World Affairs Board - View Single Post

Ray · 03-19-2006, 03:52 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Officer of Engineers

Finally, Sir, time to myself.

Sir,

You have to look at the original document in context, especially with the time period involved. The US just came off leading the world's mightiest alliance in a successful war against Iraq. The Bear went down but alot of wolves sprung up and everywhere hotspots threaten to spin out of control.

There were extreme frustrations all around, letting the wolves have their way - from Yugoslavia to Somalia to Rwanda. The temptation obviously was there to hit the wolves before they could infest the area.

Since 11 Sept, the doctrine has been forced upon the US, especially with Saddam. The Air War has been going on for 10 years and Saddam has just gotten hints how to think outside the box. The US has stared down North Korea and in process of doing the same with Iran.

The China scenario is a bit more complicated. In that, no one knows what they want. Several years ago, Bush was ready to bomb China to destroy his own EP-3. Last year, he was dining in Beijing.

Colonel,

I don't think the DPG will be available in the open forum. If it were then obviously there would be hassles.

What is available are the commentaries of those who have seen the document and one has to go by that.

The intrinsic issues in the DPG is excellent from the US point of view and of that there is no doubt, but what the DPG apparently misses out is assessing the reaction to its policy. It is merely looking at the best case scenario and because it has not cranked in the worst case scenarios, situations like what's up in Iraq has happened.

I believe the DPG takes the Energy Crisis as a major input in its postulations. To that end, Iraq and even Iran come into view. Providentially for the US, both regimes are/ were obtuse in their equations with their own people and with the world and hence the implementation of the DPG became' becomes easier.

However, the issue of the reaction has to be taken into consideration and that is why there is definitely a soft pedalling as far as Iran is concerned or else there would have been another invasion. The lack of troops for such an invasion is another factor that has come into play.

The DPG expected that the US would be able to tackle two operations of the type in Iraq simultaneously. But the events have caused a drawdown of the capability visualised and now it is believed that only one operation would be addressed at a time. While one cannot say for sure, but could that be the reason why Afghanistan, which is equally important in the GWoT, has received lesser attention and has been more or less left to the Canadians and the Europeans, with heavy US logistic and Special Forces support?

Could you amplify and correct the above so that the actual facts are known and not left in the realm of surmises and speculations?