Thread: Subdue Iran, secure Iraq

We fought multiple fronts in northwestern Europe, Italy, CBI, and the Pacific (w/ MacArthur & Nimitz operating on two distinct "fronts"). Iran, Afghanistan, and Iraq don't come close.

Compare the force levels employed and compare it today.

Compare the constraints also and the format of this so called war.

The campaigns you are mentioning were independent of each other and the force and support were earmarked for each and they were available all through. There was no video game effect.

Op Barbarossa split the force that was earmarked for a specific mission. The Principle of War - Selection and Maintenance of Aim was violated.

Likewise, it was Obama, the AQ and Afghanistan to start with. That was the aim selected but not maintained.

Heaven knows why but the emphasis shifted to Iraq. The volume of force shifted to Iraq and Afghanistan was merely put on simmer.

If indeed WMD and terrorists was the reason to shift from Afghanistan to Iraq (as I am sure you will mention), then Pakistan had both and yet it was the front line ally and now being bombed to Kingdom Come since the terrorists, of whom the US conveniently forgot, has surfaced to plague!!

Afghanistan now is on and off like a video game. And yet it was the actual focus of the GWOT when it started.

Right now, no one knows what is the focus of the GWOT since it is everywhere and nowhere and all based on which side of the bed the Administration got out of in the morning.

One day Pakistan is the front line ally and the next day a pariah!

One day Musharraf is backed and then next day it is so organised that he is shown the door!

It is no one's fault. It is just that the military planners are not being able to tell their political masters to quit fooling around and put their money where their mouth is!!