Shek

BudW,

1. It is actually old news by now that former allies of AQI have turned upon AQI. For example, 1920 is working right along side with US forces as we speak. The Anbar Awakening is a year old now. So, far from being BS, it is actually a known fact that has been long reported.

2. The ROE is not BS, but takes into account marginal costs and benefits of a potentially non-precision engagement (as well as the law of land warfare - you know, that whole morality thing that separates us from the actions of the bad guys).

__________________
"So little pains do the vulgar take in the investigation of truth, accepting readily the first story that comes to hand." Thucydides 1.20.3

TopHatter

So...your idea for promoting a better image for the American forces, i.e. winning the war, is to cut down unarmed civilians with concentrated automatic weapons fire and launch attacks on the religious sites of perhaps the most fanatically devout religion on the planet?

Man! That's brilliant!

They should put YOU in charge!

By the way, are you a day over 15?

BudW

Yes thats my idea just as the veterans in ww2 did it you take the gloves off and destroy the enemy where ever they are, the insurgents drop a weapon and they become civilians in your mind? you would let the enemy dictate the fight I guess if they are fanatical heaven forbid if we upset them you are saying? worrying about image over our own troops safety is not the way to win a war with islamist.

TopHatter

And there's my answer.

Has anybody clued you into the fact that the world is a slightly different place than it was 60 years ago?

That the indiscriminate slaughter of civilians is not tolerated by civilized nations anymore?

That the United States doesn't exist in a vacuum, but as part of a community of nations?

Shek

No, but you described situations where a positive ID cannot be made. However, just to make it clear to you how difficult the environment is (some to much of it is self-inflicted, unfortunately), approximately 90% of detainees during OIF I were released because we detained the wrong person or units can provide evidence of what they claim. In doing this, we've just wronged people and created more insurgents.

If you don't understand what I'm talking about, then play this game, Newsgaming.com -- September 12th for no more than five minutes.

TopHatter

I don't think he understands that concept.

Apparently anybody who looks cross-eyed at American troops should be executed on the spot*

You know, just like they did in good 'ol WWII.


*Extra points if you level a mosque in the process.

BudW

The indiscriminate slaughter of civilians is not tolerated by civilized nations anymore? really 911? thats why all those Countries have joined the USA in Iraq guess i will have to agree t disagree with you, I thank every one for sharing there out look on a very difficult matter.

TopHatter

Probably because - in case you hadn't noticed - there isn't a really rock solid connection between Osama bin Laden and Saddam Hussein.

Or much of any connection at all.

entropy

Just a drunk Russian opinion:

It is a most critical move in any war, and certainly this one. When one tries to gain support inside and outside his country for a war, and one's troops are known as looting vultures, many people will object the war.
As the soldiers in Iraq are struggling against leftism, and countless anti-war websites emerge with links showing soldiers barbarising Iraqi people, shellings of mosques would only upset more people, and perhaps trigger a terror wave in the UK that forces it to pull out. Who knows, might happen.

Then there is this much-discussed Islam thingy. The US, no matter how mighty, would lose a war against the entire Islamic world united. Perhaps not conquered, but it will have to live buttoned up in a quasi-apartheid system for the rest of it's days. Therefore, it is VERY important to show the Islamic world that it is not Islam the war is against, but the war on terror.
Because the war is an insurgency and nearly unwinnable by conventional means, the coalition must win allies on the other side.
Those allies, if cooperating with the US, would stir up a wave of upsetness amongst the moderate muslims, who will help overthrow the radicals and return the Middle East into a peaceful existence.

As the majority of the moderate muslims deep in the heart support, or at least condone the deeds of the "Jihadi" it is very important to get the public relations right.

Please open up your brain and start processing information.


Gentlemen, this is what a chew toy looks like, right?

__________________
If memory serves...

gunnut

Hey, I'm all for indiscriminate bombing of cities, like what we did during WW2.

However, there's a slight difference between that war and this war. In that war, we fought nation-states that had uniformed forces barring our entry into their homeland. We had it in this war, but is now in the later stages.

Did we bomb cities after our troops entered Germany and Japan? No. The resistance by a nation-state had ceased. There were insurgents back then as well. We dealt with them pretty much the same way we are doing now.

We are not at war with the Iraqi people. We removed the only form of government they know for the past 3+ decades so now we're trying to put one back.

__________________
"Only Nixon can go to China." -- Old Vulcan proverb.

entropy

You remind me about a guy on the Russian forums. It was a discussion about Chechnya and how one should look at it , as a part of Russia, an autonomous republic or a semi-autonomous state like Western Sahara.

Then one guy came in and said:

"One should look at Chechnya through the open bomb hatch"