COL Gene

WHY the Surge in Iraq Will Fail!

WHY the Surge in Iraq Will Fail!


The issue causing the violence in Iraq is for CONTROL. Political control and for control of the oil wealth. Reducing the violence for a time in Baghdad by this surge will not alter this basic objective. Both the Sunni’s and Shea want to control the future of Iraq.

We may see some reduction in attacks because of the increased military forces or because the factions want to lay low until U.S. Forces finally leave. However, what the Surge will not accomplish is to cause the factions to give up their desire to CONTROL the future of Iraq! That is the reason WHY this Surge in the END will FAIL! When the bulk of U.S. combat forces are removed, the battle for which faction controls Iraq will resume. We need to insure that fight for the control of Iraq remains within their borders and does not spill over into the surrounding counties.
14,507 views 51 replies
Reply #26 Top
IslandDog

Keep repeating your talking points, Bush will surely not get elected again in '08. AND the Republicans will loose the White House and MORE of Congress!
Reply #27 Top

IslandDog



Keep repeating your talking points, Bush will surely not get elected again in '08. AND the Republicans will loose the White House and MORE of Congress!



Don't be so sure col.  Democrats still don't have an agenda and they are already starting to eat at each other.  I see you think you are a republican.


Reply #28 Top
Island Dog

The GOP has a agenda that MOST Americans do not support!


I am a Republican that believes we MUST Balance the budget and repay the debt. I am a Republican that does not support Nation Building. I am a Republican that Believes we MUST keep our promises to the Baby Boomers!
Reply #29 Top
YOU Idiot - Why did Bush 41 stop from invading Iraq? Because he was advised that to invade Iraq would most likely create instability in Iraq, would create hate for the U.S. in the Moslem World and would get our military bogged down in a Moslem Country.


Um, since you are so historically and militarily inept, I guess I'll have to educate you. The coalition DID invade Iraq. Troops from 18th Airborne Corps, 7th Corps and yes, even the French invaded Iraq. My unit (1st COSCOM) was given the task of establishing a Logistical base in Southern Iraq specifically for the purpose of supporting the Infantry, Artillery and Armored Divisions' push to take Baghdad.

Please expain to me this, if taking Baghdad was never part of the mission, why were we setting up support assets and missions for that very purpose?
Reply #30 Top
ParaTed2k

Then WHY did we not invade Baghdad and depose Saddam under Bush 41? There may have been plan to remove Saddam; however the consequences prevented that from taking place. The SAME issues were present when GWB was planning his invasion but the difference is that GWB did not heed the advice of those that had the experience and every WARNING Bush 41 and 43 were given have come true after the Idiot we have in the White House disregarded that advice and invaded Iraq!
Reply #31 Top
Idiot, I already explained why Bush 41 rescinded the order to invade Baghdad. The fact you seem clueless that we did invade Iraq in 91 tells me all I need to know about your lack of military and historic knowledge. You are living proof that, just because you wore a uniform and earned some rank, doesn't mean you learned anything along the way.
Reply #32 Top
ParaTed2k

You ignore that Bush was warned by Baker, Powell and Armitage of the dangers of invading Iraq. Bush ignored their warnings and EVERYTHING these people warned GWB about has come true. Everything Bush told us as to how the invasion of Iraq would play out was proven to be WRONG!

Despite the results, Bush and Cheney still claim they made the correct choice. HOW THE HELL CAN THAT BE?
Reply #33 Top
Everything Bush told us as to how the invasion of Iraq would play out was proven to be WRONG!


That statement in itself is wrong.
Reply #34 Top
drmiler

We were told it would cost between $40-60 Billion.

We were told we would be treated as liberators.

We were told it would enhance OUR security

We were told it would be quick and clean

We were told we would find WMD


Every one of these claims was WRONG. What were we told about this war that was true?
Reply #35 Top
I ignore nothing, but guess what, if WE were allowed to finish the job back then (when we were more prepared, had a bigger military and were in the neighborhood anyway) we wouldn't be having this argument now. The Coalition and the UN were DEAD WRONG for settling with a ceasefire. All it did was empower Hussein as a leader and weakened the US.
Reply #36 Top
Parated2k

I do not know what would have happened if we had invaded Iraq in 1991 but I do know that Bush was warned first NOT to invade Iraq and second not to do so with a small force. He ignored the advice from foreign policy experts like Baker, Powell and Armitage. He also ignored the Military experts that said to SECURE Iraq after Saddam fell it would take about 500,000 troops. So guess what -- this mess in Iraq is 100% Bush. Now we have our military in the middle of a Civil war that we can not solve. All we are doing is killing and injuring more of our military and spending billions more each day!! When we do leave the likelihood is that the Iraqi’s will continue to fight each other until one side gains control or the country splits into two or three separate countries! We will wind up getting the blame and have killed and wounded our military, spent a $1 Trillion dollars and made our country NO safer then before we invaded Iraq! We will wind up with the need to rebuild our Army, Marines, National Guard and Army Reserve and have millions more Moslems that hate us enough to try another 9/11 or worse. We will have as many as a 100,000 former military that will require some medical care for many years to come. ALL THIS BECAUSE of the poor choices of GWB! This war will be judged as one of the worst decisions a President has EVER made in our history.
Reply #37 Top
That's funny ColGene, according to those in country, we are winning this war. I guess you should listen to the troops you hate instead of the press and anti war bigots who hate you.
Reply #38 Top
You are a complete IDIOT. You simply do not know what you are talking about. It is good you were not an Officer. YOU CAN NOT THINK!


I was disqualified from officer’s candidate school because my parents were married before I was born. (smile) You are correct I can’t think according to your expert opinion. Let’s forget the fact that I had the confidence of three presidents, Mr. Cater, Mr. Reagan, and Mr. Bush plus numerous General officers in and out of the Corps. Lets ignore the fact that after I left government service my first job was as a non thinking consultant to Carnival Cruise Lines who after a year kicked me out to help them set up security for Carnival’s Crystal Palace and then Carnival Airlines, Lets ignore the fact that I was Security Consultant to Valujet Airlines and ran their Fort Lauderdale station for a year. This allowed me to take 10 years off to relax and not think even more. I am not well known except as a security expert and that is not my primary job. Which reminds me that I just renewed my real estate license so I can continue to not think, though the state of Florida considers me an expert in Real Estate in any of their courts as I have to be a little more than acquainted with such non thinking as real estate law, and hazardous material, while keeping up with national security so I don’t’ get stale if called to consult again for DHS. Yup. You got me pegged as a non-thinker. How astute of you. I am impressed by your powers of reason and deduction.

Idiot: an offensive term in a now disused classification system for somebody with and IQ of about 25 or under and a mental age of less than three years old. This term does not fit me since my IQ is one hundred points above that number. But since you are into archaic terms to fit your mind I am pleased you used it.
Reply #39 Top
We were told it would cost between $40-60 Billion.


This is proof you never had a command in the military. When was the last time you worte a war budget?

We were told we would be treated as liberators.


This I disproved to you months ago and you still won't let it go. This proves you are a liar. there are hundreds of thousands of still pictures of us being greated and offered candy in welcome to our invasion of Iraq and removal of Saddam. On other posts others and I think myself gave you the websites to see them. There are thousands of hours of video of the same thing. Disproven and you continue to make the same disproven statement makes you a liar. You stated on many articles that you were never proven wrong by anyone on JU. This is one of those never happens things.

We were told it would be quick and clean


6 weeks is quick and we lost so few people any military person would say it was almost bloodles for our side. It was not until Iran got involved did it get messy but the war was over by them.

We were told we would find WMD


Got me there! But we as a nation were told this by Germany, France, Russia, and the U.K. are you suggesting they lied to us as well?

Every one of these claims was WRONG. What were we told about this war that was true?


Honestly only one of the claims was wrong the rest were you restating your lies or in one case your opinion as fact.
Reply #41 Top
Certifiable ColGene... but that just meant I was willing to go Airborne... I don't see wings on your bird chest.
Reply #42 Top
Your rants are often funny, Gene. But there's nothing funny about your childish and disrespectful displays of petulance. Your arguments are down to the "Your mother wears Army boots!" level. You appear to do this full time, as well, which I suppose is a good thing since it keeps you occupied with keyboard pounding therapy, away from the big kids where you can do no real damage.
Reply #43 Top
I don't see wings on your bird chest.


He says he was in the Army and was in artillery If this is true then he did his part no matter what his politics or misguided beliefs, I will give him his due. Just to let you know, got my jump wings and my dive helmet, as well as a bullet hole in my chest fired in anger. Not picking on the jerk because he was in the army while I was in the marines. Not picking on him because he acts like a mental midget. He is a political hack that hates the current president beyond reason. That lack of reason is what I don’t agree with and his seeming desire to see America lose a war in order to make the President look bad shows lack of reason. It seems that for him humiliating the nation and our military while endangering the nation he lives in is ok for him. That is his right but I still don’t agree him.

This is something I heard on the Rush Limbaugh show. Your mother is so fat that when she puts on her little black dress she looks like outer space. If Gene sinks to that level I am ready for him but he has not gotten there yet.
Reply #44 Top

Paladin: ColGene was in the Army, but never Artillery.  He was a Nuclear Weapons Officer on Active Duty and a Finance Officer in the Reserves.  I know I'm awfully hard on him and his one track mind, but in this case I was being good natured about his shot at me. 

{{{{Rubs Paladin's Wings}}}}

I now return you all to ColGene's one rail track, already in progress.

Reply #45 Top
Parated2K

Gen Powell in a speech last night said that mistakes made by the Bush Administration in Iraq allowed the insurgency to develop into a CIVIL WAR. He also said that the Bush Administration does not like him to say, “Civil War”. However that is what Gen Powell believes.

I served in the Field Artillery (8” sp Unit) for two years. It was during that time I was a nuclear weapons officer in the 8” sp unit (2/75th). I completed Combat Intel, Command and General staff and the War College. I had three Commands and was promoted to 06 after 19 years commissioned service. I was nominated for Flag Rank three times. I was not a General Powell but a Hell of a lot more then GWB and accomplished what I did WITHOUT the help of my father’s contacts!
Reply #46 Top
Paladin: ColGene was in the Army, but never Artillery. He was a Nuclear Weapons Officer on Active Duty and a Finance Officer in the Reserves.


Now you see that is different than what he said in an article some time back. Keep in mind that the Army has nuclear arttillery shells. THey were used in the 1950's but like col have been mothballed ever since. Finance officer? You mean a disbursment clerk or payroll officer? How cute!
Reply #47 Top
Paladin77

You show your lack of knowledge with EVERY WORD you write.

The ONLY time a nuclear weapon was fired from Artillery by the U.S. was in a test and it was the 280 MM atomic cannon. The Army later developed a nuclear round for the 8" Artillery Howitzer but it was NEVER used. Everyone knew the 8" was nuclear capable but you!
Reply #48 Top
The ONLY time a nuclear weapon was fired from Artillery by the U.S. was in a test and it was the 280 MM atomic cannon. The Army later developed a nuclear round for the 8" Artillery Howitzer but it was NEVER used. Everyone knew the 8" was nuclear capable but you!


I will take your word on this as the only information I have was old news reels showing the cannon at work. The Marine Corps never had the thing we used other methods of putting nukes on target. Tell me col. Are you still PRP certified?

By the by you can refute information that is irrelevant to the topic but failed to challenge anything I wrote a few days ago. I guess they must be true and you can’t find a way around them so you ignore them. Good Job!
Reply #49 Top
By the by you can refute information that is irrelevant to the topic but failed to challenge anything I wrote a few days ago. I guess they must be true and you can’t find a way around them so you ignore them. Good Job! I have refuted with FACTS just about everything you have said!
Reply #50 Top
I have refuted with FACTS just about everything you have said!


Calling people names and insults is not refuting an argument with facts. It is name calling.

Try refuting me outside your head and on the blog, I want to see those facts. LOL