It's A Quagmire, Stupid

Nobody seems to want to admit it but Iraq is a bona fide quagmire. The Democrats’ “plan” to extricate us is to try to crawl out but the struggle is only going to mire us deeper. The Republicans’ “plan” is to stay in place and hope for a miracle – such as the Iraqi army manning up and pulling us out.

The only real “plan” available to us is to stop deluding ourselves that we have any real control over the situation and start looking for ways to try to hang on long term and hope the eventual bottom isn’t above our heads. That might require some sort of draft to keep the wheels from falling off our military next year and some sort of ratcheting down of our John Wayne foreign policy but those are only going to be stop-gap measures.

One feel-good measure we could enact would be to consign the buttheads who led us into this swamp in the first place to collective oblivion before they do anymore harm – which they’re entirely capable of – but anyone who listens to or follows them at this point deserves what they get.

Yes, yes, Spook, you are especially intelligent and are therefore the only one who sees this. No one else has dared to use the term “quagmire.”

Snide but essentially fair assessments.

So even Spook does not see that we should do other than to hang on for the long term? Good.

We live in a democracy the last time I checked so vote your conscience but we will be around and we have more plans … you know…

Look what was in the Guardian the other day:
Violence ebbing. Wealth returning. Can this be Iraq?

I appreciate the good news but we are in this fight for another five to 10 years. That is that. We will win.

[quote=“fred smith”]I appreciate the good news but we are in this fight for another five to 10 years. That is that. We will win.[/quote]Will you? With what army? The one you have now is stretched and soon to hit the wall. Going to retreat to the desert to fight another war (in Iraq) another day (5 to 10 years down the road), withdraw troops from other theaters, bring in the draft, or…?

I think that our military will manage to make it through with adjustments. Regardless when even Spook realizes we must stay, what is the point then of wasting time discussing leaving? Why not focus on winning no matter how long it takes? I suggest that would be a more positive step. People need to understand that we are committed to the long term and then perhaps we will also get more cooperation from locals regarding intelligence matters.

[quote=“fred smith”]I think that our military will manage to make it through with adjustments. [/quote]Ok, but how? The new Sec. Def. has ruled out further tour extensions, and without those, the army’s going to be in an extreme pinch come spring. Unless troops are pulled out of other locales, or there’s a draft.

[quote=“fred smith”]Regardless when even Spook realizes we must stay, what is the point then of wasting time discussing leaving? Why not focus on winning no matter how long it takes? I suggest that would be a more positive step. People need to understand that we are committed to the long term and then perhaps we will also get more cooperation from locals regarding intelligence matters.[/quote]Perhaps there’s a point because ‘must’ and ‘can’ aren’t the same thing. What’s ‘focus on winning’ mean when the army’s next to broken, according to people like Powell?
:idunno:

Regardless, the military can and will make the adjustments. It has been recommended that the current levels of 160K cannot be maintained. Let’s see if we can reduce the problems in the Sunni areas where we have spent most of our effort. IF that stabilizes, we can spend more time in Baghdad and perhaps go after a few Shite militias. I remain optimistic.

And that’s why I, purely by contrast, seem “especially intelligent.”

Only the village idiot, members of congress and the entire cast of ‘Operation Chicken Little’ haven’t caught on to the reality of the situation yet.

Yes, they’ve all heard the word ‘quagmire’ but it hasn’t sunk in. They’re all still suckling on their various illusions.

It’s a quagmire, stupid, and we have no real control over the situation. We’re stuck. Iraq is in charge of us and it’s going to decide when and how to let go and it’s not going to be anytime soon.
[color=blue]
“It can get much, much worse. Heavy weapons can be brought in. It’s not scare-mongering to say a precipitous U.S. troop withdrawal would lead to total mayhem that will exceed anything that we’ve seen so far.”

“We’re not staying,” Sen. Joseph Biden, the Delaware Democrat who is chairman of the Senate Foreign Relations Committee, said over and over again to U.S. Ambassador to Iraq Ryan Crocker last week. “You don’t have much time.”[/color]

Weren’t you also optimistic about the new plans / adjustment earlier this year? You know the troop increase that has been completed recently and was to solve all the problems. Can’t recall who it was but someone was already gloating about it months back, until …

S.S.D.D.

Glad to see the Forumosa Command & Control, Chairbound Intel Division is still soundly kicking the same dead horse.

Things are improving in Iraq; they will slowly continue to improve on Iraqi terms and thing will get worse in regards to the Iranian situation.

Al Queada is still a terrorist force to be reckoned with on a global scale. And Saudi Arabia is still a wahabist terror training rat hole.

(notice that I did not end any sentence with a ‘qestion mark’(?))

S.S.D.D

I’ve just looked up the word “quagmire” so I know what you’re talking about and it says:

an area of miry or boggy ground whose surface yields under the tread; a bog.

How can you have a quagmire in a desert ?

Remnants of the marshes, silly.

HG

Well, there are vast marshes in Iraq.

Correct me if I’m wrong, but I’m only hearing three points of view here about the situation in Iraq which seem to mirror American society at large.

One viewpoint is that it’s not quicksand at all, it’s just thick mud and we can pull ourselves out of it and go home anytime we want to. The other viewpoint is that it’s definitely not quicksand that we’re up to our necks in and it’s not really even mud. It’s a ‘lake’ actually with just a little too much silt and before long people will be water skiing on it and swimming in it and fishing and only self-important, armchair “experts” can’t see that.

The third point of view can best be summarized as “quicksand? . . . mud? what the hell are you talking about?”

If anybody else here believes that Iraq is a quagmire that we can’t escape from even if we wanted to I’d be interested in hearing from them.

Define “can’t”. :wink:
You could pull out. It’s been done before.
Is it a good idea? No. No, it’s definitely not.

If the leadership and country is in any way responsible for its errors, it’s a quagmire you’re stuck with. But if you can unilaterally leap in, surely you can bootstrap yourself out. Or not. My guess is that the rest of the world will consider (maybe) lending a hand sometime after that realization sets in… deep… bone deep.

Have there been less deaths, injuries, and destruction of property this year than last year? Have the Christians returned? Are there still less women in the workplace now than before the invasion? Are women still being attacked for not wearing Islamic clothing? What do you human rights group say about the situation in Iraq?

[quote=“Jaboney”]Define “can’t”. :wink:
You could pull out. It’s been done before.
Is it a good idea? No. No, it’s definitely not.

If the leadership and country is in any way responsible for its errors, it’s a quagmire you’re stuck with. But if you can unilaterally leap in, surely you can bootstrap yourself out. Or not. My guess is that the rest of the world will consider (maybe) lending a hand sometime after that realization sets in… deep… bone deep.[/quote]

“Can’t” in that if we did things would get much worse to the point where the stability of the entire region would be threatened, far greater numbers of people would die and our access to vital energy supplies significantly curtailed:

". . . Joost Hiltermann, author of “A Poisonous Affair,” a new book about the Iraqi gassing of the Kurdish town of Halabja in 1988, and a long-standing critic of U.S. policy in Iraq, said . . .

"A premature or precipitous withdrawal is very dangerous. American forces have been the glue to keep together Iraqi security forces. The security forces would totally fall apart, fracture along ethnic and sectarian lines.

It can get much, much worse. Heavy weapons can be brought in. It’s not scare-mongering to say a precipitous U.S. troop withdrawal would lead to total mayhem that will exceed anything that we’ve seen so far."

Sorry, but I consider this a highly unfair question leveled at Fred. Given it is well known he considers due diligence, contingencies or feasibility minor distractions for wusses why did you please ask the question? You only turn to Fred if you want rosey projections based on mere wishing well. Show a bit basic courtesy, okay?

Take a close look. He does not even want (or is simply just incapable) to consider the possibility Iraq may just turn as a US defeat and a big black eye to US image. With this mindset, how please do you expect him to come up with any “how to” or measures for a situation avoiding, preventing or merely contemplate defeat? There is no real problem (from his p.o.v.) hence can’t come up with any sollution.

Only thing I always wonder though: Given how secure success in Iraq already is according to Fred, why his constant clamors for others (formost Europe of all places) to join into an endeavour which he partically singlehandedly already won here on Forumosa in 2003?