On The Defense

Posted: 12/10/2006 by Floyd in Labels:

Baker and Hamilton today on face the nation went on the defense concerning the Iraq Report, on the assumption that John McCain has on 20,000 troops and others have called for more the answer simply is this, the numbers are not there you have to work with what you have. Baker reiterated that Iraqi forces need to take the lead so we can pull back our troops, a statement by Hamilton; "What we think is possible to achieve the goal that the president has set out, which is a government that can defend itself, govern itself, sustain itself. That's an achievable goal."
I can assure you in an educated guess so to speak, we are far from this goal, Iraq is in a shambles and can no way close come to this goal, they can't even fix the infrastructure damage that has taken place and continues to do so. The reasoning they have to deal with the Israeli-Arab dispute and to stabilize the region is recommendation 16 on page-40 (Give back the Golan Heights), hmm.

Trent Lott weighed in with his point of view; Incoming Minority Whip Sen. Trent Lott (R-Miss.) said he thinks the president understands the status quo must change and is listening to recommendations. Thanks Trent for your enlightenment. in engaging the neighbors of Iraq we don't have one in the Middle East to count on and that is Lebanon, the situation there keeps deteriorating and today it has grown worse as a protesting crowd urges the U.S-backed government to step down immediately.
This is significant for us because we don't want the Middle East falling apart, while we are bogged down in Iraq and Afghanistan, tensions between Lebanon's sects - particularly Sunnis and Shiites - have been moving toward a boil during the past week. With each story of a fight between men with pipes and rocks, each insult heard and repeated, the divide between the groups widens. Note the sects mentioned; Sunni and Shiites, this is something the Iraq Report mentioned and that was to open up talks with the neighbors of Iraq, but right now it is like the U.S is in some kind of isolation from engaging other country's in talks or some kind of foreign policy stagnation?
A couple days ago Gen. Richard Cody spoke about the Army and how we need a bigger one to accomplish our goals. One the the things the General wants is more access to the National Guard, in other words he wants to be able to re-call guards after they have done their tour of duty and put them back in the theater of operations, if we are to continue operations in Iraq and Afghanistan we need forces to do it.
One thing the public is not aware of for the most part is the conditions our equipment itself is under, from the desert sand and the harsh environment has to be taking it's toll on the equipment used there, from the basic of weapons to big tanks, everything takes a beating from the environment we are in, not to mention the new Islamic radicalism spawned there. The Marine Corps, America's emergency expeditionary force, is also under unprecedented strain. The Marines have compensated for equipment shortfalls in Iraq by drawing down their pre-positioned reserve equipment stocks in the Pacific and Europe by up to 70 percent. These stocks include things like tanks and armored vehicles that enable the Marines to respond rapidly to crises around the world without the logistical delay associated with major long-range equipment transport. The Marines are also running out of helicopters, including the essential heavy-lift CH-53E Super Stallion. They are down to 150 CH-53Es from the required 160 and will continue to lose these helicopters due to their heavy use in Iraq. With the replacement for this aging helicopter still more than a decade off, this is a problem that will be hamper Marine readiness for years to come.


  1. Jim says:

    Floyd, I read that our soldiers have been clever enough to cover the muzzles of their rifles with a condom held on with a rubber band. This keeps sand out, but their weapons can be fired instantly. I guess you fight with the Army you have, as Rummy pronounced.

  1. Floyd says:

    Hello my friend Jim, I have not read that one yet but it would work, you know Jim they are not really giving the military what they need to accomplish their goals in Iraq.

    This I have heard from some Brass that is over there, the equipment is really getting hit hard under these conditions and it costs a lot of money to maintain that equipment.

    The higher ups are coming to some kind of thinking or ill gotten conclusion that this war can be won conventionally, this is a house to house war and much politically motivated, hence the civil war, in other words one group got upset because they did not get as much influence in the government as the other group. This is something the Iraqis will have to work out on their own.

    I mean what is the higher ups definition of victory? Is victory defeating the insurgency? Is victory one of the warring parties be it Sunni or Shia winning?
    Is victory having a stable Iraqi government? It will take Iraq years to start to repair the infrastructure that was damaged and continuing to being damaged even now.

    Sure the administration touts victory in Iraq, but what does this victory entail? This does not seem to be a good argument on the part of the higher ups. We took up arms in the 1860's and fought each other, but we worked it out 'ourselves.'

    No matter when we leave this place be it tomorrow or five years from today, the government must be able to function on it's own, when this government was set up it should have had equal numbers of the various sects that make up the country, Sunni, Shia, Kurds, etc., one of the sects even boycotted the election, they knew they did not have enough numbers to win anything.

    Does victory in Iraq mean we have defeated terrorism? Is Iraq the country where all these guys have gathered? According to some reports I've read there are more terrorists today than when the war began?

    Another thing to look at is our Army is being trained more or less in countering gorilla warfare and not being trained in conventional warfare as stated by a Lt. Col. Not to mention we might not be able to meet the next rotation, but they are looking for the guard to pick up that slack.

    This is the questions the media needs to be asking, what is victory in Iraq and what does it entail?
    I would be curious to know this answer.