The problem with Iraq was not a moral or abyss of immeasurable depth. The problem with Iraq is rooted in too little and too much; too little gained, too much used which contributes to the idea of Afghanistan. When you view 3000+ deaths and civilian deaths 100X; we see 3000 as too many soldiers expended over 7 years. In terms of previous wars, it is an uncanny and stark contrast. So when people say the removal of Saddam Hussein was not a bad thing; but the atmosphere of the Iraq War had a very unusual feeling to it. Saddam was removed and a new government was installed; that is not a problem but I am not enthusiastic or advocating a scale of little bang for little bucks as I saw.
There are critics of both Iraq and Afghanistan who advocate the escalation of troops, results in the expansion of war or a fight to the death. In some form, that is a reality of warfare. However, when we send 20 people in a burning building, the building should not collapse or be on fire. When you fight a fire, the more men means the smaller the fire. However, there are critics who ration more soldiers means a bigger war. In the instance with Vietnam, escalation meant a bigger war; that is true. Escalation led to more North Vietnamese and Viet Cong flooding to the battlefield in the South; this is true. However, this is a false argument and fallacy of observation.
Masters of war and those who go to a fight ill equipped and wishing to die for a cause that is evil and illogical are the most dangerous enemies on this earth. If I send in one trained and well equipped soldier and the enemy sends in 3 with sticks or pitch forks; you have what we call the most dangerous enemy and possible foe. All they would need is the weapon to carry out their dreams and the idea they are the masters of reality. The fact is if they were to send a brigade and attack helicopters to match a smaller contingency of armor and air calvary; then this sort of enemy would not be present. We see this in the immediate and this enemy attacking upstairs. They are a VC-AC element. Also, we see this similar kind of mentality over the last 10 years while the finger pointing and blame is back at us.
More guns means a safer environment? More guns and more people mean someone wants a fight. More soldiers means a fight to the death. When I bring a GE mini gun to a fight and an enemy brings a ball and chain; that is a madman and lunatic. To show up to a fight to a death is an act of suicide and stupidity. When bombs are dropped by B52 all day; the result is not to go out to dinner or the movies. The act itself, like the act of warfare we witnessed and were kidnapped by was identical to what we are seeing in both Iraq and Afghanistan. Having drafted and using a very invincible strategy during the Persian Gulf War; we are able to see a lot of credible material to base our current mindset. Iraq showed an enemy and showed a fight; the removal of that problem was not a problem but it is not good to walk around and carry a big stick as the Bush Administration did while being wracked with scandal everywhere and having such a low IQ.
The rule and potential of every man's each other man's potential murderer applies. More humans to the battle means someone wants a fight; who is that someone and what are they prepared to do in order to win this fight? Ill equipped and with rudimentary means; this problematic appeal we are experiencing in our own private life has kidnapped and taken us hostage; to declare them managers, bosses, and our protection. We delineate the stages and periods we had to extol our own personal risk to seek the goals and outcomes we desired or needed. We also rationalize the sacrifice or the emotional toll of the injustice and the callous disregard for other human beings and human life by this bunch and menace. War is not profit or a business; it may be when we are growing up and makes good conversation. However, the escalation in Afghanistan is not a mistake.
The data is not with certainty. Had Afghanistan been a priority; then the need removal of the Caliban would be more needed than Saddam. To say Saddam was removed and a bad world arrived, is a false directive. To say one man is more dangerous than a long embattled and constant warring clan who has tried to invade and dominate the region since the late 1970s; indicates the mistake. When you are on a march and carry limited supplies; you must avoid battles so you can arrive on time and have the strength and energy to outlast the enemy. I question the wisdom of placing Iraq over Afghanistan; but the Caliban is a more fierce and a more deadly force; it is much better for them to look at the Persian Gulf War and Iraq and make a conscious and rational decision to end what has been a failed effort to take over Afghanistan. It is called the Soviet Vietnam for a reason. To the terrain and the insurmountable challenge; the use of asymmetrical warfare such as Predators drones, Apache gunships, and small units spread out has proved to be effective. There is an enemy who wants a fight there and they will not win it.
No comments:
Post a Comment