Discussion in 'Current Affairs, News and Analysis' started by PartTimePongo, Apr 28, 2004.
The heart of the site is the forum area, including:
I wonder why the Dear Leader thinks it's ok for the Septics to fire back when fired upon, but it's not ok for British troops to do the same in Londonderry or Kosovo?
Will he be suggesting to Dubya that the insurgents a)be allowed a judicial inquiry at public expense, to sit for as long as it takes to reach the verdict they want, b) given asylum and then c) allowed to sue the soldiers who fired at them?
New Labour - New Inconsistency
The US seem to be assaulting the city and pretending that they are in fact not. This can only last for so long.
Bliar's facade will begin to crack once we have the inevitable moment of photojournalism, like the burned Viet girl running from a napalm attack.
I think it is tempting to go overboard with the Vietnam analogies, but something I heard today gave me pause. On PM on radio 4, they were interviewing an American journo, who is with USMC in Falluja, and he stated that they were winning every fire fight in the city (or failing that demolishing the part of the city that was causing them grief). During the Tet offensive, in February 1968, the US army effectively destroyed the Viet Cong, indeed winning every fire fight. The problem was it broke America's political will to continue the war. Everything after that was geared towards getting out without losing too much face. One of Nixon's campaign promises during the 1968 elections was that he would take the US out of Vietnam. Only took another 7 years. PVRD mentioned a critical photo that could swing public opinion; during Tet there was footage of US troops actually fighting the VC in the grounds of the US embassy in Saigon, when the command had been briefing journos that the VC were contained in marginal areas of the countryside.
If you want to read a good book on the subject, try "A bright Shining Lie" by Neil Sheehan.
I'm not surprised they're winning every firefight. It's hard to lose when you've got an AC-130 Spectre gunship on your side. It's like putting Naseem Hamed in one corner and Mike Tyson in the other, except Mike gets body armour and baseball bat as well.
Just winning the firefight will not be enough to win though, as is ever the case with counter-insurgency.
The cynic might point out that such indiscriminate use of force creates martyrs, dead civilians, makes people homeless and generally ruins peoples lives. Hey presto, instant recruiting for the bad guys. Kill the next lot ? You've just recruited some more and so on .... The Israelis have tried this for decades and got precisely nowhere.
Because guess what, this isn't some crappy WW2 film where the Marines charge up the beach and when the bullets stop flying it's all over. And that's why current US tactics will fail to maintain the peace. Just think how long the IRA et al used Bloody Sunday to justify attacks on UK troops. The current casualty lists are storing up decades of trouble for the US.
Contrasting the US attitude to UK tactics in NI (you shot someone ! unacceptable, let's fund Noraid) with their attitude to US tactics in Iraq (shoot em all, serves them right) one is forced to try and explain the difference. I have come up with two explanations, both unpalatable. Firstly the Iraqis don't have political representation in the US the way the Irish did, or secondly Arab dead don't matter as they're not real people. Anyone got any more ideas ?
Quite right! Last time I checked the US are winning every firefight (questionable call) then they are losing every sniper attack or car/roadside bomb. I forget how many have died in the US war of bodycounts but I bet they're not that far ahead since the war's end are they???
3. All arabs are terrorists and therefore responsible for the WTC attacks.
Interestingly I saw a semi-official 101st video of Op. Iraqi Freedom and in it the arabs seemed most happy (waving speaking playing talking with yanks etc) so I would LIKE to point out that the US boys are getting an extremely bad press from our 'so left wing it hurts my eyes looking that far' BBC et al news reporters. Remember, they can't slag BLiar as that is political slander but ripping GWBush a new asshole is perfectly OK and BLiar gets some of the shit.
Separate names with a comma.