What is the best way to deal with suicide bombers?
- Thread starter OPTIONAL777
- Start date
Check again in around five years to see whether the situation in Iraq has a true "Vietnam feel."
We never invaded North Vietnam, with the stated goal of removing Ho, while putting Hanoi under threat. In addition, Iraq, unlike North Vietnam, has no major source of re-supply, nor any powerful external sponsors capable of intervening. I could go on and on, but if there is any overall comparison on a military level, the situation of Hussein more resembles that of the South Vietnamese after the US left, at the point that North Vietnamese controlled most of the countryside, and the South Vietnamese grip on their remaining urban strongholds was quickly slipping.
There is, however, one key similarity between what's going on right now and what was happening especially during the final years of the US involvement: The US would win major military victories, but suffer politically. What's going on right now is actually very much like the Tet Offensive, when partisan, often suicidal acts by the N. Vietnamese and Viet Cong completely failed on the battlefield, and in fact left them unable to mount a major military offensive for years - but the American public, politicians, and world opinion were "shocked" by the show of opposition.
The differences, aside from the strategic context and the failure of the Iraqis to inflict Tet-level casualties, are critically that 1) Bush is not LBJ (nor is he even Nixon): he intends to win; 2) this war has been going on for a week-and-a-half, not five years. It is almost as though this war, unlike the incomplete project of the Gulf War, may be the one that gives us the real opportunity to fight to win - and this time, unlike during Tet, to accept the military victory, and not let the usual suspects and our own uncertainty turn it into a political defeat.
Did that disappoint you?
Of course your cowardly friends, our enemy, have stayed consistent.
The US doesn't take a day off. We are not a theocracy. So Sept. 11 was a nice day to attack a place where 50,000 people figured to be in their offices. Working to feed their families. Provide food and shelter for their loved ones.
Our military takes no holidays. So no opportunities there.
Israel is a theocracy, so the same tactics of cowardice worked nicely. Attack on the one day of the year that the defenses would be at their weakest. But not weak enough.
I would say "sorry it didn't work out for your coward pals". But I am not. And neither is the rest of the CIVILIZED world.
"Israel is a theocracy"
Israel is a democracy that was established by Jews, for jews. They have a secular society, their laws are secular and not jewish. They are biased towards what is best for the Jews of course, but they are not a Theocracy.
IRAN is a theocracy. Leaders in IRAN are the same as the religious leaders, no difference, and in IRAN there is no democracy.
Israel is a democracy that was established by Jews, for jews. They have a secular society, their laws are secular and not jewish. They are biased towards what is best for the Jews of course, but they are not a Theocracy.
IRAN is a theocracy. Leaders in IRAN are the same as the religious leaders, no difference, and in IRAN there is no democracy.
The reason that Israel won the 6 day war against an enemy much superior in numbers was because of their motivation.
The israelis stood to lose everything they had. It was a case of either beating the enemy or - literally - being driven into the sea.
There wouldn't have been any mercy as the object was to remove them from the land they lived in.
Fortunately the Israelis were better fighters than than they thought they were swimmers so they took the bit between their teeth and WON.
It helped that their enemies didn't quite have the same desire to fight.
I guess one could say the Arabs rethoric is much superior than their willingness to actually fight.
freealways
The israelis stood to lose everything they had. It was a case of either beating the enemy or - literally - being driven into the sea.
There wouldn't have been any mercy as the object was to remove them from the land they lived in.
Fortunately the Israelis were better fighters than than they thought they were swimmers so they took the bit between their teeth and WON.
It helped that their enemies didn't quite have the same desire to fight.
I guess one could say the Arabs rethoric is much superior than their willingness to actually fight.
freealways
These kinds of incidents were pretty much inevitable. While these matters should certainly be investigated thoroughly and any criminal negligence punished, it's not really the fault of the armed forces as a whole.
The fault lies with the power hungry administration that sent them there.
The fault lies with the power hungry administration that sent them there.