Fact vs Fiction: A Report From the Front

[oldreliable67]

Karl Zinsmeister has posted a really interesting report on his recent month in Iraq. Found here, he covers a lot of ground.

"Your editor has just returned from another month in Iraq—my fourth extended tour in the last two and a half years. During November and December I joined numerous American combat operations, including the largest air assault since the beginning of the war, walked miles of streets and roads, entered scores of homes, listened to hundreds of Iraqis, observed voting at a dozen different polling sites, and endured my third roadside ambush. With this latest firsthand experience, here are answers to some common queries about how the war is faring."

Too long to copy and paste here, but recommended reading for those who want a non-MSM very objective view of whats happening on the ground in Iraq. Please, go read it, then come back here and post your thoughts.

 

[Calm2Chaos]

It's a good article dispelling a lot of the common myths heaped on by a media bias. And it will be torn to shreds as lies and propaganda by the liberals the read it...LOL

 

[Bergslagstroll]

Just some question from a stupid socialist about one part of text.

"And a guerilla war like we face in Iraq generally requires even more stamina. Eliminating a terror insurgency has historically taken a decade or two. It’s like eradicating smallpox; you must squeeze and squeeze and squeeze, and show great patience. Our occupation of the Philippines after the Spanish-American War is a closer example of what we face in Iraq; we fought an extensive insurgency there for years, then remained in the country for nearly a century, with very positive eventual results.

Interestingly, our soldiers appear to better understand the incremental nature of this war than many reporters, pundits, and politicians. “Americans seem to kind of want this McDonald’s war, where you drive up, you order it, you pay for it, you go to the next window and get a democracy. That’s not the way it works,” cautioned Army reservist Scott Southworth recently. “It takes a lot of effort; it takes a lot of time."

How long did the Bush administration say that USA would stay before the invasion? And how long did the american people think that USA would stay right before the war? Do you have any pre war statements from the administration there the say that the war will last ten year or even five year?

Also have you any data how the Iraqies will feel having american soldiers there for ten year or even twenty?

 

[Stace]

It's a good article dispelling a lot of the common myths heaped on by a media bias. And it will be torn to shreds as lies and propaganda by the liberals the read it...LOL

Why did you have to go throw in the partisan remark? And only the second post of the thread! I happen to have a great deal of respect for Mr. Zinsmeister, simply because he spent a great deal of time with my husband's unit the first time they were sent to Iraq - at the very onset of the war - and even wrote a book about his experience with the unit, Boots On the Ground.

 

[Stinger]

How long did the Bush administration say that USA would stay before the invasion? And how long did the american people think that USA would stay right before the war? Do you have any pre war statements from the administration there the say that the war will last ten year or even five year?

They didn't say.

"The war on terror is not over, yet it is not endless. We do not know the day of final victory, but we have seen the turning of the tide. No act of the terrorists will change our purpose, or weaken our resolve, or alter their fate. Their cause is lost. Free nations will press on to victory. "

President Bush May 1, 2003

 

[Hoot]

They didn't say.

"The war on terror is not over, yet it is not endless. We do not know the day of final victory, but we have seen the turning of the tide. No act of the terrorists will change our purpose, or weaken our resolve, or alter their fate. Their cause is lost. Free nations will press on to victory. "

President Bush May 1, 2003

Bull!

That quote you used was "after" we went to war in Iraq.

Former assistant to Rumsfield, Ken Aldeman, said a full year before the first smart bomb fell on Baghdad..." I believe demolishing Hussein's military power and liberating Iraq would be a cakewalk. Let me give simple, responsible reasons: 1) It was a cakewalk last time; 2) they've become much weaker; 3) we've become much stronger; and 4) now we're playing for keeps." Washington Post Feb 13, 2002

"The bulk of Iraqi military, police and beauracracy will join the U.S. to undertake the main responsibility of securing order in the country, With basic services in place, the U.S. can quickly begin the task of rebuilding the nation and earn the long lasting gratitude of an already welcoming Iraqi people. The U.S. will then hand off the task of governing to the Iraqi regime and begin withdrawing troops in a matter of months." Under Secretary of Defense Douglas Feith

When Army chief of Staff, General Shineski told reporters a month before the war that the U.S. would need several hundred thousand troops to stabilize post war Iraq, Dick Cheney, on Meet the Press said..."To suggest that we need several hundred thousand troops there after military operations have ended, I don't think that's accurate."

Paul Wolfowitz on Meet the Press..." It's hard to conceive that it would take more forces to provide stability in post-Saddam Iraq then it would to conduct the war itself and to secure the surrender of Saddam's security forces and his army, hard to imagine."

Yeah right...hard to imagine our own CIA warned the White House that armed opposition was inevitable after the war.

There's just a ton of quotes from the Bush administration that led the American people to believe we'd throw some civics textbooks out of a back of a humvee, and democracy would miracously sprout, and we'd be in and out of Iraq in no time, with the ever lasting gratitude of the Iraqi people.

 

[stsburns]

Karl Zinsmeister has posted a really interesting report on his recent month in Iraq. Found here, he covers a lot of ground.

"Your editor has just returned from another month in Iraq—my fourth extended tour in the last two and a half years. During November and December I joined numerous American combat operations, including the largest air assault since the beginning of the war, walked miles of streets and roads, entered scores of homes, listened to hundreds of Iraqis, observed voting at a dozen different polling sites, and endured my third roadside ambush. With this latest firsthand experience, here are answers to some common queries about how the war is faring."

Too long to copy and paste here, but recommended reading for those who want a non-MSM very objective view of whats happening on the ground in Iraq. Please, go read it, then come back here and post your thoughts.

If you want the "Real" information that is going on in "The Front" your best bet is talk to someone who has been there! Anything less is just foolish?

 

[oldreliable67]

If you want the "Real" information that is going on in "The Front" your best bet is talk to someone who has been there! Anything less is just foolish?

That is quite true. Mudville Gazette has a good bunch of soldier-bloggers, as does Milblogging.com.

I find Karl Zinsmeister interesting in that he is a reporter who spends a lot of time in-country and gets out with the troops to see what is happening on the ground.

 

[Stinger]

Bull!

That quote you used was "after" we went to war in Iraq.

Bull! That quote was "after" the war with Iraq and before the war on terror moved there. You are confusing the war on terror with the war against Saddam, which was just a part of it.

Former assistant to Rumsfield, Ken Aldeman, said a full year before the first smart bomb fell on Baghdad..." I believe demolishing Hussein's military power and liberating Iraq would be a cakewalk. Let me give simple, responsible reasons: 1) It was a cakewalk last time; 2) they've become much weaker; 3) we've become much stronger; and 4) now we're playing for keeps." Washington Post Feb 13, 2002

All true. And then the terrorist decided to bring their fight to Iraq. Two different things here.

"The bulk of Iraqi military, police and beauracracy will join the U.S. to undertake the main responsibility of securing order in the country, With basic services in place, the U.S. can quickly begin the task of rebuilding the nation and earn the long lasting gratitude of an already welcoming Iraqi people. The U.S. will then hand off the task of governing to the Iraqi regime and begin withdrawing troops in a matter of months." Under Secretary of Defense Douglas Feith

They were off by about a year. So what?

When Army chief of Staff, General Shineski told reporters a month before the war that the U.S. would need several hundred thousand troops to stabilize post war Iraq, Dick Cheney, on Meet the Press said..."To suggest that we need several hundred thousand troops there after military operations have ended, I don't think that's accurate."

And the commanders in the field have never asked for more troops and we are begining to pull out so what is your point?

Paul Wolfowitz on Meet the Press..." It's hard to conceive that it would take more forces to provide stability in post-Saddam Iraq then it would to conduct the war itself and to secure the surrender of Saddam's security forces and his army, hard to imagine."

It didn't.

Yeah right...hard to imagine our own CIA warned the White House that armed opposition was inevitable after the war.

It was more acitive than they had planned but not unexpected and is down quite a bit about 43% over the last 3 months.

There's just a ton of quotes from the Bush administration that led the American people to believe we'd throw some civics textbooks out of a back of a humvee, and democracy would miracously sprout, and we'd be in and out of Iraq in no time, with the ever lasting gratitude of the Iraqi people.

There are a ton of quotes that say the Bush adminsitratin believed we would knock out Saddam rather quickly and we did just that. As far as what happened afterwards anyone who believes that the administration KNEW EXACTLY what would happen or that anyone KNEW EXACTLY what would happen is engaged in folly. No one could have known that and the reporters and politicians who were insisting on knowing before we went in are simply ignorant of such things.

The administration has been quite clear, this will ber a long fight, one that moves to different fronts but one we must face. If you somehow had the misconception that it would be a short engagement you were simply relying on the wrong sources for you information.

 

[MSgt]

Hoot, the U.S. is slowly learning the real meaning of a "war on terror." This also means our President and every one all the way down to the trigger puller. There is a wealth of study going back to the Reagan era that identifies exactly what we are facing today, but no one could have predicted the length and hardships such an undertaking would produce - and we still don't. Taking out Saddam was a noble deed for our country which is supposed to stand for freedom and justice. No one knew that our invasion in to Iraq was going to be our introduction into what we should have faced a long time ago. Radical Islam has been engaged in a war with us for a long time and until we put ourselves in Iraq, we refused to take part in it. One thing is sure....we cannot afford to not face it anymore. Do you think we should have invaded Saudi or Iran? What about now that Iran is pushing it's nuclear program? Either way and in any country, we would have to face these zealots sooner or later. Iraq was of our choosing.

Consider our enemies in the War on Terror. Men who believe, literally, that they are on a mission from God to destroy our civilization and who regard death as a promotion are not impressed by elegant maneuvers. We must find them, no matter how long it takes, then kill them. If they surrender, We must accord them their rights under the laws of war and international conventions. But, as we have learned so painfully from all the mindless, left-wing nonsense spouted about the prisoners at Guantanamo, we are much better off killing them before they have a chance to surrender.

It cannot be repeated often enough: "Whatever else you aim to do in wartime, never lose your focus on killing the enemy." There is no substitute for shedding the enemy’s blood.

Our "friendly" body count in Iraq has been remarkably low considering other wars. But you have to understand that we are being led by people who haven't yet fully realized what we face. While they are doing everything possible to reduce our deaths, they are prolonging progress. We are showing a lot more constraint than we should. These people will not quit. They must have their will sapped and their courage destroyed. Precision weapons unquestionably have value, but they are expensive and do not cause adequate destruction to impress a hardened enemy. The first time a guided bomb hits the deputy’s desk, it will get his chief’s attention, but if precision weaponry fails both to annihilate the enemy’s leadership and to somehow convince the army and population it has been defeated, it leaves the job to the soldier once again. Those who live in the technological clouds simply do not grasp the importance of graphic, extensive destruction in convincing an opponent of his defeat.

This will be a long war, stretching beyond many of our lifetimes. And it will be a long war of attrition. We must ensure that the casualties are always disproportionately on the other side. The longer we wear kid gloves, the longer this will be.

This "War on Terror" is defining itself daily. With every new "cartoon," we are that more able to focus. To expect any President or analyst to be able to predict what is going to happen next, we would have to be irresponsible to reality. All we can do is recognize what we face and do our best to shape a favorable result....whatever it takes.

I've said before..."This was and is bigger than just Iraq."

 

[cnredd]

I've said before..."This was and is bigger than just Iraq."

Stop stealing my lines!....

I'm not even military and I get it...:2wave: