U.S. headed for disaster when efforts in Iraq collapse

[bemildred]

We may now be only weeks away from a complete collapse of the Iraqi army and the withdrawal of British troops from Iraq in the face of overwhelming public pressure on Tony Blair.

That is a realistic projection based on the reports of two Washington Post reporters, whose dispatches from inside Iraqi Army units and U.S. units assigned to train and work with the Iraqi military have just been published.

What the Post reporters found was massive disenchantment on both sides: American forces bitterly disappointed with the Iraqi government forces, and Iraqi troops harboring similar feelings toward their American counterparts. Only a small percentage of all Iraqi troops are now estimated to be adequately trained to take over the defense of their country. Desertions are widespread.

More than 1,700 American men and women sent to Iraq have returned home in body bags thus far, and more than 7,000 have been critically wounded. War dead in total exceeds 25,000, including "collateral casualties." And the price tag for our military operations tops $200 billion - and counting.

more

[Ganja Ninja]

1. If it brings about the end of the neocons then it won't ...

be a complete disaster.

[muriel_volestrangler]

2. Though it would be nice if there was, I don't see public pressure on Blair

certainly not 'overwhelming'. The majority of people think the invasion was wrong, but there isn't a huge "we must get out now" movement. A lot of people think that it would get even worse if we did (and, to be fair, I thought that, until Abu Ghraib, when I decided we had to be making things worse), and the casualty rate of British troops is currently fairly low.

[bemildred]

4. I thought he was being a bit optimistic, too. nt

[Deja Q]

3. And once we're out, those delicious oil wells will be destroyed.

Karma for the misdeed destroys us. And the world economy, I wonder how * will react to those who react against our irresponsiblility...

[RethugAssKicker]

5. 1723 dead, 15000 wounded, 100,000 Iraqis dead

[indepat]

6. These are but small prices we must pay for the neocons to keep us safe

[Raster]

12. EVERY signatory to the pnac "manifesto" is a traitor and should be

treated as such. Their cockeyed self-serving view of the world will cause horrific consequences for you and I for DECADES to come. They played fast and loose with the facts and gambled away our country's solvency and security. To make matters worse, I believe 9/11 will eventually prove to be-horrifically--a choreographed effort to advance the neocons plans. This country has no idea just how much in jeopardy we really are.

[oblivious]

7. I remember General Clark saying losing was not an option in Afghanistan.

Just a couple of days before the war.

Did they say that about Iraq? If so, I guess that means a disaster of epic proportions. All is lost. No respect. No money. No fear.

[bemildred]

8. Anyone that EVER say ANYTHING is "not an option" get morons credits

in my book. It is a stupid statement. Anything that is possible
"is an option" and you better deal with it or it will deal with you.

[muriel_volestrangler]

10. Not only did they say it, the British took the piss out of them for it

The first batch of Downing Street Memos were broken like this:

'Failure is not an option, but it doesn't mean they will avoid it'

"He also wants your support. He is still smarting from the comments by other European leaders on his Iraq policy. This gives you real influence: on the public relations strategy; on the UN and weapons inspections; and on US planning for a military campaign. This could be critically important. I think there is a real risk that the Administration underestimates the difficulties. They may agree that failure isn't an option, but this does not mean that they will avoid it."

http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/main.jhtml?xml=/news/2004/09/18/nwar118.xml

[Jack Rabbit]

9. Thank you for posting, Mr. Mildred

Recent surveys in Iraq have shown that insurgents are overwhelmingly Iraqis, not foreign fighters. Few are associated with al-Qaida.

In other words, we are not fighting as terrorists as much as we are fighting resistance to a colonial occupation. The Iraqi people have every right to resist a colonial occupation.

[LyleNews]

11. Lemme Get This Washington Turd's Thinking Straight

The First Turd spent $500 Billion Dollars invading two countries that had no Army, Air Force, Navy or Artillery. They're penned in like George Custer and Captain Remo. The Iraqi natives are kicking his ass. But, for another $500 billion they could train the Iraqi's, who supposedly had a bad-assed army before the invasion, to fight for themselves? Who the hell elected Rove in the first place?

[oblivious]

13. Good point. It depends which group you call the Iraqi army I guess.

The ones fighting for the resistance or the ones pretending to fight for the invaders. It doesn't sound like the former need much training from anyone.