1. First, Michael Pugliese. Yesterday you claimed WMD didn't need de-bunking because it was so obvious. But as a list watcher pointed out to me in an offlist post, your posting record 2001-2 would indicate otherwise. It's there, it's searchable, it's recoverable, it's boring. You posted some material without comment that paralleled the lies the Bush and Blair administration used to justify their war and occupation.
2. Really, I hope everyone takes the time to read the End of Warfare article. It has a technical detail missing from the US and UK media analysis, who really are in awe of the CentCom propaganda machine. I think one of the main points of the article was, yes indeed, the US hadn't learned anything from Vietnam, and had hoped that a still further concentration of firepower and might would mean that any war they chose was unlosable, while most of their troops wouldn't be placed in harm's way (harm's way being a volunteer duty for gung-ho elite forces). Instead what they have is a mess where their most expensive weapons often don't work and a fighting force that really never expected to be put in harm's way doing their daily non-frontline duties (like truck convoys). What the farce of the totally unnecessary Fallujah assault shows is the only way the US can take Fallujah, is to level it building by building til the resistance has no cover from which to fight. In which case, it could have done just using its air force, no steroidal heroics from gyrines expeditionary froce and the beetle bailey brigade necessary.
Another thing it shows is just how unmotivated most US troops must be to go in and do Stalingrad-style fighting (they really are afraid to die) , while the defenders of Fallujah know they are up against the wall and are going to fight til the end. The choices have already been clarified by their would-be conquerers. However, whether or not most Americans can learn anything from this is doubtful. They didn't want to admit that the security apparatuses that got billions of federal dollars are the people who should be held responsible for 9-11, and I doubt whether most want to admit that over 500 billion dollars a year is going to the DoD in order to create an over-indoctrinated, over-trained, over-priced military that can't fight very well and is equipped with over-priced junk (though anyone with enlisted military experience in systems operations will know exactly what I'm talking about). The recent clamour over retro-fitted vehicle armour is so typical. Why were the vehicles so poorly designed to begin with? Why are they now being retrofitted with extra armour? What will all this extra weight do to the engines and suspension systems over the next year (wear them out faster, of course).
3. To Luke Weiger. You wrote to me the following: >> You claimed that the US and/or Israelis were most likely responsible for the recent bombings in Iraq. Though not impossible, I think the suggestion is exceedingly improbable.>>
That does not make a conspiracy theory. What I said was I found all too convenient the explanations that the bombings in Shia religious centers were the Sunni insurgency trying to disrupt elections. One, I don't see how it's going to disrupt the US's elections anyway. Two, I highly doubt that the Sunni insurgency operates there (certainly they have been cooperating, not fighting al-Sadr's forces). Three, I said alternatives have to be considred, including the US and Israel at their worst, simply because of the gross geopolitical motives on display. The worst scenario for an anti- US insurgency is a fully united Sunni-Shia front. And if these people come to power, the traitors will pay. And relations with Israel will not be good. I remind you I also said that Shia-on-Shia violence warranted a closer look, because there was so much of it even last year around this time.
4. Finally, as for the indiscriminate violent nature of the insurgency, that's more a begged question than any serious analysis. Look at how indiscriminate the US has been in its bombings of Sadr City, Najaf, and Fallujah. The recent attack on the US military in Mosul wasn't indiscriminate; if it's war, that was a military target. I wonder if the First Chimp is going to fly in and serve ham and turkey 'tactical' to the CentCom warriors of Iraq (if you have combat arms experience, you'll know what I'm talking about). Wonder if Blair will go home and draft an escape plan from his own folly, after seeing a bit of reality on his 'surprise' visit? Perhaps the extra trip to Egypt, if it happens, is to beg President Laughing Cow for an all-arab, all-muslim force to make the dirty work look clean. Then won't some here be amazed to see the real Iraqi resistance 'indiscriminately' kill Arabs and Muslims who would deny them their victory?
F
-- _______________________________________________ Find what you are looking for with the Lycos Yellow Pages http://r.lycos.com/r/yp_emailfooter/http://yellowpages.lycos.com/default.asp?SRC=lycos10