Quote Originally Posted by AdrianII
EDIT
Maybe there are some good clues in the Battle for Basra in March 2003, when the Brits took the town without too many casualties after highly selective bombardment and with the use of good human intelligence.
HUMINT can make a world of difference. On those occasions where the USA has had it, our operations have been both more selective and more effective. The Brits (and USMC? or did they bypass?) did quality work in Basra.


Hurin

Yes, part of my argument is that the tactical choice made was one of the better ones available on an unpleasing list. All of these choices involve the deaths and injury of people who aren't combatants and really shouldn't be involved.

If you discount morality entirely, than the nuclear stuff becomes practical, but to discount the moral component entirely is to cede victory to the concept of terrorism if not to the particular terrorists in question. Not fun.

If you know a way of actually generating an open field fight with the terrorists/insurgents please let us know. Most of our military types dream of an engagement -- even facing long odds -- where they don't have to worry about innocents. Many of our opponents simply don't worry -- or use them as shields to make us hesitate.