What is really going on in Iraq?

[Philippus Flavius Homovallumus]

I think the entire American view on occupation is screwy, no offense. The British go through three stages.

Peace Keeping

Peace Enforcment

War Fighting

The US forces, by accounts from British senior servicemen and their American counterparts do not understand the first, have trouble with the second and then default to the third. It is not a question merely of manpower, but of handling the situation.

Question: In Bosnia what were the two things that came out of every Warrior when it stopped?

Redleg: I believe breaking point is 140-180 days by US studies from WWII. That's about six months, which is what British troops spend in theatre, and twice what Americans did in Vietnam.

[Beren Son Of Barahi]

Alright bear with me hear, lets see how i go.

to highlight the point i am making about fitting in with the local population, i don't mean dress in local drab, live in huts and eat goats. I mean making concerted efforts to establish good relations with the local community, this takes a little bit of understanding and a little understanding local customs. A great example of the difference is by this. In the border regions of Afghanistan and Pakistan an Australian SAS patrol lived with the various villages around the area, making a concerted effort to understand the locals and getting the locals to trust them, so if things were happening the locals would be the eyes and ears for the patrol. the area in question is huge. after several months the 8 Australian SAS men were replaced by 1000 US marines, who built a huge base and never once tried to relate or build trust and understanding with the locals, the locals in turn stopped providing any information to them. the 1000 marines failed where 8 sas had done so much. boots on the ground does no one any good if you turn the local popultion against you due to over-whelming force, the pointless killing of innocent civilians and bad policy like arresting people based of nothing more then accusations of rival families or tribes.

Of cause bush is looking for an exit, he has 2 years to turn iraq into a non-issue for the elections or the republicans will loose the power they had dreamed off through the Clinton era. The republican party is basically now looking ahead to the next election and will be only doing things or saying things that give it a chance in 08.

The rotations were changed in the 2nd year of the war weren't they? as well as the rule of how many tours soldier's could do, as well as calling up any newly retired service personnel? and my point is not the the soldiers shouldn't be rotated but it is that they should be phased, so that the new guys learn from some vets until they ease into it. this was not done at the start at least.


FYI. My experience that i use to make most of my comments comes from the time i spent in East Timor during the UNMISET. I was there as a contractor teaching, instructing and reporting. i know quite a few Australian SAS who had/have/are working in Afghanistan, Iraq and timor. i have read a fair bit about all things iraq/Afghanistan and indo. whilst not a serviceman i would consider myself well-enough versed to comment on issues involved in nation building, peacekeeping, occupation.

[Redleg]

Alright bear with me hear, lets see how i go.

to highlight the point i am making about fitting in with the local population, i don't mean dress in local drab, live in huts and eat goats. I mean making concerted efforts to establish good relations with the local community, this takes a little bit of understanding and a little understanding local customs. A great example of the difference is by this. In the border regions of Afghanistan and Pakistan an Australian SAS patrol lived with the various villages around the area, making a concerted effort to understand the locals and getting the locals to trust them, so if things were happening the locals would be the eyes and ears for the patrol. the area in question is huge. after several months the 8 Australian SAS men were replaced by 1000 US marines, who built a huge base and never once tried to relate or build trust and understanding with the locals, the locals in turn stopped providing any information to them. the 1000 marines failed where 8 sas had done so much. boots on the ground does no one any good if you turn the local popultion against you due to over-whelming force, the pointless killing of innocent civilians and bad policy like arresting people based of nothing more then accusations of rival families or tribes.

Of cause bush is looking for an exit, he has 2 years to turn iraq into a non-issue for the elections or the republicans will loose the power they had dreamed off through the Clinton era. The republican party is basically now looking ahead to the next election and will be only doing things or saying things that give it a chance in 08.

The rotations were changed in the 2nd year of the war weren't they? as well as the rule of how many tours soldier's could do, as well as calling up any newly retired service personnel? and my point is not the the soldiers shouldn't be rotated but it is that they should be phased, so that the new guys learn from some vets until they ease into it. this was not done at the start at least.


FYI. My experience that i use to make most of my comments comes from the time i spent in East Timor during the UNMISET. I was there as a contractor teaching, instructing and reporting. i know quite a few Australian SAS who had/have/are working in Afghanistan, Iraq and timor. i have read a fair bit about all things iraq/Afghanistan and indo. whilst not a serviceman i would consider myself well-enough versed to comment on issues involved in nation building, peacekeeping, occupation.

Teaching as a civilian is different then combat operations - you should be able to get that answer from your SAS friends. It effects everyman different. Some handle the stress with ease, other crack. Hince the reference to the study.

Try it sometime its a lot more difficult to be a soldier facing combat then a civilian in a war zone. And the rotations are phased if one looks at the actually deployment cycles

Here try this site it links a lot of information to include the troop deployment announcements.

http://www.globalsecurity.org/milita...nstruction.htm

[Redleg]

I think the entire American view on occupation is screwy, no offense. The British go through three stages.

Peace Keeping

Peace Enforcment

War Fighting

The US forces, by accounts from British senior servicemen and their American counterparts do not understand the first, have trouble with the second and then default to the third. It is not a question merely of manpower, but of handling the situation.

Question: In Bosnia what were the two things that came out of every Warrior when it stopped?

Redleg: I believe breaking point is 140-180 days by US studies from WWII. That's about six months, which is what British troops spend in theatre, and twice what Americans did in Vietnam.

Yes indeed you have referenced the study that I was refering to.