How come the war in Iraq is going down in defeat?
542823
First off, for most of us WW2 took five years of actual fighting and then the cold war with its regional conflicts that followed went on for another Forty!\n\nAlso in that conflict the allies would lose the total number of casualties incurred in Iraq in a single day.\n\nThe war in Iraq was won.....It is the peace which is being lost.
813978
2.5% of Iraq's population has died...when?  Maybe provide some follow-up statement and context for your quesion.  I'm sure everyone will blame the US, it seems to be the cool thing to do lately.  I will give you this, the US did light the fuse in that part of the world, but it was bound to happen eventually.
869135
I think it partially a coincidence.  There has been talk of strategy for several months now.  Support for the war is dwindling.  Its a constant attack, its not getting much better.   And, anticipating a dem win, they probably figured, they need one really soon.\n\nI think its a combination of things forcing the issue.
934619
Kerry Has certainly made his mistakes. But Bush and Cheney are in way over their heads. They blundered into Iraq not because of terrorism but because of Hussein. (They had to cover up for bin laden some how.) The military is not prepared to fight guerrillas. We have the most powerful military in the world, but as it was proved in Vietnam, if we're not fighting another army, we cannot win. We didn't have the organization to take Iraq when we started, and now we don't have the will. The Bush administration is trying desperately to cover up for what will be 8 bungled years. They achieved nothing except to destroy the United State's reputation in the eyes of the world.
987448
In a war there are only loosers & victims:\n \nThe victims are always the invaded, attacked, brutalized countries and their citizen. But also the citizens of the aggressor (US) fall victim to their warmongering "government", as they loose their sons and daughters, fathers and mothers in a war, which only aids the Bush family and the Cheneys... noone else will benefit from this.\n \nThe Iraq invasion = \nTwo oil men...\nOne oil war...\nRising oil prices..\nGet it  ?!\n \nAny war is a lost cause.... and the Iraq war is costing everybody - APART FROM the Bushs & Cheneys... they are getting richer every minute this senseless murdering of innocent people continues. Wonder, when Moron will send HIS daughters off to kill babies and women "to protect the US" .... "fight to protect the US: geez, there's a stupid statement, if I ever heard one.
568452
I think the war in Iraq is a failure of the Bush adminastration. Iraqi's are engaged in a civil war and we are in the middle of it. Only way out is to get out and let them settle for themselves. I always wondered how many repugs were acturally fighting in the war. Now I know. It is a shame.
1039268
It is obvious the United States is winning, but the problem is that doesn't suit the leftist (Democrats) in this country.  They want to scare the American public into thinking we are losing and bring up ever road side bomb as evidence.  \n\nWhen was the last time you heard of a terrorist training camp?  Yeah they don't have those any more.  \n\nWhen was the last time the "insurgents" occupied any territory.  The answe is Falluja last year and they held it for less then 2 weeks when we went in and took it back.  \n\nWhen was the last time they hit America?  9/11 and none since then.  \n\nYes we are winning.  It just doesn't fit into the political scheme of the media or the left to say so.
135239
God knows.  Sometimes I think it started with this Neocon PNAC invasion of Iraq, but it seems to me that ever since the end of WW II, the US has tried to assert its dominance over much of the world.  We seem to have lost our way since Bush stole the first election.  Byzantium, China, Persia, the Ottomans, Rome, Great Brittain, France...and the good ole USA.\nthey all decline and fall.
796355
I agree with you America is gradually being isolated because the war in Iraq which is a failure.
594321
Everyone who is answering that the war is going terrible needs to talk one-on-one with a servicemember who has been there. IF you do, you will most likely find:\n\n* The "war" is going very well. Most Iraqis want us there to finish the job of helping them get on their feet and then leave.\n* Most Iraqis have always been and still remain friendly to the American military. Kids still want to touch our hands. People still smile and wave at us. Most have a kind word to us and the United States and make an attempt to communicate their gratitude in broken English.\n* Americans are doing wonderful things in Iraq. We are building schools, roads and infrastructure. We are training Iraqi Police (the IPs) and Iraqi military. These projects allow Iraqis to stand on their own two feet and govern themselves.\n* The democratically elected, constitutionally backed Iraqi government is in charge and running the show. It only took 3 years to accomplish. By contrast, Germany took 4 years and Japan took 7 years to take over governing themselves.\n* The "insurgency" is NOT what the media leads you to believe. I use quotes around "insurgency" because, by definition, an insurgency would be one led by Iraqis. The truth is that 95% of all "insurgents" ARE NOT Iraqi. They are Saudi, Egyptian, Jordanian, Syrian, Somalian, Iranian ... just about anything BUT Iraqis.\n* The "inusrgency" is being orchestrated by the Iranian government. The Iranians have the most to gain by keeping Iraq unstable. As long as Iraq is unstable, no one will seriously look at Iran and its nuclear weapons program. And with almost 200,000 Americans to Iran's east and west, Iran is mighty damn nervous right now.\n* The vast majority of Americans in Iraq - conservatice or liberal, Republican or Democrat - believe in the mission in Iraq and believe it is the right thing to do. Their opinions are based on events they see every day with their own eyes ... NOT what they have seen on CNN.\n\nYou can believe what you want. Believe CNN or believe the words of our servicemen and women who have been there. But have an open mind.\n\nEDIT: Rena - Conservatively, 500,000 American soldiers, sailors, airmen and Marines have rotated through Iraq since the end of major hostilities. Approximately 2400 have died there - and about 1/6th of those were non-combat related. Divide 2400 / 500,000 and you get 0.0048 - or less than 1/2 of 1% chance of dying in Iraq. This is - BY FAR - the safest war in terms of KIA's that the United States has ever been involved in. You really should talk to several servicemembers before you dismiss a mission we believe in so easily.\n\nEDIT: Manuel Sarmiento - You said:\n\n"War implies that both parties are at even. USA just went and crushed Iraq."\n\nTell that to the Poles, the Czechs, the Austrians, the French and the Belgians who were crushed by Hitler in the beginning of World War II. Tell that to the Kuwaitis who were crushed by Hussein in 1989. Tell that to the Muslims who were slaughtered by Milosevic in the early 1990s. I doubt any one of them would agree with your absurd statement. War DOES NOT imply both sides are even. War implies two governments are fighting with two militaries - nothing more, nothing less.\n\n"Now, because Hussein is a bad person, does that justify to kill thousands of innocent iraquies?"\n\nNo, but I think it justifies the liberation of 25,000,000 Iraqis. In EVERY war, unfortunately, innocent people are hurt and killed. The main difference between the United States and other countries' militaries is that we do not TARGET innocent non-combatants. In fact, we PROSECUTE and JAIL military members who intentionally do so. 'Nuff said.\n\n"Iraq had nothing to do with 9/11 but now, it's just natural that iraq people enroll to damage USA, the country that, on their perception, crushed Iraq."\n\nSee my statement above on how Iraqis really feel about Americ
946576
Please......everyone is in denial that there is a civil war going on in Iraq.  Sunnis and Shiites killing and getting killed.  US troops are dying just because they are there.  The Kurds are just smart enough to stay away from civil war because when the Sunnis and Shiites annihilate each other, then the Kurds will have it all.
436216
By the "Iraq War", I will -assume- you mean the fight between the Iraqi insurgency (and Al Qaeda terrorists) vs. US (and Iraqi Defense Forces). Occupation, police action, whatever you want to call it.\n\nThe reason why we cannot defeat the insurgency is because the United States has not learned much from history (I would place most of the blame on the incompetent civilian leadership, regardless of party).\n\nThe civilian leadership did not have a contigency plan that geared towards reconstruction and defeating a potential insurgency. Their love of their doctrine and dreams blinded them as to what might happen. The military leadership, trained to make Plan Bs, tried to warn the civilian leadership of their folly, but were ignored. Remember General Shinseki telling Rumsfeld that at several hundred thousand US troops would be needed to pacify Iraq? Well, he is suspected of having been sacked (officially he "retired").\n\nNext, after the invasion, Iraq's infrastructure was destroyed by "shock and awe," followed by tensions between the Iraqis and the US troops. Remember that the civilian leadership thought that when the US came in the Iraqis would celebrate us as liberators? Well, Iraqis know their history. They know the West's past involvement in the Middle East, known as colonialism. They remember what the French did in Egypt. They remember what the British did in Iraq. The Iraqis did not trust us either nor do they like us (traditional vs modern culture clash). Also, the Iraqis lost power and water and all the essentials for everyday life due to all the bombing campaigns. These factors combined created a massive backlash against the US presence.\n\nAlso, the military uses conventional strategy and tactics to deal with its enemies, the way it has been trained. Unfortunately, most of this is outdated WWI/WWII military thought, which some call "Second Generation Warfare" (the German blitzkrieg is an example of Third Generation Warfare, and the VC element in Vietnam is an example of Fourth Generation Warfare). This is in layman terms of taking ground and destroying the enemy with superior firepower. Unfortunately, such conventional strategy/tactics do not work when you are facing insurgents and terrorists. When dealing with insurgents and terrorists kinetically (means blowing things up, shooting things up, arresting everyone in sight, etc), you can cause massive damage in the civilian infrastructure and create a large amount of collateral damage. This enrages the people, who would then decide to shelter the insurgents and terrorists from the US military, because they want the Americans out. Mao's fish in water illustration. As well, a lack of cultural understanding also makes the tensions escalate. When the Americans carried out their cordon and searches, they disrespected Iraqi customs and violated individual Iraqi's honor. Such gross disrespect of another's culture (especially when you deal with traditional people) is unforgivable, and makes more enemies than allies. This can fuel the insurgency and create support for it.\n\nLastly, our grand strategy must put emphasis on political, social, and economic issues, as opposed to military issues. The goal should be to gain the moral high ground and to use more psychological warfare as opposed to physical warfare. By forcing Iraqis to create a "democracy" (which is actually a republic; democracy is the wrong term to use if you have read Madison's Federalist #10), we are ignoring that these people have a traditional culture who have not been given the time to embrace Western ideals. Remember in history, it has taken several hundred years for the West to develop and embrace Western ideals such as "democracy" and "equality" and etc. Now we expect Iraq to eat all this in one or two decades? Also, we need to focus on at least giving the Iraqis the basic necessities in Maslow's Hierarchy of Needs
482690
Excellent. In the darkest days of World War 2 the American public began to become disgruntled about being in the war. After reports of thousands of troops dying sometimes daily, many parents of fallen soldiers began to actually write dissenting letters to the generals and and other governmental leaders. But our government made the decision to stay the course and continue to absolute victory. And now, despite the heavy losses, history has vindicated our involvement in the war as being a great triumph over tyranny. The same can be said about our leaders resolve for victory during the darkest days of the Revolutionary War and the Civil War.\n\nSince then, the government gave in to public pressure during the Korean and Vietnamese wars; both of which the military could have ultimately come out victorious. In fact, commanders in the field in Vietnam will tell you that we were not losing the war. In counting casualties, we lost 58,000 troops killed to an astonishing over 2 million Vietnamese. \n\nThe problem is, just like after 9/11, Americans are all patriotic and ready to fight - until the body bags start coming in. You can't win a war like this. In WW2 our leaders fought on despite the pain of losses. Once complete victory and success has been achieved in Iraq, history will vindicate it as a war worth fighting as well. If we just pack up and leave because of public pressure, then just like Vietnam this current conflict will go down in American history as a failure.
194669
not so easy my fraind.the millitary was humilated and destroyed by saddam the moment he took over,the iraqi armed forces faught a bloody long and intensive war with iran for 8 years.by 88 the armed forces where exhausted,& so was the economy.before they gathered breeth ,they were thrown in kuwait where they were never ready for,and without the consultation of of even the chief of staff or the minister of defence.strange isnt it!!!!.the armed forces were so weak that the ordinary soldir was not able to get more than a stony pice of bread every two days.no logistic support.tanks were in no fighting readeness,you could see that on what was called the victory parade held in baghdad in winter 89,with the heavy smoke of the tanks & apcs engaines that blocked the vission.at that time the coalition was announcing that the iraqies have the 5th strongest army and they threat saudia arabia and the peace of all the world.halfe a million men with 2500 war plkanes and huge numbers of the most modern weapons slaughtered that weak army during its retreat in 91.the order of retreat was given by saddam at the last momment,it was a desaster for an army cant retreat in one day.plus,no one belived the order,because saddam himself stressed manytimes that the millitary must not retreat even if they hear his personal voice in the radio,cause his enemy is capable of forging his voice.after that there was blockade and sanctiones for 12 years.no new arms,no ammunition,no equipments,no spare parts.what ever was left of air crafts was grounded.by 2003 the iraqi armed forces were reduced to skeleton forces,very low moral,(the general was paid less than 30 us$ p/m as a salary).what was left was only small arms.noe,how can any one fight the abrams tank and f-117,or cruise missiles with rpgs or ak-47.who can fight without air fotce or navy.why should the forces fight when they feel that they are humellated for 35 years.who agrees to gight under the command of a dirty kid(his son)or an ice seller?who ius ready to have his children orphaned and wife widowed with no one to take care of.should they die so that saddam become richer and his sonesrape more of the iraqi girls.the armed forces felt that they were strange in thair land.they refused the slavery .it was totally idiotness millitarilly to face such a mighty force with nothing.that is why they didnt fight.no honest man can blame the iraqi millitary for not fighting with honour,but fighting has its conditions.
743287
Just about all wars see major shifts in goals and tactics at some point making the original goals and tactics obsolete.  If we leave Iraq tomorrow the result would be a major power struggle resulting in a winner.  that winner will be the badest of the bunch and most likely hate the west.  We will leave him the 2nd largest oil reserves in the world.  He will spend that oil wealth on exporting terror with the best weapons money can buy.  We are part of this world we better have a force there!!
246612
This strikes me as a very misguided question.  Fewer people are killed today in Iraq than there were during Saddam's reign of terror.  His citizens no longer live in fear of him using chemical weapons against them and for the first time ever they were allowed to select a government.  Iraq is certainly not a safe place but calling the situation a mess is just not accurate.
1163804
I know what you mean. You can even see it on this board. How we are stupid and if you fight this war you should die. As if I chose to separate from my 1 year old when i went to IRAQ.People like to over exaggerate everything. No one really thinks the military is loosing this war. I mean if the military was loosing the war there would be more than the 2,500 dead in three years. After all there is over 120,000 soldiers in Iraq at any given time.\nLoosing is the last thing people really think. Politics is what has you there and it is whats going to keep soldiers there for a while. i mean aren't they just now starting to close the bases down in Germany. Those were there to make sure Germany didn't invade another country. I think that threat has great diminished yet the bases are just now being closed. Politics and money are the roots of all evils.