[lit-ideas] Re: The beginning of the end in Iraq

  • From: "Andy Amago" <aamago@xxxxxxxxxxxxx>
  • To: "lit-ideas" <lit-ideas@xxxxxxxxxxxxx>
  • Date: Sun, 22 Oct 2006 12:37:08 -0400

> [Original Message]
> From: Eric Yost <eyost1132@xxxxxxxxxxxxx>
> To: <lit-ideas@xxxxxxxxxxxxx>
> Date: 10/21/2006 7:57:15 PM
> Subject: [lit-ideas] Re: The beginning of the end in Iraq
>  >>What army?  There is no more army.  Why do you think they 
> keep rotating the same guys?
> Do the research, then speak from some knowledge of the 
> situation. The ENTIRE army. Why do I bother to reply to such 
> an uninformed person?

Well, given that you supported this adventure based on Annie Myelroie's
'facts', you might want to define 'uninformed'.  They're considering, if
not actually implementing, outsourcing desk jobs to free up people to
fight.  What does that say to you about the entire army?  They're spending,
I forget, about a third more to recruit, after having reduced standards,
which means more training.  Does that mean nothing to you?  We're maxed
out, whether you want to believe it or not and whether General Grange
believes it or not.

>  >>Eric, everything you've said shows that we're still 
> clueless that this war cannot be won militarily.
> Okay forget about me. Would you admit that a US Army General 
> might know more about military matters than you do? Just 
> maybe? Possibly because it's ... his job?

Those whose job it is have lost Iraq, civilians and military.  Frontline
just did a show called 2003, the Lost Year in Iraq.  It's a little sketchy,
and they go easy on Bremer, but it's still worth watching:


> Nahhh...forget it. You always know more than everyone else.

The difference between me and 'everyone else' is that I'm not in denial.  I
look at the facts.  Neocons and right wingers wrapped themselves up in
ideology until it blew up in their faces and they have no choice anymore,
even Granddaddy Buckley, and even after it blew up in their faces they
clutch at straws.  We can win this thing the way we were going to be
greeted as liberators.  On this very list they insisted that Saddam and
9/11 were related until Bush himself said they had nothing to do with each
other.  It seems it's easy to know more than everyone else.  The ONLY way
to win this, and it's probably too late even for that, is to win hearts and
minds, the way al Qaeda and Hezbollah are doing it.  And we hate humanity
enough to not know what that means.  It's sort of like talking to oil
executives and they think global warming is great because it means it will
be easier to get the oil in the Arctic.  Only when it's too late, as with
Iraq, will they sit up and take notice, maybe.  Never mind, I forgot, I
know more than everyone else.  Thanks for explaining things.  BTW, did you
know that the do-nothings in Congress worked about 94 days out of the year?
Who can have hearings on a war they know nothing about when they're so busy
with other things, like satisfying lobbyists?  Not one hearing on this war.
Not one.  What does General Grange say to that?  I wouldn't be surprised if
the good general was paid to say we can still win because the election is
coming and Iraq is such an issue in this election.  Either that, or he is
also in denial, and that, as has been amply demonstrated to date, is no way
to win a war.


To change your Lit-Ideas settings (subscribe/unsub, vacation on/off,
digest on/off), visit www.andreas.com/faq-lit-ideas.html

Other related posts: