Okay, maybe I’m just not all that adept when it comes to military things. Let’s discount the military background I actually have, the numerous degrees and my fascination with girls who shoot guns for a moment so I can somehow understand what’s really going on here. Some time ago, the actual ground battle stopped in Iraq, which is why the bombs stopped dropping, the soldiers stopped invading and the airplanes stopped flying nonstop combat missions. So, somewhere after that we started walking around the country and getting fired at by civilians, or terrorists, or Imperial stormtroopers working for the Empire, or whatever, and we were, um, fighting?
Now, we’re going to stop fighting, turn the mission over to the Iraqis and then go home? Oh wait, we’re not going home. We’re going to hang out in barracks and do nothing? But why do I have this feeling that we’re still going to get daily counts of Americans dying while sitting around in the barracks?
What exactly is changed? Or changing? Is the war really “over”? Or are we just looking for something to sound good so we can say it’s over?
I’m really confused about this because I don’t think anything’s really going to change other than a different president is is charge who promised the end of hostilities in Iraq, so he’s telling us it’s over, but we’re still going to be there in the same exact places where the enemy is firing at us on a daily basis. Or am I wrong? I mean, I could be. What do I know about such things anyway?
I really hope it means good things, but I just don’t understand what it means other than a change in rhetoric. Are the al qaeda guys listening to rhetoric? Or are they too busy trying to kill Americans?
I apologize for being confused here. It’s like I turned into a season of Stargate only to find out that I missed an entire season while playing World of Warcraft every day instead, so I don’t understand why there are strange people on the show. Can someone get me up to speed? Or should I just go back to playing WoW?
From my understanding,today's activities are more of an arbitrary point on a sliding scale… while 50000 troops is by no means a small presence, it is only 40% of the occupation peak. And over the course of the last year it seems that (for better or for worse) the US troops have been attempting to take a support role, can no longer make missions of their own independent choosing, and can't go out without Iraqi troops along anymore… Think of it like a birthday. Sure, in the scheme of things you aren't really any older or different than you were the day before, but we do like to notice the direction things are going from time to time. And there is a direction here… as near as I can tell, this is about as quick of a scramble for the exits as one can make, while still pretending that one is trying to "win" (separate discussion)… and for sure this policy direction is completely different than what would have occurred during a Republican administration, which surely would have seen a much bigger footprint at this point. So yes and no. Nothing is particularly different from yesterday, but things surely are different from a year ago… as far as the US role at least… one thing that hasn't changed is the inevitability of a massive and bloody civil war at some point in the next few years, but again, different discussion.
From my understanding,today's activities are more of an arbitrary point on a sliding scale… while 50000 troops is by no means a small presence, it is only 40% of the occupation peak. And over the course of the last year it seems that (for better or for worse) the US troops have been attempting to take a support role, can no longer make missions of their own independent choosing, and can't go out without Iraqi troops along anymore… Think of it like a birthday. Sure, in the scheme of things you aren't really any older or different than you were the day before, but we do like to notice the direction things are going from time to time. And there is a direction here… as near as I can tell, this is about as quick of a scramble for the exits as one can make, while still pretending that one is trying to "win" (separate discussion)… and for sure this policy direction is completely different than what would have occurred during a Republican administration, which surely would have seen a much bigger footprint at this point. So yes and no. Nothing is particularly different from yesterday, but things surely are different from a year ago… as far as the US role at least… one thing that hasn't changed is the inevitability of a massive and bloody civil war at some point in the next few years, but again, different discussion.
Endless war makes more money for banks
I don’t unremarkably comment but I gotta tell appreciate it for the post on this amazing one : D.