We are not willing to do, what needs to be done.

Basically we are in an asymetrical version of WWIII. Western democracies US and UK vs. radical islamic terrorists. Yet, we are unwilling to do what it takes to win this fight because of politics (on both sides), the liberal media and world organizations such as the UN. In WWII we were preparing to put a million men onto mainland Japan to win that war. In today's world political climate no one has the guts or stomach for that. What needs to be done will probably never happen because we need oil from the Saudi's and this ties one hand behind our back. I think the Powell doctrine was needed in Iraq, but we missed the opportunity to do it that way. We have to get the Iraqi forces up to par and then it will be up to them. We probably need a draft or at least a few more army divisions and another USMC division but as I say...we are unwilling to do what needs to be done. It really frustrates and angers me, but this is what our world has become.

Al-Qaeda 'blames Blair for bombs'



Osama Bin Laden's lieutenant Ayman al-Zawahri has warned London will face more attacks because of Tony Blair's foreign policy decisions.
His comments were made in a videotape which was broadcast on Arab satellite channel al-Jazeera.

The al-Qaeda deputy said: "Blair has brought you destruction to the heart of London, and he will bring more destruction, God willing."

Mr Blair denies his policies provoked the 7 July bombs, which killed 56.

Al-Zawahri also warned the US that Iraq would be worse than Vietnam.

Downing Street refused to comment on the latest al-Qaeda tape.

Some critics, including MP George Galloway, said the war in Iraq had helped to spark the attacks on London.


This is the biggest threat London has faced in peacetime and we have to throw all our resources into it
Detective Chief Constable Andy Trotter


But Mr Blair has said the Iraq war is merely an excuse for those who want to attack the UK.

He has acknowledged Iraq is being used to recruit terrorists, but insisted the roots of extremism were much deeper.

In the tape al-Zawahri - who wore a white tunic with black turban and posed next to a rifle - also warned other nations to leave Muslim lands to avoid further violence.

And he said: "What you have seen, O Americans, in New York and Washington and the losses you are having in Afghanistan and Iraq, in spite of all the media blackout, are only the losses of the initial clashes.

"If you continue the same policy of aggression against Muslims, God willing, you will see the horror that will make you forget what you had seen in Vietnam."

'Dark vision'

President Bush said al-Zawahri's comments would not prompt the US to withdraw from Iraq.

"We will stay on the offense against these people.

"They're terrorists and they're killers and they will kill innocent people... so they can impose their dark vision on the world," he said.

Police are still investigating the bombings on Tube trains at Aldgate, Russell Square and Edgware Road, as well as a bus in Tavistock Square, and are also holding 15 people over the failed 21 July attacks.

Police presence

There is a massive police presence on London's streets, with 6,000 officers watching for a repeat of the attacks two and four weeks ago.

A high-visibility police presence in the capital is aimed at making the public feel safe, while undercover officers are mingling with passengers on Tubes and buses trying to spot would-be bombers.

Although police have received no intelligence about another attack, all leave has been cancelled and detectives drafted into uniform.

Extra officers have also been brought in from outside the capital and retired officers persuaded to return to help with the anti-terror work.

Thursday also saw the first person charged over the 21 July attacks appear in court. Ismael Abdurahman, 23, of Kennington, London, is charged with failing to disclose information about suspected Shepherd's Bush bomber Hussain Osman.

He has been remanded in custody for a week.


Al-Zawahri last appeared in a video in June, saying Muslims should not rely on peaceful protests but should also use violence. He also appeared in a video in February.

The Egyptian-born mastermind is thought to be Bin Laden's deputy and to have been hiding in the rugged border areas of either Pakistan or Afghanistan.



Story from BBC NEWS:
http://news.bbc.co.uk/go/pr/fr/-/2/hi/uk_news/4745639.stm

Published: 2005/08/04 17:44:10 GMT

Would be great to have another division or double whatever amount of men you already have over there, if you were fighting a traditional war where the enemy wore a uniform....

Send another million men over there, the bad guys will still blend in with the public...they just wouldn't have to wait as long for the next convoy to drive by before setting off the roadside bomb.....

You're right about Saudi....you need the oil and coddle them relentlessly.....methinks Saudi will remain untouched even though you guys know how many bad dudes are seeping out of there....If Iraq was floating on oil like Saudi and had all them rich kings in power with ties to the good ole boys network, you'd be stuck invading some other weak sister in the middle east like Syria or Pakistan....

Japan and WWII.....I wouldn't have bothered a million man invasion when the bomb was handy....needless to say I think we were a little forgiving in only dropping two.....there would have been single plane missions to Japan for about a month if any justice would have been sought out....

Marco,
I was refering to the planned invasion before they knew the bomb would work. I really thought more people might chime in on this thread...
You are correct to mention Syria, Pakistan along with Saudi as places that in a perfect war we could clean out. I just believe in doing it right and currently we are not prosecuting this war correctly. The political problem is that if we just said the hell with the middle east and totally pulled out, the bastards would say, "Look, we made them leave" and claim victory...plus the oil need problem would still be there. We could do it if we wanted to drill off shore here in the states more but believe it or not a big obstacle is W's brother Jeb...doesn't want to risk harming the pristine beaches of Florida, which I enjoy too...but we are slaves to middle eastern oil and it is up to us to either stay that way or change something.
In Iraq we could have achieved total victory if we had went in with enough force at the beginning, taken our time and not by-passed large weapons and explosive caches and SEALED the Syrian border, rounded up former Bathists and radical Sunni's immediately and just basically overwhelmed ANY armed opposition. Look at the way we cleaned out Fallujah, but we don't have enough troops to occupy it and so the terrorists slip back in...just frustrates me.

I understood your timeframe reference to a mass invasion of Japan...

More than just a Syrian border to seal off if you want to maintain control anywhere, as they slip in from about wherever they want....not enough troops to ring Iraq and then clean out the middle, so, like another controversial war, you clean and takeover a hill, then leave, and next week do it all over again as the enemy slips back in.....

Kinda like a base that was built in Nam.....enemy kept attacking rather easily, then somebody figured out the base was built on top of a whole tunnel complex built underneath the base...all they had to do to evade the perimeter guard was just come to the surface, cause they were already inside.....

They have decades to attack via roadside bombs and suicide attacks, all it takes is a few of them to tie the military down at $177 million a day......best case scenario right now is train a ragtag Iraqi security force, then leave and let the Iraqis finish thier civil war and let them do the heavy spending and bleeding.

The oil problem will be there until we develop alternative energy sources to the point where we can cease our dependence on oil, then we can go about the business of treating the middle east like we do some country in the middle of Africa.....

Crooks and Liars



MATTHEWS: That's the question, Colonel Allard. Do we get on television an unalloyed, honest answer when we ask, do you have enough troops over there?

ALLARD: I'll give you an unalloyed answer. No, we do not right now.
And I will tell you that I've heard those kinds of comments from Mr. Rumsfeld before, because we've probably had more meaningful discussions on MSNBC about the right level of troops than on anyplace else. I remember specifically a comment the vice president made about retired military officers embedded in TV studios, going back two more years. So, it is a long overdue discussion.

But I have got to tell you that, when you're involved in an insurgency, you have literally no choice but to make sure that you've got enough manpower to control that situation, because, if you don't, you're going to see lots more stories like we've been covering in the last 72 hour.

MATTHEWS: Do you believe that the military commanders throughout this campaign in Iraq have been able to tell honestly the civilian leadership if they need more troops?

ALLARD: I'm not really sure, because I've not been privy, obviously, to those discussions.

But there's an enormous presumption that when the former Army Chief of Staff General Eric Shinseki stood up and said, look, it's going to take a couple hundred thousand troops to control that situation, and he was shouted down, because the deputy secretary of defense said, it's unimaginable that we're going to require more people to secure that country than it does to take it down.

That's in fact turned out to be precisely the case. What we have not done is to figure out how we're going to sustain that commitment over the long term. And even more than that, Chris, if you take a look right now, most of that burden is being born by a disproportionate few in American society today.





Perhaps one of the most serious questions is how Bush will "draw down" the troop levels, as the Pentagon claims it will do in 2006, and at the same time be able to protect those soldiers who remain in Iraq. If our soldiers are targets now, with 138,000 troops on the ground, reducing that number could clearly result in more attacks on those who remain.

I can only shake my head at the complete insanity of everything associated with Bush, this administration and those Americans who continue to support a failed, insane policy.

Iran has to be licking their chops watching this military blunder in Iraq continue to head into the quick sand

doc mercer said:

Iran has to be licking their chops watching this military blunder in Iraq continue to head into the quick sand

Click to expand...

Which 'team' are we on there now-I can't figure it out by my scorecard!

There is only one solution to the middle east issues. Take the middle east out of the equation. Toss the big one over there and then go in, when it is safe to do so and take their stuff. Group hugs don't work. Wake up. The killing of our young sons and daughters has to stop. My solution works.

Anything less is useless talk and continues the killing of our soldiers !