Pulling out of Iraq?

[FightinDaMan]

Apparently, a leaked British memo, published yesterday, details possible plans by the Pentagon to reduce troop presence in Iraq to 66,000 within a year.

http://www.alertnet.org/thenews/newsdesk/GRA155223.htm

[FightinDaMan]

Good question. It's certainly possible.

[WhiteAfricanAmerican]

So a 50% reduction is pulling out?


First you libs whine about bringing them home, now when a 'memo' is 'found' suggesting a 50% reduction, now we're cutting and running.

I swear there's no making you people happy.

Did you ever consider the fact that we don't NEED 130k troops over there. That it may be stable enough to reduce the troop strength.

[RightisRightLeftisWrong]

Did you ever consider the fact that we don't NEED 130k troops over there. That it may be stable enough to reduce the troop strength.


That could indeed be a good reason but libs wont beleive it.

[FightinDaMan]

So a 50% reduction is pulling out?


First you libs whine about bringing them home, now when a 'memo' is 'found' suggesting a 50% reduction, now we're cutting and running.

I swear there's no making you people happy.

Did you ever consider the fact that we don't NEED 130k troops over there. That it may be stable enough to reduce the troop strength.

It's actually about a 2/3 reduction 110,000 out of 176,000 leaving. Notice that I did not editorialize, I just stated the facts, presenting no opinion.

[Peace_by_superior _power]

while its a known fact that you cant win a war with out ground troops we have the technology to win with less troops.

[Madcowhunter]

If it is true, then I'm guessing we're going to Iran. This MAY mean that Israel really is going to war with Iran, and we're going to help them. It's just a possibility.

[Madcowhunter]

They wouldn't pull that many men out of Iraq just to go home, if they are getting pulled out, I'm certain they're going to a different operation.

[Wadi66]

They may be leaving to gear up for Tiawan.

[WhiteAfricanAmerican]

It's actually about a 2/3 reduction 110,000 out of 176,000 leaving. Notice that I did not editorialize, I just stated the facts, presenting no opinion.


B/S!

What is the name of this thread?

Pulling out of Iraq

Notice, not "Reduction in troops strength", not "Some of our guys are comming home".

You stated your opinion in the title of this thread.

In addition, you also quoted that:


.........details possible plans by the Pentagon to reduce troop presence in Iraq to 66,000 within a year.

There are currently 130 000 troops over there right now.

so

1) 130k less 66k (your figure) is 50.76%

2) Troop strength has already been reduced by 50k, considering that at it's peak it was in the high 150k'

Want to try again?

[WhiteAfricanAmerican]

while its a known fact that you cant win a war with out ground troops we have the technology to win with less troops.

Yah, the technology is known as: Force Multipliers.

Force Multipliers greatly enhance the efficiency of a soldier. However the one FM we don't have is good intel. That's a pity.


If it is true, then I'm guessing we're going to Iran. This MAY mean that Israel really is going to war with Iran, and we're going to help them. It's just a possibility.

There is no way in hell, that the US will attack an Arab state with Israel. doing that would be like dousing yourself with gas and stepping into a fire. There is nothing in the world that will unify the entire Arab world against us, here and abroad than attacking an Arab state, no matter how deserving with Israel as an allie.


They wouldn't pull that many men out of Iraq just to go home, if they are getting pulled out, I'm certain they're going to a different operation.

Why wouldn't they? The most effective soldier is one who's moral is high. You pull him out of one theater and drop him in another which has less to do with his current mission, and everything will go to hell.

My money says, if it's going to happen, they're bringing them home.

[Avid_Liberal_Hater]

They may be leaving to gear up for Tiawan.

Screw Taiwan, let China have it. The troops would be much better used on the US/Mexican border.

[FightinDaMan]

B/S!

What is the name of this thread?


Notice, not "Reduction in troops strength", not "Some of our guys are comming home".

You stated your opinion in the title of this thread.

I never stated whether I thought that it was a good thing or a bad thing. There are plenty who, I'm sure, would be quite happy if we pulled out of Iraq.


Want to try again?

I used the figures provided in the article, which said
The secret British government memo, published in the Mail on Sunday newspaper and confirmed as genuine by officials, said Washington hopes to cut the U.S.-led force in Iraq from 176,000 troops to just 66,000 within a year.

[Wadi66]

Screw Taiwan, let China have it. The troops would be much better used on the US/Mexican border.I agree, the troops would be better served on the border, but we both know that isn't going to happen. Our govt has already told China it will side with Taiwan.

Some groups are saying there are already Chinese troops in Mexico, to which I would say, send pics and logistics, nevertheless, if that were true, we would needs lots a boots on the ground here.

[Avid_Liberal_Hater]

Some groups are saying there are already Chinese troops in Mexico, to which I would say, send pics and logistics, nevertheless, if that were true, we would needs lots a boots on the ground here.

If China put troops on the ground in Mexico, we're in for a mother of a war. And Democrats in this country would get a change to be Viet Cong.

[RightisRightLeftisWrong]

If China put troops on the ground in Mexico, we're in for a mother of a war. And Democrats in this country would get a change to be Viet Cong.

I really can't see that happening Avid.

To be honest we should just stay out of business with Taiwan and China. China is a huge threat to the United Stats considering they transport 70% of is products are from there. They could just cut off their shipping and leave us high and dry and they do have a larger army I will try to bring up a link but I believe its well in the millions. But we are the most High Tech army in the world that could come to are advantage, and I believe we aren’t labeled as a Super Power anymore I think we are called a Mega Power country now.

[Avid_Liberal_Hater]

To be honest we should just stay out of business with Taiwan and China. China is a huge threat to the United Stats considering they transport 70% of is products are from there. They could just cut off their shipping and leave us high and dry and they do have a larger army I will try to bring up a link but I believe its well in the millions. But we are the most High Tech army in the world that could come to are advantage, and I believe we aren’t labeled as a Super Power anymore I think we are called a Mega Power country now.

I completely agree that we should stay out of their business. Not to sound like a liberal, but I wish our gov't would worry more about our country than other countries.

China does have a larger army, but I believe they would be sacrificial in a conflict. When we encountered them in Korea, we infllicted much more casualties on them than they us. We have (as of no, anyway) a much more high tech Military. Not to mention a huge nuclear arsenal. If our country is ever defeated, it will be from the inside.

[FightinDaMan]

Just to pose a possibility, the USSR was able to defeat Hitler's army by sheer numbers, despite having a poorly equipped army.

To counter my own argument, the USSR also had the weather, and the local population on their side, two advantages which the Chinese would not have if they invaded.

[Wadi66]

I don't remember where I read it, but there was a prophecy that the U.S. would be invaded from the East and from the South. People would flee to the rocky mountains and our armies would be almost defeated until hoards of men came out of the rockies and defeated the invading army. Darn, wish I could remember where I read that.

[Avid_Liberal_Hater]

Just to pose a possibility, the USSR was able to defeat Hitler's army by sheer numbers, despite having a poorly equipped army.

To counter my own argument, the USSR also had the weather, and the local population on their side, two advantages which the Chinese would not have if they invaded.

Don't forget the Germans were spread thin as they were fighting a two-front war. Plus they were essentially supporting Italy for most of the war.

Not to mention that Hitler was seperated from reality.

I would hope that China or any country would not have the testicular fortitude to invade, but one advantae would be that undoubtadly a lot of bleeding heart liberals would probably turn into nationalists.

[WhiteAfricanAmerican]

If China put troops on the ground in Mexico, we're in for a mother of a war. And Democrats in this country would get a change to be Viet Cong.

The communist doctrine of throwing tens of thousands of troops at something in order to overwhelm and eventually take the objective is out dated.

In an era with stealth bombers, and nasty little things called carpet bombs, a 'million man army' would be reduced to a blood soaked field within an hour.

And the psychological impact on the rest of the Chinese forces from seeing one million of their comrades evaporated before their eyes would cause the most resilliant soldier to shit his pants

[Arbiter]

:biggrin: LMFAO
shit his pants.

[Argonath]

ummm. . . . Taiwan? why?

[RightisRightLeftisWrong]

Just to pose a possibility, the USSR was able to defeat Hitler's army by sheer numbers, despite having a poorly equipped army.


Not to mention Russia used foolish tactics, out of all the armies Russia took the biggest blow. If Hitler just didnt attack Russia he would of had victory but he got greedy and of course hes partly insane and went ahead and betray Russia and attack them.

[WhiteAfricanAmerican]

Not to mention Russia used foolish tactics, out of all the armies Russia took the biggest blow. If Hitler just didnt attack Russia he would of had victory but he got greedy and of course hes partly insane and went ahead and betray Russia and attack them.
Uhmmm, not exactly accurate there RIRLIS

Hitler was stupid to attack Russia, no arguements there, but Stalin was stuck at the time of the German excursion into Russia.

Stalin knew that Japan and Germany were allies, and he didn't want to fight a war on 2 fronts.

So Stalin was waiting on intel from Japan to find out if Japan would infact attack him should he engage the Nazi's.

So Stalin followed a passive resistance plan until such time as he knew that he could commit all his troops to the invading Nazi's. He followed the scorched earth policy, and when he got word he kicked the living shit out of them.

We all know that the Russians did the whole scorched earth thing to Napoleon.

Personally, if I were Hitler or one of the commanders in Russia, the instant I saw a city on fire, I'd have either stopped or pulled out. But hindsight is always 20/20.

Never the less, by the time the intel got to Stalin, it was already dead in the middle of winter, the Germans were pretty much done for, and it wasn't much of a job to finish off what winter and the scorced earth policy had started.