I don't know what the exact policy on Fallujah and other cities is. Maybe they want to get things to the point where the Iraqi military can handle it. Maybe nobody wants to see a city attacked by the Marines before an election. Maybe the Iraqi government doesn't want us to do anything, and now that we've passed the baton, we have to take what they give us. I've seen arguments on all sides of this.
What is becoming apparent is that these rogue cities have to be taken out. I wasn't sure about this before, and I still have doubts. But attempts to use "police methods," diplomacy, and halfway measures seem to have been blatant failures (see also Donald's post here.)
Is this a war or not?
A lot has been said about the planning in the Iraq War, but the biggest problem I can see is that we are trying to fight it like pulling a tooth slowly stretching dull pain over days, instead of yanking it out and putting up with a short period of intense pain.
Sure, we'd get a lot of crap from the Usual Suspects for civilian casualties, destroyed buildings, and ruined cities. Like they aren't dishing out crap now?
It would also save a lot of American lives in the long run.
Current Events » in reply to Violence May Force Iraq to Bypass Hotspots in Election
Hotspots need to be dealt with.
