"There really isn't one, much as people would like to believe there should be. What would be the "victory point" in the fight against domestic crime?

Apples and oranges, Tom. Your begging the question by stating that victory in warfare is equal to dealing with criminal behavior within a society. It certainly aids you in that there is never a victory point against crime, historically or possibly- but its also an impossible confusion of two distinct things. You are sort of taking the 'War on crime' metaphor literally.

"A free Iraq" is, like "end the war with minimal losses" a bit vague.

Really? Its more concrete than the total absence of a stated goal in Iraq- which is exactly what we have now. So extend your point logically.


I have my own milestones, a primary one being more than one successful election. One election is a good thing, but you know you are out of the woods when you have more than one, especially if an incumbent leaves gracefully. Needless to say, the jury is going to be out on that one for some time."

Okay, well this is even more than what we have now.

"Give up on this. It ain't happening. Those European and Arab nations that are willing to help already are. Not necessarily with troops, but basing support from nations like Qatar and Kuwait has been invaluable.

The rest are not going to help us. They would not help us if Franklin Roosevelt was making the request.
"

I tend to think that they'll never help as long as Bush is asking, and its not like we have really asked. We've followed insult with haughty demand.

re: draft
"Not necessary, and negates everything the military has become in the past couple of decades. Nobody even remotely associated with the military wants a draft. The only people supporting a draft are leftists who want it only so they can use it as a political weapon like they did during Vietnam."

Okay, but if we are calling disabled vets and 54 year olds back into active duty and shipping them to Iraq, and still don't have enough troops, then something needs to be done.

"But that's not what Bush is trying for. "Bringing a new order to the area" is exactly what this is about, and always has been. This is what makes Bush controversial."

No, it what makes the war intractable. and Don't start the EBNelson Big Lie that this was never about pre-emptive self defense first and foremost. You are not thta dumb and I'm too smart and was too studied up before the war for that shit.

"Don't go by a head count of insurgents. Go by who's funding them, who's sending in the weapons, where the support is coming from, and who's calling the shots. There were about twice as many South Vietnamese troops in the Vietnam War as there were American troops. Who was running that show?"

Keep the faith, Tom... Keep the faith.

The weapons are everywhere, remnants form the former regime. The point is that at the end of the day, its Iraqis that are getting out in front of the tanks and shooting the RPG's. After that, its just a question of means.

"Most of our heavy military force--you know, the "major combat" stuff--is sitting quietly on runways, storage facilities, and in harbors. Stockpiles of cruise missiles and other weapons are being quietly replenished while sailors and pilots cool their heels at home."

All of that does not really speak to the point that we don't have the logisitcal capacitym to wage another major conlict, nor the troops available to hold territory. Its a problem Tom, and you know it.

Davin L.