"none of the things you said in it would lead a reasonable person to the above conclusion."
I have very good reasons for believing those things, and a solid understanding that the future is unpredictable so I also know there is a possibility (not a probability) I might be mistaken.
There are two reasons to go to war. If you are unexpectedly attacked you have to accept the time and circumstances your opponent has chosen and you do what you can to defend yourself. Victory is defined by survival.
This was an elective war. We chose the time, place
and we did so because we presumably had specific goals and objectives in mind, and that is what we prepared for. These objectives were never met, the goals turned out to be unobtainable, if not illusory, the situation has changed because we lost the initiative. We have remained while the mission keeps changing and the reasons for being there continue to be adjusted for domestic political consumption and from fear of what might happen if we leave. I believe I have pointed out at least one scenario where the resulting chaos of our departure may work out to our advantage. We have had four years to demonstrate conclusively that our presence there leads only to continued stalemate. We really can't begin to define what victory means any more, even if we succeed in establishing total military control in theater, we don't know what kind of Iraq will come out of it no matter what we do there.
As for my source of information deliberately deluding me and clouding my judgement concerning events on the ground, that forces me to accept that your sources are more reliable, and I know better than that.
I also know the only arbiter that matters, time. Four years of complete and unopposed domestic support and total freedom to act as the administration sees fit have not produced results, it has only changed the mission. That is my source of information, and it is unimpeachable.
The purpose of war is to carry out diplomatic objectives. We no longer have any, it can be plausibly argued we never really did.
Current Events » in reply to re: Resilient tactics...
re: Resilient tactics...
