- My Forums
- Tiger Rant
- LSU Recruiting
- SEC Rant
- Saints Talk
- Pelicans Talk
- More Sports Board
- Fantasy Sports
- Golf Board
- Soccer Board
- O-T Lounge
- Tech Board
- Home/Garden Board
- Outdoor Board
- Health/Fitness Board
- Movie/TV Board
- Book Board
- Music Board
- Political Talk
- Money Talk
- Fark Board
- Gaming Board
- Travel Board
- Food/Drink Board
- Ticket Exchange
- TD Help Board
Customize My Forums- View All Forums
- Show Left Links
- Topic Sort Options
- Trending Topics
- Recent Topics
- Active Topics
Started By
Message
re: How long until we send troops back into Iraq?
Posted on 8/12/14 at 9:03 pm to Wolfhound45
Posted on 8/12/14 at 9:03 pm to Wolfhound45
quote:
That is the way we roll.
And I have strong disagreements with the way we roll. We are far too heavy and logistically intensive and it's why we have so much trouble with insurgencies. We focus far too much on force protection and not enough on force projection. Smaller units, lighter weapons, living amongst the population.
Putting a brigade sized or larger force in Iraq to face ISIS would be counter productive. ISIS would simply disband their conventional combat units and fight a guerrilla war.
2
Posted on 8/12/14 at 9:08 pm to GeauxxxTigers23
quote:
And I have strong disagreements with the way we roll. We are far too heavy and logistically intensive and it's why we have so much trouble with insurgencies. We focus far too much on force protection and not enough on force projection. Smaller units, lighter weapons, living amongst the population. Putting a brigade sized or larger force in Iraq to face ISIS would be counter productive. ISIS would simply disband their conventional combat units and fight a guerrilla war.
There are probably some War College grads who can argue this better, but didn't we learn the hard way (in this very conflict) that counter-insurgency requires troops, boots, checkpoints, "footprint", all the shite Rummy spent his whole tenure railing against. You need troops to hold ground. Simple as that. In a country with the size, demography, and topography of Iraq, you need a lot of troops. And that requires a lot of support.
This post was edited on 8/12/14 at 9:24 pm
Posted on 8/12/14 at 10:51 pm to GeauxxxTigers23
quote:This in a nutshell is the issue, it's easy to say what you said. I am not totally disagreeing with you however when it comes time to toss you name on the line the mixture of deployment forces versus risk factor drive you to a logical balance of projection versus protection.
And I have strong disagreements with the way we roll. We are far too heavy and logistically intensive and it's why we have so much trouble with insurgencies. We focus far too much on force protection and not enough on force projection. Smaller units, lighter weapons, living amongst the population. Putting a brigade sized or larger force in Iraq to face ISIS would be counter productive. ISIS would simply disband their conventional combat units and fight a guerrilla war.
put it this way let's say you want to do it with a small footprint, fair enough as the HMFIC you make that decision, then you wake up and see parents on MSNBC in tears because their son died because the logistic train you decided to cut corners on left out the surgical units required to keep him alive when he gets dinged.
President on down gets hung out on this logical thought.
Therefore you go Colin Powell deep on the numbers and capabilities.
Page 1 of 1
Popular
Back to top
Follow TigerDroppings for LSU Football News