As to the other articles and thesis's. Interesting stuff and I agree with the overall premise of them. However, it does not take into account 1/2 of the equation. The other side.

Iraq means little in the great scheme of things. Not to us, not to AQ. It's mearly a "field of battle" in a larger struggle. Afghanistan is a different story, but Iraq itself, means little. To pretent so is short-sighted.

AQ's premise is that we have a soft underbelly and do not have the stomach for prolonged conflict. They themselves don't have to beat us, they just have to expose us for what we are. Losing Iraq (whatever that means), shows others our weakness. And in the past we've seen that Iran is emboldened to fight us via proxy. Russian (a once defeated foe) and China angle against us in the shadows, DPRK firing dud-nukes and even Europe (even weaker than us), turns away and looks to its next sugar daddy.

All AQ has to do is expose our weak and rotten core, and that they are doing. Our weak and rotten core, folks represented by PressCoverage and Wista, are happy to oblige them. Granted, be it Nationalism, or isolationism or other inadvertent tendencies, our "internal struggle" that our nation is going through, simply reenforces the belief that we are unsure of ourselves. The will of others can be imposed on us, and that is exactly what is happening.

Like Viet Nam before us, we are tactically winning every engagement, but that accounts for little. Our enemy simply has to lose longer than we win.

Iraq, and the Iraqi people mean little to the actual combatants. That is sad, but is a sadness that has existed since the outset of war itself.

We will lose the war on terror, and if you question that, just look to the ongoing posts of PC, Wista and plenty of others. Our collective heart just in not in it.

Yes, Willie T was of the same ilk as US. But was not his equal.

Grant was the most underrated American General in our history. He out-generaled one of the best, RE Lee.

Though, I've often wondered how a Grant v. Jackson battle would of went. A bloodbath of epic proportions I'm sure.

Grant was not a genius at tactics...only strategy.

He had an enormous advantage in troops and supplies.
His strategy was to engage the enemy in constant battle..attrition then resulted in the inevitable defeat of the South.

The insurgents in Iraq will not fight pitched battles and therefore the losses are insignificant. As in Viet Nam there is a segment of the Military and the Public that fail to see the difference.

If the Al Queda losses are insignificent why was Zawahiri calling for new jihadist for Iraq?

__________________
If the devil can keep you from asking the right questions he never has to worry about the answers.

What you do not understand (that Grant did), if you have the one (enormous advantage in troops and supplies) than your overall tactics take a backseat to your overall strategy (total warefare). You use what you have.

I'll agree that INDIVIDUAL LOSSES in Iraq for AQ are insignificant. However, losses in command, support and structural elements are NOT. I submit to you that the new tactics are aimed at command, support and structural losses.

Trust me, we can deal and work with the individual differences in within the Iraqi system with the tried and true MONEY TALKS, BULLSH!T WALKS philosophy. The overall AQ mindset is something we can only combat with force. Our retreat will cause an overall loss of the whole endeavor, signifying that we do not have the POWER to impose our will on their turf. That message will resonant, not only regionally, but globally as well. Now you can retreat to the soft pillowy "but we shouldn't think we can" BS, but the bottom line is that we already have attempted to do so, so once committed, you really have no choice but see it through. Otherwise, we face a lifetime of conflict ahead of us, from all those that learned from our past behavior.

You are only as good as your last war. Our last war was Viet Nam. How is AQ fighting this war, JUST LIKE the VC did. At it's current pace, the outcome will be the same.

Right out of General William Westmoreland's mouth.

Can you say Domino?

It's rubbish..and a greater majority of American youth will fail to sign up for this pig...and the troops we have in the field are losing their enthusiasm as well.

Really ? How do you acount for all the wounded soldiers who have volunteered to go back to Iraq?

__________________
If the devil can keep you from asking the right questions he never has to worry about the answers.

How'd the VC losing more than we won back in the 70's work out for world Communism? I seem to remember world Communism going up in smoke about a dozen years later even after its 'victory' in Vietnam

Seems to me that if our struggle against Islamofascism is following the same arc as Communism we just need to leave Iraq now and our problem goes away around 2020 or so.

These people are going to toss off this silly religion of theirs only when they are good and ready to. Nothing we do will speed that up.

The difference was Ronald Reagan (remember Carter and malaise? We 'had to live with' the Communist in Russia. The mockery of Reagan when he suggested the cold war could be won?

BTW don't suggest to Vietnamese refugees who escaped the country that the victory by the NVA was anything but a disaster for the people of South Viet Nam (and Cambodia for that matter

__________________
If the devil can keep you from asking the right questions he never has to worry about the answers.

Right wingers still complain to this day that we "abandoned" our allies in South Vietnam.

You now say our efforts thwarted the dreaded Red Tide?

You may want to note that this Civil War is religious and not political.

God how I hate this bs