It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.

Please white-list or disable AboveTopSecret.com in your ad-blocking tool.

Thank you.

 

Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.

 

Center For Strategic/International Studies: US Has Lost

page: 1
0

log in

join
share:

posted on May, 11 2004 @ 06:46 PM
link   
Here's a quote from the article:



The United States can no longer win the insurgency war in Iraq militarily, according to a new report.

The Washington-based Center for Strategic and International Studies asserted in a new report that the United States no longer has a military solution for Iraq. Authored by Anthony Cordesman, the report said any U.S. military solution would result in massive civilian casualties and collateral damage and fail to end the Shi'ite or Sunni insurgency.

"The U.S. can of course defeat the Iraqis," the report said. "However, any military solution is now likely to be the kind of 'victory' that creates a new firestorm over excessive force, civilian casualties, and collateral damage. At the same time, the U.S. cannot hope to kill or arrest all of the Sunni and foreign insurgents that exist now and is almost certain to create far more than it destroys."


Link: www.worldtribune.com...

[Edited on 11-5-2004 by Seekerof]




posted on May, 11 2004 @ 06:56 PM
link   
this only says we'll look bad winning, not that we're losing.



posted on May, 11 2004 @ 06:59 PM
link   
Originally posted by SamaraMorgueAnn

what does that have to do with this?


[Edited on 11-5-2004 by namehere]



posted on May, 11 2004 @ 07:02 PM
link   
I think the predictions/prophisis in the Bible will happen when god decides them to happen and thats why god/bible says something around the likes of "And god is the only one who knows the dates" or so and since god is the one in control it could be billions of years/as long as it wants as god does not have a time limit to work in (afaik)



posted on May, 11 2004 @ 07:05 PM
link   

Originally posted by SamaraMorgueAnn
Use your own head. Or do I have to?



syria isnt at war with us for one, wars arent too rare in the middle east and this thread is about iraq and this war which by modern warfare standards is not short.

[Edited on 11-5-2004 by namehere]



posted on May, 11 2004 @ 07:12 PM
link   

Originally posted by SamaraMorgueAnnOh plllease. Where do you get this aint a short war? You don't know the future!


neither do you, again this isnt related to iraq, this isnt a prediction thread, stay on topic here.


[Edited on 11-5-2004 by namehere]



posted on May, 11 2004 @ 07:16 PM
link   
namehere and sara, please, please, and PLEASE....cite only what you are arguing or commenting to....like the sentence or two...not the WHOLE post...please....I beg of you both.


Please cite only what is necessary.


seekerof



posted on May, 11 2004 @ 07:20 PM
link   

Originally posted by Seekerof

Please cite only what is necessary.


seekerof


sorry, i forgot i was doing that again, i fixed it when i saw i was.

[Edited on 11-5-2004 by namehere]



posted on May, 11 2004 @ 07:26 PM
link   

Originally posted by SamaraMorgueAnn


leeching? what, syria and a future war, thats a totally seperate subject than what the Center For Strategic/International Studies is saying about this iraq situation, dont get so maad at me, create a new thread or something but this prophecy is another topic.

[Edited on 11-5-2004 by namehere]



posted on May, 13 2004 @ 02:37 AM
link   
the website doesn't say where they got the study from... who wrote the article... who commissioned the study....


in short, it offers nothing that can be verified. Either a case of bad journalism or overt propaganda.



posted on May, 13 2004 @ 02:44 AM
link   
Winning a war in a military sense is different to winning it, you have to also convince the international community you did it well... which i think America has not chance of doing.... and also in regards to 'The War on Terrorism' i feel the USA has no chance of winning this war. They've forgotten about Osama, they're attacking countries with no links to the actual Al-Qaeda group... That and the fact that every day more and more people are turning against the USA...

and i didnt actually know that Russia and Syria had a mutual protection pact... hmmm seeing as Syria is obviously on the US' 'list' this could get interesting...



posted on May, 13 2004 @ 02:57 AM
link   
This is a potentially explosive thread and topic.

Even Rumsfeld has just admitted that the US may have lost, as a result this analysis is crucial in understanding what is going to happen.

In the light of that I deleted SamaraMorgueAnn off topic babble and warned him/her/it to stay on topic.



posted on May, 13 2004 @ 03:05 AM
link   

Originally posted by specialasianX
Winning a war in a military sense is different to winning it, you have to also convince the international community you did it well... which i think America has not chance of doing....

What gave you this idea? That is the problem, the "international community" is not Americas master. We don't care what the world says (at least to the extent where it involves what we consider our national security). For the US to "win" we need to keep both American and Iraqi deaths as low as we can, establish a peacefull democracy, and slowly withdraw.

and also in regards to 'The War on Terrorism' i feel the USA has no chance of winning this war. They've forgotten about Osama, they're attacking countries with no links to the actual Al-Qaeda group...

There has not been a single attack on US soil since 9/11. The fact that OBL isn't getting the media coverage of Iraq does not indicate that the US is not working on him. It is just most likely being done in more covert ways. What countries are we attacking that has no link to Al-Queda OBL or terrorists? Please do not reply with Iraq as it has been proven otherwise.



new topics

top topics



 
0

log in

join