WAR: Iraqi Fighters and Insurgents on the Run but Not Gone

We have come near the end of major battle in Fallujah, and may very well be near having the war torn city under control and secure. Having either killed or ended the hold by insurgents on this once peacful religous community. But have we won just another battle in the war and only driven out these "insurgents" to have them show up again ready to continue the battle elsewhere? According to the following report this could be the case...





We may have along with Iraqi forces won Fallujah, but at what ultimate cost?

Have we really won, or have we for the most part only driven the enemy out of Fallujah?

With the U.S. death toll now officially near 1,200 and continuing to grow since this war began in March of 2003, Have we met any real goals in finding weapons of mass destruction, Liberating the Iraqi people?

Or have we only furthered the cause of the enemy by showing our ultimate military power?

In a way we could have caused support among the Islamic population for the insurgents to grow in giving them victim status under our massive military power.

Iraq... A better place for Iraqis today?

The war on terrorism seems to have come at great cost in both lives and in world opinion for the USA which despite concerns from the international community seen Iraq as an imminent threat to our security which required immediate military action.

We have liberated Iraq, we promise democracy, we have faced the insurgents in a major battle for an Iraqi city known as Fallujah.

Have we won?

Or have we only driven them out of Fallujah to only have to face them and even more of their radical islamic brothers elsewhere in the future?

It seems that could be the case but only time and future attacks from insurgents will tell.

Are we fighting terrorism in Iraq?

Or are we fighting Islam?

[edit on 17-11-2004 by UM_Gazz]

Actually the call of forces to take care of a sucessful mission in Iraq was about 500 thousand soldiers, but US could not come out with such a large force.

Originally posted by marg6043
Actually the call of forces to take care of a sucessful mission in Iraq was about 500 thousand soldiers, but US could not come out with such a large force.

Is it all in the numbers?

Quote from the ABC article above:

It appears unlikely that the Pentagon will send substantially more troops to Iraq than the 140,000 already there. U.S. commanders believe a bigger force would just give the insurgents more targets.

The Pentagon seems likely to stick to its current approach: confront the insurgents wherever they appear, building up the number of U.S.-trained Iraqi soldiers and other security forces, and hoping the political footings of a democratic Iraq take hold quickly.

Targets?... Is that what our soldiers are now?

You should really think of the impact of those words having came from the Pentagon.

With this line of thinking coming from the Pentagon I can't help but believe that those in command of our military are now thinking there is no "military" win solution in Iraq.

But that is my view alone it seems.

I will have to agree with you, if the government pulls troops out of Iraq, the remaining troops will become targets for the Insurgents and we will see more American soldiers dying that in the last year.

The Iraqi military is not ready and it would not be for years.

Right now the only thing keeping Fallujah is the quantities of US forces in the city but now Mosul is having problems and they will probably pull forces from fallujah into Mosul.

Then the insurgents will go back into fallujah and will have success in targeting the Iraqi forces and the remaining troops.

Does it sound like a no win situation? Perhaps but US alone in that country can not do it all. I still stand by my first opinion that US did not planned this war well or it was relying on troops from other countries to take over and is not happening.