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.

 

U.S.: 60 pct of Baghdad not controlled

page: 1
2

log in

join
share:

posted on Jun, 16 2007 @ 07:20 PM
link   

U.S.: 60 pct of Baghdad not controlled


news.yahoo.com

BAGHDAD - Security forces in Baghdad have full control in only 40 percent of the city five months into the pacification campaign, a top American general said Saturday as U.S. troops began an offensive against two al-Qaida strongholds on the capital's southern outskirts.

(visit the link for the full news article)



posted on Jun, 16 2007 @ 07:20 PM
link   
How many people even buy the 40% controlled? With reports of green zone attacks almost daily, is the truth clsoer to 10-15% Just yet another sign that the end is near for this ruinous adventure in Iraq. I have to just chuckle whent he neo-cons go on about going into Iran. If we cannot control Baghdad with a population of 3 million and some supportive of our efforts how exactly would we control Tehran with 10 million people most of whom would be openly hostile?

news.yahoo.com
(visit the link for the full news article)



posted on Jun, 16 2007 @ 11:14 PM
link   
What was the so called "Surge" supposed to accomplish??? I just saw a report the other day saying the troops needed for the surge were put in place. Now we only need to wait a year or so to see if it works??? Our President is a joke as well as the people he has put in position to advise him. Bush needs to be put on trial in the Hauge for the crap he has pulled. As far as I am concerned, Bush, Cheney, Rumsefeld, Wolfiwitz, Gonzolas, everyone needs to get the heck out of our country. If Hillary is President, count on us to be in the Middle East occupying many countries for years to come.



posted on Jun, 17 2007 @ 06:59 AM
link   
The problem is that we don't know what percentage of Baghdad neighbourhoods were secure before the troop surge took place so there is no way of knowing just what percentage of improvement there has been. The troop surge is the right idea but the problem is that there are not enough troops to replicate the surge in other urban areas of Iraq. The other problem is that the surge is only a gradual build up which allows to the enemy to adopted his tactics. Its no coincidence that the likes of bridges have been targeted rather then the usual car bomb in the market place.

As for Iran bomb there nuclear program , military and the insurgents supply lines into the stone age. Regime change would seem to be out of the question but the Iranian threat can be knocked on its head for a good while.



posted on Jun, 17 2007 @ 07:30 AM
link   
The actual is really 0%.

We are on foreign soil, supported by a faulting economy, resisted by a growing resistance while a major collapse of civil order is in full stride.

We hold our soldiers and officials in a fortress, that’s constantly attacked..

We have no control what so ever, over anything that occurs in Iraq.
It is the Iraqi’s CHOICE, where battles occur, where bombs are placed or where people are allowed to go without fear of reprisal, occasionally the US flatten area's believing 'this time' it'll hit the insurgents hard... instead all we do is create more terrorists when they come home to find their ENTIRE FAMILY obliterated.

We've lost support from our once closest allies, and we've created a totally new concept of 'terrorism' that will make 911 appear faint in the decades to come.....

the better question is, how much control does the public of America have over its own country?



posted on Jun, 17 2007 @ 03:39 PM
link   
I've had an interesting conversation once with a Russian bomber pilot who served in afghanistan. One time when he was on leave he was drinking tea with his co-pilot and a few local afghanies and at one point of the conversation they were discussing the soviet progress in this war. The pilot told the locals that from what he hears the soviets were mostly only having trouble in the countryside and the mountains, and that the cities were controlled rather well. One of the locals replied to him "If you want to have this country under your control, the only way to do that is to kill off any man woman or child above the age of 4."

The point that the local was making is that you are in a foreign country, and while you o have support from some of the local population most of the country's people would not stand to see their land occupied by someone they see as an invader. Befor the age of 4 you are still a little kid. past that you start thinking so to say. You start having a large enough understanding of who you are, who your family is and where you live. You would learn to hate anyone who tries to take that away from you.

I agree with what the local was saying. This is really the only way to counquer and control a country. It's cruel but cruel is what war is. I'm not saying this is what the US should do in Iraq - god no. I'd hate to see anyone do something like this. I'm jsut saying that you'll convince an alcoholic to stop drinking faster then you're gonna subdue a nation with promises of McDonalds, freedom, and baseball.

Regards,
Maestro



posted on Jun, 17 2007 @ 03:41 PM
link   
The surge seems more like a weak wet dream. September will roll around and bush minor will refuse to listen then as well.... the war is too wrapped up with his ego for him to ever concede failure.



new topics

top topics



 
2

log in

join