"Their line of tan Humvees and Bradley Fighting Vehicles creeps through another Baghdad afternoon. At this pace, an excruciating slowness, they strain to see everything, hoping the next manhole cover, the next rusted barrel, does not hide another bomb. A few bullets pass overhead, but they don't worry much about those. :eek:

"I hate this road," someone says over the radio.

They stop, look around. The streets of Sadiyah are deserted again. To the right, power lines slump down into the dirt. To the left, what was a soccer field is now a pasture of trash, combusting and smoking in the sun. Packs of skinny wild dogs trot past walls painted with slogans of sectarian hate.

A bomb crater blocks one lane, so they cross to the other side, where houses are blackened by fire, shops crumbled into bricks. The remains of a car bomb serve as hideous public art. Sgt. Victor Alarcon's Humvee rolls into a vast pool of knee-high brown sewage water -- the soldiers call it Lake Havasu, after the Arizona spring-break party spot -- that seeps in the doors of the vehicle and wets his boots.

"When we first got here, all the shops were open. There were women and children walking out on the street," Alarcon said this week. "The women were in Western clothing. It was our favorite street to go down because of all the hot chicks."

That was 14 long months ago, when the soldiers from the 1st Battalion, 18th Infantry Regiment, 1st Infantry Division, arrived in southwestern Baghdad. It was before their partners in the Iraqi National Police became their enemies and before Shiite militiamen, aligned with the police, attempted to exterminate a neighborhood of middle-class Sunni families.

Next month, the U.S. soldiers will complete their tour in Iraq. Their experience in Sadiyah has left many of them deeply discouraged, by both the unabated hatred between rival sectarian fighters and the questionable will of the Iraqi government to work toward peaceful solutions.

Asked if the American endeavor here was worth their sacrifice -- 20 soldiers from the battalion have been killed in Baghdad -- Alarcon said no: "I don't think this place is worth another soldier's life (http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2007/10/26/AR2007102602402.html?hpid%3Dartslot&sub=AR)."

I feel a bit sorry for the ordinary US trooper in Iraq.

They've been exposed to media coverage of the 'war' for a long time,some before they joined the military.

When they get there they find that infact,there is no war,but a police action,which they have not been properly trained.

The Bush Administration would be safer sending some SWAT teams to Baghdad,rather than young soldiers,might get better results.

Falk is one of several members of the unit who were in Ramadi in early 2006, when U.S. convoys raced down the main drag at 65 mph to dodge insurgent gunfire. Every patrol risked hitting buried bombs or being caught in a gun battle.

The situation had changed by the time the unit returned in April. Marines trained as snipers, tank experts and riflemen found those skills unnecessary here. Instead, they became masters of municipal mess, working under the theory that the way to keep the Iraqi city from going back to the insurgency was by improving the quality of life, from the fetid ground up....This is the fight -- sewage, water and trash," Lt. James Colvin said as he showed the landfill to a visitor. "I was a poor math major in college. I come here and they tell me: 'OK, fix the sewage system!' " said Colvin, remembering how shocked he was to return to Ramadi and find that he could walk down streets that he once dreaded crossing in an armored vehicle. "But there's no enemy to hunt down now, so this is our line of attack.....This is a dull life."

http://www.latimes.com/news/nationworld/world/la-fg-trash26oct26,0,6501084,full.story?coll=la-home-world

Point made.
PR work is fine,tho not for combat troops.

They've been exposed to media coverage of the 'war' for a long time,some before they joined the military.

When they get there they find that infact,there is no war,but a police action,which they have not been properly trained.


is this the new left wing strategy? I have seen this a lot recently from the usual anti war crowd.

And honestly, i don't see how you can say they are not trained for it. You ride/walk down the street and face out. If you are fired on you fire back. what is so hard about that? I bet some of the left wing zombies we have around here could even pull that off. Trying to call it something else won't change the task at hand on the ground for Joe Soldier, which is watch your ass and the ass of your buddies.

By the way, I was not calling you a zombie Paul, it was just that you used the same words almost verbatim that the left wing zombies use.

You ride/walk down the street and face out. If you are fired on you fire back. what is so hard about that?.

I agree with you there... However how long do we expect this to last? There is seemingly no direction or even a course of action over there. What are we to do wait to "kill em all"?

I wouldn't go as far as to say our troops are not trained.... it is just they are not as a whole collective given a strategy as a whole to move toward an end.

I personally believe the reason we are still there is pretty clear....

We went in with the intention of ousting a terrible dictator. He might of not been as dangerous as we thought,but for the past decade he has been a problem,and a thorn in the sides of the UN. So we go in there and clean house... but the transition is not easy... There are alot of bad guys coming in from all over the world daily just to take a shot at the great US,and the good guys who we thought to rebuild a free Iraq are greedy and power hungry... they are not interested in a free Iraq,they are interested in how much of a leg up they can get over the rival sect.

So what do we do? Just leave and let them sort it out? Let them have a 3-way battle civil war to see who is going to take control? Carve the country out into sections and tell them to live and let live?

At first I understood why we were there after the ousting of Saddam. We made the mess we should stay to ensure it gets straighten out. But I NEVER see that happening. I am not even sure anymore what needs to happen in order for us to win,and at that what the hell do we even win?

There is not a real force that can surrender. These terrorists are always going to be around. If we leave they might not have anything to try to attack,but that will give them time to grow. Last thing we want to do is give a country the chance to be a breeding ground for international terrorists,while the general public have such a disdain for the US as it is.

I see bad consequences with "staying the course", "pulling out right away",and with "carving out secular territories"...so It makes me wonder if the people in Iraq would of been better off if we just left them alone and allowed a horrible,vile leader continue his 20 plus years of dictatorship.
Then I wonder if the people of Iraq were meant to suffer no matter how this played out.

is this the new left wing strategy? I have seen this a lot recently from the usual anti war crowd.

And honestly, i don't see how you can say they are not trained for it. You ride/walk down the street and face out. If you are fired on you fire back. what is so hard about that? I bet some of the left wing zombies we have around here could even pull that off. Trying to call it something else won't change the task at hand on the ground for Joe Soldier, which is watch your ass and the ass of your buddies.

By the way, I was not calling you a zombie Paul, it was just that you used the same words almost verbatim that the left wing zombies use.

I have no love for them,but I will say,the British have more experience of this than anyone else.

They learnt this on the streets of Belfast and Derry over 30 years.

The Brits in Basra,[admittedly not as hostile]as US sectors but,
from the start went in,with what they call the softly softly approach.
Soft hats,open top jeeps,mixing with the public,working with the local leaders.

Now US troops:Go in,in Bradleys and Abrhams,using heavy handed tactics,Ive seen video of say a group of insurgents attacking a US patrol,next thing,tank rounds are fired,troops open up on anything that moves,this causes resentment in the local community.

Im not saying that US troops are not as good,but for 'policing operations'like what Iraq has become,they simply arent trained.

Its not the troops its the commanders. believe me, if the commanders said soft caps and T shirts it would be done!

Its not the troops its the commanders. believe me, if the commanders said soft caps and T shirts it would be done!I get your point, and agree that it is up to the commanders to succeed in planning or be responsible for any failure.

But, uh, on the last bit...hell, no! Those grunts would bow up tight if told to go in soft! (As it should be!)

In 120 degree heat I would take my chances with soft cap and T shirt.

Its not the troops its the commanders. believe me, if the commanders said soft caps and T shirts it would be done!
You think.

US military success has always relied on superior firepower,
is Iraq any different?

US soldiers are tough, smart and flexible. You can tell them to destroy a town or rebuild one, and they will do both with zeal. For some reason those against the war like to paint them as one dimensional kiling machines, which they are not. I am not sure what the objective is by saying the troops cant do something, but I can assure you that is not the way to get them to quit.

US soldiers are tough, smart and flexible. You can tell them to destroy a town or rebuild one, and they will do both with zeal. For some reason those against the war like to paint them as one dimensional kiling machines, which they are not. I am not sure what the objective is by saying the troops cant do something, but I can assure you that is not the way to get them to quit.Your right,US troops are 'tough,smart and flexable'
what Im saying is they simply arent trained for what they now face in Iraq,which is not war,but a 'policing action'.

Think about it,US Combat Troops on the streets of Baghdad,fighting an enemy that steps out of the crowd,fires then disappears back into the crowd.

How can a soldier trained for fighting a war against the Iraqi Army cope with that,I suggest they self teach,on the scene,but until a policy change happens in Washington,they will remain exposed to Insurgent tactics.

You think.

US military success has always relied on superior firepower,
is Iraq any different?
I'd venture to say, NO, it isn't. It's an issue of superior firepower there too - we can smoke most of 'em with our (entirely kick ass) newly operational, unmanned flying drones, and we can smoke 'em from MILES out at that. We have sniper rifles (.50 caliber BMG) that can seer through half-inch steel armor plate at 1 mile out (1.6 km) with depleted uranium shells. I saw this really cool video of, literally, someone being CUT IN HALF from being shot with that thing from 1.5 miles out (2.4 km). It's fully functional at night too when equipped with the proper optics. That simple gun has been one of our most effective weapons there (believe it or not).

A 50 caliber that fires a depleted uranium shell isnt a 'simple gun'.

Which gun are you talking about-The Barret.

Your right,US troops are 'tough,smart and flexable'
what Im saying is they simply arent trained for what they now face in Iraq,which is not war,but a 'policing action'.

Think about it,US Combat Troops on the streets of Baghdad,fighting an enemy that steps out of the crowd,fires then disappears back into the crowd.

How can a soldier trained for fighting a war against the Iraqi Army cope with that,I suggest they self teach,on the scene,but until a policy change happens in Washington,they will remain exposed to Insurgent tactics.

That is the nature of the beast. Until troops are allowed to fire into crowds it will always be that way. Of course they will never be allowed to, and would never want to. The insurgents have an advantage, no one is disputing that. Should we thrown in the towel because of it? No. If we were russians we would just level the whole crowd to get to one insurgent, but we are not russians. We are adapting to their tactics, and the fact we have so many casuatires shows our unwillingness to destroy civilians in the pursuit of insurgents. We would have a lot less casualties if we leveled every house and street we recieved fire from. WE dont do that though.

Cant agree with that Trav,the F word comes to mind.
Fallujah.
Over half the homes were damaged or destroyed.

Residents were warned to leave before it was attacked,but many remained,as they simply had nowhere else to go.

There was evidence of 'white phosphorus'usage on bodies found after the attack.

Some of the newsreel footage of US troops in the operation was amongst the worst 'gun ho' tactics I ever seen.

Sometimes hundreds of rounds plus tank shells being fired at one target.

A 50 caliber that fires a depleted uranium shell isnt a 'simple gun'.

Which gun are you talking about-The Barret.
You know about it!? Color me surprised. Do you get the Military channel in Europe? I LOVE that station - for they expose' all of our goodies here in America (well, obviously, not the classified shit). We've got some seriously badass toys at our disposal. We just commissioned an all-new nuclear sub in '05, and it's gonna change the rules a bit - mark my words on that prediction. From what I've heard, it's virtually invisible to sonar AND it can travel at speeds up to 50 mph underwater.

Some of the newsreel footage of US troops in the operation was amongst the worst 'gun ho' tactics I ever seen.
Complete and utter nonsense, Paul. Trav's point is completely valid. We're not the Chinese and we're not the Russians. Those fuckers are the real cowboys of warfare.
Sometimes hundreds of rounds plus tank shells being fired at one target.
So what? The more, the better I say. It's designated a "target" for a reason. We typically don't leave ‘em standing.

You know about it!? Color me surprised. Do you get the Military channel in Europe? I LOVE that station - for they expose' all of our goodies here in America (well, obviously, not the classified shit). We've got some seriously badass toys at our disposal. We just commissioned an all-new nuclear sub in '05, and it's gonna change the rules a bit - mark my words. From what I've heard, it's virtually invisible to sonar.
Must say Ive never heard of the military channel,never mind seen it.

No,after the Barret Lite 50 was issued to the US Army,a consignment of them found their way to Irish Republicans,early ninties,they were used in killing British troops along the border,the British mounted a major operation to find them,as they had nothing to stop their firepower.

Complete and utter nonsense, Paul. Trav's point is completely valid. We're not the Chinese and we're not the Russians. Those fuckers are the real cowboys of warfare.Well I dont know if it was standard operating procedure,but remember there was civilians down there also,fuck the insurgents.

Funny thing about that weapon, I own a bolt action .50 caliber Barrett model 99 w/ a 32" barrel (cost me roughly 4,500 bucks in '03), but unfortunately, I can't get my hands on any depleted uranium rounds. :) I've only fired it 4 times, but when I found that gun for sale, I don't know...........call me crazy, but I just had to own one. :)

OK.

Your crazy.

Your right,US troops are 'tough,smart and flexable'
what Im saying is they simply arent trained for what they now face in Iraq,which is not war,but a 'policing action'.

Think about it,US Combat Troops on the streets of Baghdad,fighting an enemy that steps out of the crowd,fires then disappears back into the crowd.

How can a soldier trained for fighting a war against the Iraqi Army cope with that,I suggest they self teach,on the scene,but until a policy change happens in Washington,they will remain exposed to Insurgent tactics.

How can anyone not acknowledge a policy change? For three years under Abizaid and Casey they tried to build the local forces to the point where they could take over. US soldiers were pretty much doing training and patrolling (thus the huge IED effect). The change in policy occurred with Petraeus which and now included protecting the population. The change has reaped enormous benefits. Anbar has gone from one of the deadliest provinces to number 3 on the list. Military and civilian deaths have dropped preciptiously. Electricity in Bagdhad has skyrocketed, oil being pumped is over targets.... Unemployment is dropping (as well as they can measure it).
The Switzerland of the ME it's not but a sense of normalcy is returning. Once people can settle and breathe then they can work on the political process but to suggest that there has been no change in policy is i think either completely missing the picture or worse.

OK.

Your crazy.
How can owning a gun THAT COOL make me crazy? :D Holding a round in your hand is comical, to say the least. It's the loudest weapon I've ever heard discharged in my life, and the funny thing is, I own lots of guns. Nothing compares, and I do mean NOTHING.

You wanna get out more,leave the guns at home.

What does that mean? :confused:

Its just a saying we have. Nothing bad.

Okay, I think I get it, but with that said, will you elaborate anyway?

Okay, I think I get it, but with that said, will you elaborate anyway?
''ya wanna get out more''

Get out,have a drink,get laid,relax,make love not war,know what a mean.

Heres another one for ya,just for laughs.

If someone is being narky and argumentative,someone might say,

''wind yer neck in'' haha.

That's what I thought. Thanks for clarifying. :)

just wait until all that depleted uranium dust kicks in on the troops and citizens of iraq.

another gift of modern warfare.