freethefly 6 #1 October 4, 2005 Why is it that an American kid can be trained in such a short time and be put on a battle field while at the same time an Iraqi cannot? Is it because the Iraqis would rather have Americans do their dirty work? Is it because some Americans are just war hungry? What is the reason? Certainly after all this time they should be ready to take control of their own country. Yet, they are far from being able to even kill a fly. It really is no surprise, considering that the Iraqi people did very little to squash Saddam over the years. Maybe they feared that the U.S. would had intervened to support Saddam if a uprising had occured. Could it be that the majority of able bodied Iraqis just do not trust the U.S.? When one considers that the U.S. was a major backer of Saddam for many years, this may tend to be a reason why so many are just not willing to back the U.S.. It is quite appearent that this war is not going away anytime soon and that many more Americans and unwilling Iraqis will die. How long untill Americans get off of their high horse of whatever the new reason is and see that this is a quagmire and that we cannot force our way of life on to people who clearly do not want to fight for it. Iraqi combat-readiness diminishes By ROBERT BURNS Associated Press 9/30/2005 Associated Press WASHINGTON - Only one Iraqi army battalion seems capable of fighting without U.S. help, a senior American general told Congress on Thursday, leaving some lawmakers worried about worsening conditions there despite his assurances that the overall military strategy is working. Army Gen. George W. Casey Jr., the top U.S. commander in Iraq, told the Senate Armed Services Committee that the number of Iraqi army battalions rated by U.S. officers as capable of fighting without U.S. help had dropped from three to one. This prompted expressions of concern by Democrats and Republicans alike, at a time when many lawmakers and members of the public are growing restless about the U.S. involvement in Iraq and the nearly 2,000 American troops who have died there. "That contributes to a loss of public confidence in how the war is going," Sen. Susan Collins, R-Maine, said of Casey's remarks. "It doesn't feel like progress when we hear today that there is only one Iraqi battalion fully capable." The Iraqi troop ratings are important because the Pentagon has built its Iraq strategy on the expectation that it can start bringing American troops home as the Iraqis gradually take the lead in the fight against the insurgency. Casey said 75 percent of the U.S.-trained Iraqi army was at least capable of engaging in combat, albeit with U.S. troops providing support in most cases. He declined to give an exact breakdown of Iraqi combat readiness, which he said was classified as secret, but he said that more than 30 battalions are judged capable of taking the lead in an offensive, with U.S. support. Only one can operate entirely on its own. Casey did not explain why the number had dropped from three in June to one today. But he said the Iraqi army is getting stronger, even though the Ministry of Defense that manages the army lacks expertise and stability. He said Iraqi soldiers performed well in recent battles for control of the city of Tal Afar. Underscoring the continued U.S. presence in Iraq, the House on Thursday passed, 348-65, a bill funding Pentagon operations at roughly current levels as part of a stopgap funding bill for federal agencies whose budgets will not have passed by Saturday, the start of the 2006 fiscal year. The effort to train Iraqi troops and police has progressed far slower than once expected, and Casey acknowledged that it has been hurt by infiltration of the army and Iraqi police by insurgents and their sympathizers. Sen. John McCain, R-Ariz., said he was troubled that with such uneven progress in training the Iraqi army, the Bush administration is still planning for the possible withdrawal of some U.S. troops from Iraq next year. Casey said troop reductions are an important part of the overall military strategy for stabilizing Iraq. He declined to predict, as he had in July, that the Pentagon could make a fairly substantial troop withdrawal next year if political progress continues and the insurgency does not grow more violent. But he said under questioning by committee members that troop reductions were possible in 2006. "You're taking a very big gamble here," McCain said to Casey. "I hope you're correct. I don't see the indicators yet that we are ready to plan or begin troop withdrawals, given the overall security situation." Defense Secretary Donald H. Rumsfeld and Air Force Gen. Richard B. Myers, chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff, also testified. Together with Casey and Army Gen. John P. Abizaid, head of the U.S. Central Command, they also testified before the House Armed Services Committee. Abizaid cited several encouraging signs in Iraq. He said the main battles against the insurgency had shifted to western Iraq, "which is a good sign, a good indicator that Iraqi and U.S. forces are having an effect elsewhere." Also, infiltration of foreign fighters across the Syrian border "remains a concern, but it's down." On a less optimistic note, Casey said political divisions in Iraq could widen if, as he expects, a sizable majority of Sunni Arabs vote against the proposed constitution."...And once you're gone, you can't come back When you're out of the blue and into the black." Neil Young Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
cloudseeker2001 0 #2 October 4, 2005 Yea, no shit they do not want to fight! That is dangerous and why should they..........? "Some call it heavenly in it's brilliance, others mean and rueful of the western dream" Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
