akarunway 1 #1 January 18, 2007 Hell. Not like we haven't armed them before. At least we can get the hell out and save of few of our own boys(MEN)> http://www.timesonline.co.uk/article/0,,7374-2553148.htmlI hold it true, whate'er befall; I feel it, when I sorrow most; 'Tis better to have loved and lost Than never to have loved at all. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Gawain 0 #2 January 18, 2007 One thing there is no shortage of in Iraq, it's guns and bullets. They need more weapons like I need a hole in the head. The IA and special police is not under-armed.So I try and I scream and I beg and I sigh Just to prove I'm alive, and it's alright 'Cause tonight there's a way I'll make light of my treacherous life Make light! Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
warpedskydiver 0 #3 January 18, 2007 yeah what's an RPK cost these days? about 25 dollars? Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
SpeedRacer 1 #4 January 18, 2007 nevertheless, we have to put the Iraqis in the driver's seat as soon as possible. otherwise we'll be stuck there forever. Speed Racer -------------------------------------------------- Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
steveorino 7 #5 January 18, 2007 From the article: The US Government is wary of handing over large amounts of military hardware to the Iraqis because it has sometimes ended up in the hands of militias and insurgents. How would you like to be one of the remaining US troops when the majority of US troops pull out and suddenly your opposition is fully supplied? Just a thought. steveOrino Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
billvon 3,120 #6 January 18, 2007 >How would you like to be one of the remaining US troops when >the majority of US troops pull out and suddenly your opposition is fully >supplied? Indeed. That's an argument for both a rapid pullout and against increasing troop levels now. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
steveorino 7 #7 January 18, 2007 Quote>How would you like to be one of the remaining US troops when >the majority of US troops pull out and suddenly your opposition is fully >supplied? Indeed. That's an argument for both a rapid pullout and against increasing troop levels now. Sort of like the fall of Saigan, eh? I'm not against it, but I'm fully aware of the chaos it brings. steveOrino Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
billvon 3,120 #8 January 18, 2007 >I'm not against it, but I'm fully aware of the chaos it brings. Yep. The question is - ten years from now will there be more chaos or less if we pull out now vs. pulling out in 8 years? Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
steveorino 7 #9 January 18, 2007 Somewhere in one of these threads I suggested a Viet Nam style withdrawl. It is chaotic, and the little guy (the Kurds in Iraq) will be devasted like the montagyard in Viet Nam was. However, the loss of USA life will be over. It seems we did not learn much, did we? steveOrino Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
billvon 3,120 #10 January 18, 2007 >It is chaotic, and the little guy (the Kurds in Iraq) will be devasted . . . That I disagree with! Kurdistan is one of the more peaceful areas over there, and they are so autonomous that they are almost their own country already - they have their own regional government (the KRG) and checkpoints on the entrances to their territories. Kurdistan will do just fine if we pull out. It's the cities like Samarra that will be devastated by violence, at least until a local warlord (like al-Sadr) can take over and impose order. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites