|
Rdr4evr, I admit I haven't read everything you said in previous threads, so maybe I'm a bit "innocent" here. But looking at those last three posts, I can honestly say that I think you are blind. Blinded by your hatred of the US government and army, blinded by your opposition to the Iraq war, blinded by the propaganda from anti-US forces.
The war in Iraq may not be clean, but no war has ever been. The American forces in Iraq, by and large, are doing a fine job in the most difficult circumstances. Last time I checked, the insurgents are not winning. Or you must count "killing as many civilians as possible" as winning. Perhaps you think they're winning because they manage to kill a few soldiers? The casualty rate for the US (and Iraqi forces!) is very, very low; it just *seems* to be high, because the US public has been spoiled... As an example of large numbers of casualties, I'd point to pretty much every battle in WW2.
The only place where the insurgents are relatively succesful and get some support is in the so-called Sunni triangle. This just happens to be the place that used to support (and be supported by) the old regime. Everywhere else, the population hates their guts.
The insurgents are not the good guys. Their goal is not to free Iraq, their goal is to take control and supress the rest of the population, just like they used to do before the war. Or perhaps you think that Saddam was actually a pretty nice guy...
|