Iraq forces push into streets of IS-held Fallujah

[Ransom]

We had 150,000 troops in Iraq plus over 100,000 contractors to defeat AQI.

And did so. As you know the Sunni awakening occurred long before US troops arrived, the mere announcement the US would Surge in Iraq lit the Sunnis up Pete......because they knew they'd have support. Kicking AQI out of Anbar and then having the US military clean up is exactly what happened, it would take no "hundreds of thousands" of US troops as has been your ascertain. And let's not forget, we departed a relatively peaceful Iraq that had a growing economy and much more autonomy and had had free and fair elections.....their first by the way.

You still refuse to admit what is needed to achieve the goals of the neocons in the ME.

Their the same goals of the realist, Peter....we just don't sit there wit our thumb up our ass like you've been advising this entire time. You opposed taking action against ISIS Pete, remember? Until it was going to be a violent and festering issue, you didn't call for intervention...you called for Turkey.

Your colossal errors on ISIS.......now infamous and documented....has wrecked your reputation and any authority to even speak on the issue.

You need to shut up and listen for awhile.....and get educated....learn from your superiors.

That Ransom guy for example, he's personally danced on your bullsh!t from day one.

[Ransom]

We ain't no creepyazz
Crackers from the boonies
We be the cannon fodder
For the No-Limit Sunnis

If the Saudi king aks us
We'll burn down Damaksus

Poetry trumps your logic.

[Peter1469]

And did so. As you know the Sunni awakening occurred long before US troops arrived, the mere announcement the US would Surge in Iraq lit the Sunnis up Pete......because they knew they'd have support. Kicking AQI out of Anbar and then having the US military clean up is exactly what happened, it would take no "hundreds of thousands" of US troops as has been your ascertain. And let's not forget, we departed a relatively peaceful Iraq that had a growing economy and much more autonomy and had had free and fair elections.....their first by the way.

The Anbar Awakening started in September 2006 about the time the surge was starting. It was US dollars shoveled to the sheiks that got them moving. And it certainly did take 150K troops and another 100K contractors. I was there for most of the surge.

Their the same goals of the realist, Peter....we just don't sit there wit our thumb up our ass like you've been advising this entire time. You opposed taking action against ISIS Pete, remember? Until it was going to be a violent and festering issue, you didn't call for intervention...you called for Turkey.

You don't know what the goals of the "realists" are. For one, you don't have a good grasp on what you are talking about. There is no single position of realists on the topic. There are general principles however. You can start with that.

I didn't call for a ground invasion by Western forces. I said that would cause more problems than it would solve.

Your colossal errors on ISIS.......now infamous and documented....has wrecked your reputation and any authority to even speak on the issue.

You need to shut up and listen for awhile.....and get educated....learn from your superiors.

That Ransom guy for example, he's personally danced on your bullsh!t from day one.

I have not been wrong. I said ISIL had no staying power. And that as they lose territory they will begin to shift towards international terrorism. I have been correct all along. I suspect that I will continue to be correct.

[Peter1469]

The final fight to win Fallujah is on.

The sound of gunfire and explosions echoed through Fallujah’s streets Saturday as security forces battled to oust the remaining militants a day after Iraq declared victory over the Islamic State in the city.

Iraqi special forces recaptured the city’s main hospital, which had been used as a base by the enemy, storming it in the afternoon, but the fight here is not over. Intercepted Islamic State radio communications, which crackled over a walkie-talkie in a base for Iraqi special forces, showed the militants were still resisting.


“I can see about twenty Humvees next to Hajji Hussein,” said the voice of an Islamic State commander referring to a popular Fallujah kebab shop. He ordered a suicide bomber in a Humvee to attack them.


“Go, may God be with you,” another militant said to the attacker. “All your brothers are listening.”



Special forces officers radioed to alert the joint command center, which notified the federal police forces that were gathered there, but the Humvee exploded.

[Peter1469]

Iraqi forces are declaring victory.

Good job men. Now hold that city and prepare to take the rest of your country back.

[Ransom]

The Anbar Awakening started in September 2006 about the time the surge was starting. It was US dollars shoveled to the sheiks that got them moving. And it certainly did take 150K troops and another 100K contractors. I was there for most of the surge.

The surge about security and the changes in rules of engagement as much as troop surge, Pete. Leaving bases or green zones and putting ourselves out In the communities. It's not going to take nor will we require 150k US troops to defeat ISIS...... unless we'd left you to dictate policy since 2011, hence, consider them irrelevant and not our problem, Dude.

You don't know what the goals of the "realists" are. For one, you don't have a good grasp on what you are talking about. There is no single position of realists on the topic. There are general principles however. You can start with that.

The goals of the realists you've brought to the table are to be a would have critic and beg for a media job.

I didn't call for a ground invasion by Western forces. I said that would cause more problems than it would solve.

No one has called for a ground invasion by western forces, Pete. That's your straw man when you get in trouble. And thus you have to use it often.

I have not been wrong. I said ISIL had no staying power. And that as they lose territory they will begin to shift towards international terrorism. I have been correct all along. I suspect that I will continue to be correct.

Suspect. Guesswork. Supposition. Error. All you ever have

[Peter1469]

The surge about security and the changes in rules of engagement as much as troop surge, Pete. Leaving bases or green zones and putting ourselves out In the communities. It's not going to take nor will we require 150k US troops to defeat ISIS...... unless we'd left you to dictate policy since 2011, hence, consider them irrelevant and not our problem, Dude.

You don't have a clue - which is why you ignore me when I say that Goals = ways + means. You utterly refuse to define ways and means. Don't worry. Same with Obama.

The goals of the realists you've brought to the table are to be a would have critic and beg for a media job.

That does not make any sense. You are becoming a Cepitus.

Stop misusing terms of art. It makes you look like an exo.

No one has called for a ground invasion by western forces, Pete. That's your straw man when you get in trouble. And thus you have to use it often.



Suspect. Guesswork. Supposition. Error. All you ever have

Incorrect. Many have called for a US invasion. But more importantly for the stated Neocon goal to be achieved, the only absolute way to do it is with a US massive invasion and occupation. When you have your big boy pants on, you are not allowed to say that X is what you want if you have not the faintest idea of what is needed to make X happen and no idea of the cost of making X happen.

That is why smart people made it simple for you.

Goals = ways + means.

[Ransom]

You don't have a clue - which is why you ignore me when I say that Goals = ways + means. You utterly refuse to define ways and means. Don't worry. Same with Obama.

I've not only defined, I've put a Ways: then an Ends: then Means: spelled out, detailed, my analysis both standing tests of time and realities abroad. I've also defined your ways and means by simply returning through these threads and linking top exact thread and post number for complete context concerning your now award winning bone ups for analyses, Peter.

That does not make any sense. You are becoming a Cepitus.

It does make sense. You've brought articles to this table regarding realism. They are filled with "would ifs", your very first an attempt by a professor to get realism disciples more employment and thus influence in government and media.

Stop misusing terms of art. It makes you look like an exo.

Stop being wrong, it's killing your integrity.

I

ncorrect. Many have called for a US invasion. But more importantly for the stated Neocon goal to be achieved, the only absolute way to do it is with a US massive invasion and occupation. When you have your big boy pants on, you are not allowed to say that X is what you want if you have not the faintest idea of what is needed to make X happen and no idea of the cost of making X happen.

Got
names of those invasion hawks now....and one again Straw man.......you are the member here who claims your goal is to defeat ISIS...and telling everyone it will take 150,000 US troops to do so. It is your stated goals that will require massive invasion and occupation, those are your definitions. I'm using actual history to inform you, it never took 150k troops in Anbar. Bush's surge was an additional 30,000 combat troops and a change in rules of engagement, and security rings around Baghdad that today, isn't in play. you've fcked this up from day one, been belligerent and stubborn, hosed the sh!t out of the west being safer arguments, you've been slow to even admit ISIS is a national security threat for the US.....and I've beaten the sh!t out of you for that.

That is why smart people made it simple for you.

Goals = ways + means.

NOPD, makes the west safer, not a security threat, no staying power, no US intervention...married to donttread.

Naïve, clueless........again.....we can never in this country allow the isolationist or erred realism sheeple anywhere near seats of power. Given the policies of Peter or donttread...these two peas in a pod.......we'd not have a United States of America. you'd speak a different language....and why we've never...ever.....let them govern nor command. Unqualified members of the forum may share the same pod and be at times identical peas......but they need to be tossed...bad seeds.

[Peter1469]

I've not only defined, I've put a Ways: then an Ends: then Means: spelled out, detailed, my analysis both standing tests of time and realities abroad. I've also defined your ways and means by simply returning through these threads and linking top exact thread and post number for complete context concerning your now award winning bone ups for analyses, Peter.

Not yet. You have never said how you would achieve your goals. Not in a serious manner. Start simple. Just state your goal. We can get the the rest later.

It does make sense. You've brought articles to this table regarding realism. They are filled with "would ifs", your very first an attempt by a professor to get realism disciples more employment and thus influence in government and media.

Explained already. Realists are out of power. They are telling you Neocons where you went wrong and what could be.

Stop being wrong, it's killing your integrity.

I
Got
names of those invasion hawks now....and one again Straw man.......you are the member here who claims your goal is to defeat ISIS...and telling everyone it will take 150,000 US troops to do so. It is your stated goals that will require massive invasion and occupation, those are your definitions. I'm using actual history to inform you, it never took 150k troops in Anbar. Bush's surge was an additional 30,000 combat troops and a change in rules of engagement, and security rings around Baghdad that today, isn't in play. you've fcked this up from day one, been belligerent and stubborn, hosed the sh!t out of the west being safer arguments, you've been slow to even admit ISIS is a national security threat for the US.....and I've beaten the sh!t out of you for that.

You are confused.

I was in Anbar while you are in your armchair. We had 150,000 troops plus another 100,000 contractors and barely controlled the country.

So when the Neocons make claims like: "ISIL must be destroyed" I take them at their word. To do that you will need hundreds of thousands of US troops for decades. You will distance yourself from those numbers because you are an arm chair quarterback.

NOPD, makes the west safer, not a security threat, no staying power, no US intervention...married to donttread.

Naïve, clueless........again.....we can never in this country allow the isolationist or erred realism sheeple anywhere near seats of power. Given the policies of Peter or donttread...these two peas in a pod.......we'd not have a United States of America. you'd speak a different language....and why we've never...ever.....let them govern nor command. Unqualified members of the forum may share the same pod and be at times identical peas......but they need to be tossed...bad seeds.

You are upset because Necons have been rejected in the US. Pick up Cold War books. Read. Become a realist and matter again.

[Ransom]

Not yet. You have never said how you would achieve your goals. Not in a serious manner. Start simple. Just state your goal. We can get the the rest later.

You're merely trying to deflect from your colossal fck ups, Peter, I can't blame you for trying to rescue yourself.

Explained already. Realists are out of power. They are telling you Neocons where you went wrong and what could be.

Bill Clinton was a realist. Obama is a realist. You're a realist. And all 3 of you combined couldn't manage a bowel movement after a night of heavy drinking and we should never allow you near seats of power. We made the mistake with Clinton and Obama, three strikes and we're out. You three are dangerous and fatal to US national security, I've already called for you being drawn and quartered.

You are confused.

I was in Anbar while you are in your armchair. We had 150,000 troops plus another 100,000 contractors and barely controlled the country.

the 150,000 troops weren't in Anbar and you know it. And the changes in rules of engagement and the end to the Sunni Shia strife by tribal factions had the more telling influence on the success of the surge. Typical example of your front line soldier losing sight of the bigger picture. You're the tool, Pete, not the civilian command structure you serve.

So when the Neocons make claims like: "ISIL must be destroyed" I take them at their word. To do that you will need hundreds of thousands of US troops for decades. You will distance yourself from those numbers because you are an arm chair quarterback.

You take them at their word and make the rest up as you go along in a desperate attempt to hide your own colossal fck ups. That won't be permitted.

You are upset because Necons have been rejected in the US. Pick up Cold War books. Read. Become a realist and matter again.

Neocons have been rejected and thus ISIS, the rest of the globe, and a rudderless foreign policy.