Kuntmode
Literotica Guru
- Joined
- Nov 28, 2002
- Posts
- 1,249
Why is it George Bush seems to rave on about how courageous, brave and strong are the men and women that have gone to Iraq?
I am more inclined to look upon these forces as cowards, whimpy and very over-rated indeed.
Let's look at a simple situation.
Take away air superiority and the vast technology they have at their disposal, give them rifles, grenades and old fashioned military equipment, and then throw them on the front lines and see how they fair.
I am not an advocate of war, but I lay praise towards the Iraqi forces and people who are trying to protect their country from a foreign occupation.
They are up against a well advanced and by far superior force in every facet, yet they are making commanders and government officials rethink their strategies, and there are increasingly becoming a lot of long faces at the surprise resistance these forces have achieved.
If these forces were courageous and brave, then they would be fighting on a level footing with Iraq, and show their true capability or at least expertise.
The claim of 'we are better than them' is always going to be the case when we fight wars from high up in the skies, use satellite photos to pinpoint targets, use systems that don't give the enemy really any chance at all, yet why is it some of the statements coming out suggest Western forces are starting to whine and complain about the way Iraq is fighting against them?
Iraqi's are being regarded as criminals, thugs and using dirty tactics. Wearing civilian clothing, surrendering then pulling out guns, ambushes, infiltrating civilian areas to protect themselves from air strikes from above as well as using the dreaded chemical weapons so many fear.
Based on the technology and tactics the west is using, the term 'all fair in love and war' is common place when they are criticised or seen as fighting in a cowardlike manner. Maybe that term can also be used to at least give Iraq some sort of leeway in their struggle against the most advanced and superior fighting force the world has ever seen.
The Iraqi casualties will by far outweigh Coalition forces when proceedings cease, but take away that technological advantage and I would say things would be on a even scale.
I hate to say it, but if they had to fight the way Iraq has too, I feel they would not have a hope in hell of winning this abominable war.
The Iraqi's movement out of Basra and Baghdad to confront the Coalition forces head on, on their advance forward demonstrates courage, bravery and determination to ward off their enemy. Even though most military analysts see it as suicide or they are sitting ducks for allied jets and cruise missle attacks, I am sure if we took away that luxury from US and British commanders, there would be many troops out in the desert with shit in their shoes, and I am sure those brave and courageous troops that George Bush seems to keep raving about, would be asking for their mommy and daddy.
I am more inclined to look upon these forces as cowards, whimpy and very over-rated indeed.
Let's look at a simple situation.
Take away air superiority and the vast technology they have at their disposal, give them rifles, grenades and old fashioned military equipment, and then throw them on the front lines and see how they fair.
I am not an advocate of war, but I lay praise towards the Iraqi forces and people who are trying to protect their country from a foreign occupation.
They are up against a well advanced and by far superior force in every facet, yet they are making commanders and government officials rethink their strategies, and there are increasingly becoming a lot of long faces at the surprise resistance these forces have achieved.
If these forces were courageous and brave, then they would be fighting on a level footing with Iraq, and show their true capability or at least expertise.
The claim of 'we are better than them' is always going to be the case when we fight wars from high up in the skies, use satellite photos to pinpoint targets, use systems that don't give the enemy really any chance at all, yet why is it some of the statements coming out suggest Western forces are starting to whine and complain about the way Iraq is fighting against them?
Iraqi's are being regarded as criminals, thugs and using dirty tactics. Wearing civilian clothing, surrendering then pulling out guns, ambushes, infiltrating civilian areas to protect themselves from air strikes from above as well as using the dreaded chemical weapons so many fear.
Based on the technology and tactics the west is using, the term 'all fair in love and war' is common place when they are criticised or seen as fighting in a cowardlike manner. Maybe that term can also be used to at least give Iraq some sort of leeway in their struggle against the most advanced and superior fighting force the world has ever seen.
The Iraqi casualties will by far outweigh Coalition forces when proceedings cease, but take away that technological advantage and I would say things would be on a even scale.
I hate to say it, but if they had to fight the way Iraq has too, I feel they would not have a hope in hell of winning this abominable war.
The Iraqi's movement out of Basra and Baghdad to confront the Coalition forces head on, on their advance forward demonstrates courage, bravery and determination to ward off their enemy. Even though most military analysts see it as suicide or they are sitting ducks for allied jets and cruise missle attacks, I am sure if we took away that luxury from US and British commanders, there would be many troops out in the desert with shit in their shoes, and I am sure those brave and courageous troops that George Bush seems to keep raving about, would be asking for their mommy and daddy.
