Shock and Awe - The War Simplified.

[ksmybuttons]

Watching the news yesterday, my husband and I were talking about "Campaign Shock and Awe" and my son said:

"Who's Shock an' Awe?" Just like a name. I told him his real name is George Bush, our President.

This "show of force" is really about showing our military might. After this "war" every country will realize that they can't fuck with the USA. Some people think a demonstration of power is needed I guess.

The little skirmish in Afganistan really couldn't show what our military could do and we never got Osama. Damn, that made the boys mad and they really want to show what the USA can do!

So, George and machine decided everyone hated Saddam and Iraq would be a good country to demonstate the power of the USA. They could find an excuse to go after him. It wouldn't take much, because after the World Trade Towers, these boys just wanted to hit something. You know the feeling -- our leader guys are mad.

And, that my son, is the reason we are having a war. Do I agree with it? I am ambivalent. I am not against war, but I am for peace. I guess I am one of the few from a Judo-Christian background that takes seriously the Ten Commandments and the 7 deadly sins. I accepted that blueprint at a very early age and just can't get over that "Thou shalt not kill" one.

Also, I sometimes think you need to put on a show so people will know you are serious. What are we serious about? Well mainly I am serious about having a good life. I want to be able to go out and play and have a good time. I want to be able to watch movies and sports, play any kind of music. I want to be able to go on the internet and view porn without repercussions.

I want to be able to pursue my dreams and I want that for my son and everyone else, too. Don't mess around with my way of life. All of these little dictators are diddling it up and getting in my way of going for the American Dream.


So Dubya, you can have your Shock and Awe. I am sorry you are killing to achieve it, but I can see that you believe that sometimes you just got to hit something.

 

[HeavyStick]

So we needed the war to show off our weapons?

If you believe that you're an idiot.

Most countries are hearing about the war on radio. Other countries censor what is seen on TV. With the Anti-Bush/Anti-American rhetoric spewing about they'll show the worst of everything anyway.

The countries who are concerned about our military prowess, already have a good idea from intelligence gathering.

I'll let you know when I test out the new Stealth Slingshot.

 

[Guest]

 

[Problem Child]

If you're going to have a war, have a war. What should they call it..."Fluff and Feathers"?

It's a term that some pentagon hack came up and now the media is repeating it ad infinitum. I'm pretty sure George Bush didn't dream up the term.

 

[Hamletmaschine]

I thought it was Shuck 'n' Jive?

Oh, no...that was Weapons of Mass Distraction they used on us, wasn't it?

 

[lavender]

This is the most benevolent war I have seen. The whole shock & awe is rather deceiving. It makes people think we're just going in and bombing the hell out of the place with no specific targets. These are very calculated bombings. It is evident that our troops and our military leaders are doing everything in their power to limit civilian casualties.

I actually think there is a very justifiable reason for this war. I'm just not sure my reasons match Dubya's.

 

[Problem Child]

This is the most benevolent war I have seen. The whole shock & awe is rather deceiving. It makes people think we're just going in and bombing the hell out of the place with no specific targets. These are very calculated bombings. It is evident that our troops and our military leaders are doing everything in their power to limit civilian casualties.

I actually think there is a very justifiable reason for this war. I'm just not sure my reasons match Dubya's.

Who are you and how did you get lavender's password?

 

[Hamletmaschine]

LOL

 

[lavender]

Who are you and how did you get lavender's password?

I'm being serious. I haven't really stated any of my views in one of my overly verbose posts here.

I may not agree with the intentions of Bush. I may not agree with the outcome of this war. I may be incredibly skeptical of what this will do to US relations in the Middle East.

But, the actual action is easily justifiable.

I'll explain more, if you like.

 

[ksmybuttons]

Heavy, I am against killing. I don't like war. I have not been able to find any justifiable reason for this war, no matter what I read, and hate how much oppression is happening here in the USA for homeland security.

I am sure you have knowledge of many things in your life that you have not personally experienced. When you actually experience it, it takes on a whole new appearance. Had one of those moments? No matter what you believe the impact of an event is, until you have seen it, you can't truly understand. We all have those moments in our lives. Campaign Shock and Awe is one of those.

Emerald, no matter what you tell your children, it is full of opinion. Everyone has one and it colors your presentation. My child asks why. The military is bombing Iraq. "Why?" I certainly can't figure it out.

All I know is how my life has been affected by 9/11. I only have collateral damage. I am not in the direct line and it has changed my world and it pisses me off...

 

[ksmybuttons]

Lavender, please explain more.

 

[Angel]

I'm being serious. I haven't really stated any of my views in one of my overly verbose posts here.

I may not agree with the intentions of Bush. I may not agree with the outcome of this war. I may be incredibly skeptical of what this will do to US relations in the Middle East.

But, the actual action is easily justifiable.

I'll explain more, if you like.

I tried explaining something similar a week or so ago in a calm, clear manner and was ignored.

I changed my tactic and bagan posting psychotically and angry and suddenly everyone wanted to respond.


Good Luck.

 

[Problem Child]

This is the most benevolent war I have seen. The whole shock & awe is rather deceiving. It makes people think we're just going in and bombing the hell out of the place with no specific targets. These are very calculated bombings. It is evident that our troops and our military leaders are doing everything in their power to limit civilian casualties.

I actually think there is a very justifiable reason for this war. I'm just not sure my reasons match Dubya's.

Assuming you're not pulling all our collective legs with your "pro-war" stance, I'll say that I agree with you on the benevolent aspect of this action. It's clear that if we wanted to level baghdad, we could do it easily. The lights are all on, and the majority of the infrastructure seems to be intact. The air force is intentionally leaving bridges up so that the water mains running under them aren't broken, for example. The U.S. military seems to have gone out of it's way to try and persuade the Iraqi military to surrender rather than fight us and face annihilation (again).

All in all it seems to be calculated to limit both civilian and military casualties, as well as improved the world opinion of what we're doing. It will also make rebuilding Iraq that much easier if we don't totally destroy it to begin with, which is a good thing because I doubt that the rest of the world is going to help us pay for it.

 

[Guest]

 

[ksmybuttons]

Assuming you're not pulling all our collective legs with your "pro-war" stance, I'll say that I agree with you on the benevolent aspect of this action. It's clear that if we wanted to level baghdad, we could do it easily. The lights are all on, and the majority of the infrastructure seems to be intact. The air force is intentionally leaving bridges up so that the water mains running under them aren't broken, for example. The U.S. military seems to have gone out of it's way to try and persuade the Iraqi military to surrender rather than fight us and face annihilation (again).

All in all it seems to be calculated to limit both civilian and military casualties, as well as improved the world opinion of what we're doing. It will also make rebuilding Iraq that much easier if we don't totally destroy it to begin with, which is a good thing because I doubt that the rest of the world is going to help us pay for it.

AND it shows our capabilities...

 

[HeavyStick]

The Shock and Awe (IMO) is being misinterpreted. The Red Cross is in Baghdad and I haven't heard of any civilian deaths.

Could the Shock and Awe be used to describe the precision and localized destruction of strategic targets?

With the exception of the JDAM bombs, we have used the same weapons that we had in '91.

The MOAB's haven't been used. (20,000 lb bombs)

The "E"-bombs haven't been used.

I know the precision our Laser Guided Systems are capable of.

The Shock and Awe could be the sudden destruction of several targets being destroyed in the same breath, while limiting civilian deaths.

 

[Guest]

 

[lavender]

ksmybuttons, just to provide some justification if you are searching for one:

First, no one can deny that Hussein is one of the most loathsome leaders on the planet. He has led a reign of terror in Iraq. The mass killings, his use of weaponry, his intentions all justify the fact that this man should not be in power.

Second, the United States has a clear mandate under various UN Resolutions. Hussein has been entirely uncooperative for over a decade with respect to disarmament. He has continually, and I do mean continuously and systematically, prevented the fulfillment of his requirements pursuant to the end of the Gulf War. Just a few years after his defeat, he began falling far short of the bargain. The way he has treated UN weapons inspectors has been horrid. The fact that only a few short years after the Gulf War our inspectors had incredible difficulty carrying out their job in Iraq demonstrates how defiant this leader is.

Third, in the midst of this war we have seen, what we believed. Saddam has military capabilities that he is not supposed to have according to the resolutions and agreements following the Gulf War.

Let's put this in historical context. After World War II, both Germany and Japan were provided with constitutions and regulations that kept them from rearming. Each nation had strict restrictions on what type of military activity and weapons build-up they could have. If either of these nations had not complied with these rules, there would have been significant problems. However, for the most part, both nations complied.

Saddam is in the exact same spot. He invaded a nation. He cost the nations of this world lives and money trying to protect this nation. He has created instability in our world far too long.

The people of Iraq do not want Saddam in power, but he reigns with military might and as I said previously, a reign of terror.

We went into the former Yugoslavia to get rid of such a man - Milosevic. What Hussein has done is very similar, and yet more far-reaching than the actions of Milosevic.

I hate seeing war. I hate that the United States has not handled this in the most appropriate manner.

But, war has begun. I think many protestors are disingenuous. It almost seems "trendy" to not support this war. I know that many are well-informed, but many have no friggin clue why they are opposed to this war.

Saddam Hussein being out of power in Iraq is truly the best thing for Iraq, for the Middle East, for the United States and for the globe.

I think the main problem here is that the world and many Americans do not trust George Bush's intentions. Who can blame them? That is a fault in our policy.

But regardless of Bush's ulterior motives, I think war in Iraq is for the best. Hussein and his regime need to be toppled.

I will not protest this cause because I do not trust Bush. I will not protest this cause because I fear what will come of Iraq, due to Bush, in the aftermath. That is all speculation.

Right now I'm only concerned with one thing - engaging in a war that will allow us to overtake Iraq, topple the Hussein regime, have the least amount of loss of life for our young troops, and balancing this all with a war that limits civilian casualities to the highest extent practicable.

 

[Guest]

 

[Problem Child]

I'm being serious. I haven't really stated any of my views in one of my overly verbose posts here.

I may not agree with the intentions of Bush. I may not agree with the outcome of this war. I may be incredibly skeptical of what this will do to US relations in the Middle East.

But, the actual action is easily justifiable.

I'll explain more, if you like.

I pretty much agree with you. Saddam has needed to go for a long time now, and now that it's on I'm glad that hopefully he soon will be gone.

I'm disappointed that we couldn't build more world concensus, and I'm afraid we are setting a bad precedent...the U.S. has had a tradition of trying to hold the moral high ground, even though we've made bad policy blunders in the past. We don't go around invading other countries jusy because we don't like their leaders (yeah I know the CIA, chile, etc. etc...).

It's a done deal now though. I'm glad to see the military seems to be doing a good job on this one, but they've done pretty well ever since the last gulf war.

I just hope it doesn't get bloody in the streets of Baghdad. If that happens you'll see public support in the U.S. plummet.

 

[lavender]

AND it shows our capabilities...

No, ksmybuttons. It doesn't. It doesn't even begin to show our capabilities. I don't think anyone doubts our capabilities. The world knows that in about 12 hours we could dismantle the infrastructure and completely cripple any city we wanted.

About 8 years ago, I had the opportunity to listen to a person speak from some intelligence agency that specifically dealt with Us/Asian military relations. This was at the height of fear about the growing prosperity and power of China. In this discussion, he informed us that the United States had the capability (without using nuclear weapons) of crippling this entire nation in 15 days.

We don't even know how capable our military is. This isn't about showing how big of a dick America has. If we wanted to show such brute force, we would be carrying out this war far differently.

To date, we have not let go of any bomb beyond 2,000 lbs. We have innumerable bombs that are FAR heavier, and exact a far greater toll.

 

[HeavyStick]

I am sure you have knowledge of many things in your life that you have not personally experienced. When you actually experience it, it takes on a whole new appearance. Had one of those moments? No matter what you believe the impact of an event is, until you have seen it, you can't truly understand. We all have those moments in our lives. Campaign Shock and Awe is one of those.

BTW I have seen it. I've seen death and carnage on a scale I wouldn't wish on anyone.

I'm disappointed in your logic. Saying that we need to show off our weapons to scare the world.

 

[Problem Child]

AND it shows our capabilities...

What does that mean? Is there some way that we can win the war without showing our capabilities?

Is there any nation on earth that doesn't already know that we are the big dog on the block, militarily speaking? If so I'll happily e-mail their leaders and explain it to them.

 

[lavender]

The problem I have with this war hasn't been our actions in the last 2 months - it was our actions prior to this. I believe that the Bush Administration began the rhetoric for this war far too early. I believe that Bush started this rhetoric before he had done anything diplomatically to try and build a consensus. I think that there have been far too many reports about ulterior motives that have resonated with the global community.

That being said - the reaction of France, Turkey, Germany and Russia have really begun to piss me off.

I tend to believe that France has far greater ulterior motives than the Bush Administration. Hell, just weeks ago they were selling parts of weaponry to the Iraqis. What a fucking joke.

 

[weed]

Though I do think the "show of force" is part of the administrations desire to establish without doubt America as a big bulldawg amongst the little ones, it's more complicated than just that. So common to hear people deny it's about oil but how can that not be a part of it. The administration claims it's about WMD and that may be a factor but from what I've seen so far Saddams forces and weaponry are no match for us. The sheer stubbornness of some of them may be a challenge, however. Then there's the oppressiveness of Saddam and the cruelties he has suffered unto others. Irreprehensible, no doubt, but if it were all that we needed to attack then there are others we should be going after as well. The North Korean people seem to have a worse standard of living than the Iraqi's do.

So, just why we are there does not seem like such a simple question to me. And why we couldn't have given the inspection process more time is not answered either.

The more humanitarian aspects of this war are yet to be seen. I think a lot of dust (and smoke) has to settle before all damages and bodies can be counted (if they ever are). I include the damages the Iraqis do to themselves in their concept of defense in this toll. The troops can at least be proud that they perform their duties with less of the blunders they are often known for. I am glad our targets seem to be quite specific and there is some surrendering going on.

However, there seems to be conflict in some of the reports I've heard. Whether or not the palace in Baghdad is a historical site or a branch of Saddam's regime, for instance. For another, I heard one embedded reporter saying that these "military" targets are usually surrounded by residential areas. I only hope most people have cleared out of the areas.

I agree with you on lacking some understanding when it comes to killing, ksmybuttons. Even though I'm not religious that "thou shalt not kill" commandment seems to surpass any religious doctrines to a gold standard for living. I just don't understand how anyone can excuse intentional death short of true self-defense....not some propaganda on "preventative" defense.

I also agree on the precedent setting....who's next?

Bush's abilities as a world diplomatic are what scared me most about him being elected....I see I was right.