Powell on Iraq: U.S. Army 'about broken'

Cypress said:
I think only Marines use Harrier - its a close range ground support attack aircarft. Perfect for Marine operations.

But, its not an air-superiority jet fighter, like F-15 eagle, or F-18 SuperHornet.
Click to expand...
Don't forget the F/A-22 Raptor or the new F-35 Lightning II, I like the F-35 C...
 
LadyT said:
"Running Things"? I thought they were "running things" Are you suggesting that the elections were a farce and that the US is still running Iraq?




http://www.foxnews.com/story/0,2933,236982,00.html

I stand corrected. We're just getting picked off one by one because we are in the middle of a civil war.





I think we'd easily get dragged into another conflict that has nothing to do with us, if republicans are in charge. We need to re-evaluate our response to middle east conflicts. Regarding Iran and the Sauds invading Iraq, I don't think that will happen if we exit and are stationed on the outskirts of Iraq. Redeployment and making it clear that we are allied with the Iraq gov't as a whole will be enough for Iran. I think its clear in the elections that just took place that Iranians are as interested in a war as the american people are meaning they aren't. The Sauds may funnel money to Sunni's and fund terrorist operations as they did 9/11, but as for an all out war, I think you're being a drama queen.
Click to expand...

Makes no difference which party is in charge. If the middle east erupts we will get dragged into it.

As for stationed on the outskirts of iraq, where exactly is that? iraq is surrounded by iran syria and saudi arabia with little kuwait down in the corner. what outskirts are you referring too?

Letting iarn know we are allied with iraq is going to prevent them from any action. They are already shipping in weapons, IED's, money and troops. They know we are allied with iraq and yet they continue to do that so what is pulling out and claiming alliance prove.

Don't count on the voting in iran to change things there. Council seats in the cities is not going to effect the government there. And anyone who speaks up to loudly will be silenced by the revolutionary guard.

Those students that demonstrated agains ahmalittlehitler last week are all in hiding now with death squads looking for them.

The saudi's stated publically that they would support the sunni's in iraq and if iran interfers they will move militarily if the US withdraws from iraq.

There are three provinces the iraqi government does not have complete control over. Those are the ones you see on the news all the time. Only a portion of the iraqi army is able to work on their own, the police are totally incompetant with 25% being corrupt or outright ali babas. The rest are scared.
The iraqi's need to have the confidence and competence to take control of things. At this point they don't have either.

But Bush's plan will fail unless iraq developes a secular government with no state religion. islam can't exist with a democracy as islam is a totalitarian political entity itself.

We are fighting a defensive war and it will stay that way until iran is taken down with an all out victory or death war. If we don't, look for many more years of what we have now and eventually mushroom clouds over America.
 
Damocles said:
Don't forget the F/A-22 Raptor or the new F-35 Lightning II, I like the F-35 C...
Click to expand...



I think the Raptor is corporate welfare for defense contractors.

The F-15 Eagle is on its 5th-generation upgrade (F-15E I think), and its still untouchable by anything the chinese, north koreans, or russians have.
 
Cypress said:
I think the Raptor is corporate welfare for defense contractors.

The F-15 Eagle is on its 5th-generation upgrade (F-15E I think), and its still untouchable by anything the chinese, north koreans, or russians have.
Click to expand...
Which begs the question of what we need a next generation air superiority fighter for, exactly. At least right now.

But I digress. :D
 
Gaffer said:
Makes no difference which party is in charge. If the middle east erupts we will get dragged into it.
Click to expand...

Getting involved in middle east violence is not eminent. Our politicians chose to make it happen. Period. We need to start electing people that will take a more defensive position rather than offensive.

As for stationed on the outskirts of iraq, where exactly is that? iraq is surrounded by iran syria and saudi arabia with little kuwait down in the corner. what outskirts are you referring too?
Click to expand...

Kuwait and limited presense along the Iraq border.

Letting iarn know we are allied with iraq is going to prevent them from any action. They are already shipping in weapons, IED's, money and troops.
Click to expand...

Letting Iraq know that were allied with Kuwait seemed to stave off Hussein. and according to Bush he even had a WMD program and it seemed to work ok. Or was that false too?

[QUOTEThey know we are allied with iraq and yet they continue to do that so what is pulling out and claiming alliance prove.[/QUOTE]

Do what? I thought you were talking about an Iran invasion.

Don't count on the voting in iran to change things there. Council seats in the cities is not going to effect the government there. And anyone who speaks up to loudly will be silenced by the revolutionary guard.
Those students that demonstrated agains ahmalittlehitler last week are all in hiding now with death squads looking for them.
Click to expand...

Can I get a link to this? And are those death squads at the hands of A-need-a-job

The saudi's stated publically that they would support the sunni's in iraq and if iran interfers they will move militarily if the US withdraws from iraq.
Click to expand...

You can support people without an outright invasion. The way we support Israel for instance.

The iraqi's need to have the confidence and competence to take control of things. At this point they don't have either.
Click to expand...

What do you suggest then? Therapy sessions?

But Bush's plan will fail unless iraq developes a secular government with no state religion. islam can't exist with a democracy as islam is a totalitarian political entity itself.
Click to expand...

#1) There already was a secular gov't before we went. Now Iraq is turning into Iran II.

#2) Get a clue. Bush's "plan" has already failed. Miserably.

We are fighting a defensive war and it will stay that way until iran is taken down with an all out victory or death war. If we don't, look for many more years of what we have now and eventually mushroom clouds over America.
Click to expand...

LOL, are the apologists coming full circle again and using mushroom clouds as a fear tactic again.
The more things change the more they stay the same.
 
LadyT said:
Getting involved in middle east violence is not eminent. Our politicians chose to make it happen. Period. We need to start electing people that will take a more defensive position rather than offensive.

If we pull out of iraq too soon there will be a war. which will draw us in as the oil shipments will be stopped or curtailed. We are already fighting a defensive war. A war that will go on for the next 50 years if we don't get offensive.

Kuwait and limited presense along the Iraq border.
What makes you think kuwait wants a bunch of US troops stationed in their country for an indefinate period of time. Why not pull back to kurdistan where we would be welcome.


Letting Iraq know that were allied with Kuwait seemed to stave off Hussein. and according to Bush he even had a WMD program and it seemed to work ok. Or was that false too?
I don't know what your reffering too here.




Can I get a link to this? And are those death squads at the hands of A-need-a-job
I think it was first noted at In the Bullpen - Iran watch but not sure.


You can support people without an outright invasion. The way we support Israel for instance.

yes and the saudi's have said they would, but they also are looking at military support if the US pulls out. They are not going to let the sunni's get massacred. They are looking into developing their own nukes to counter iran.




#1) There already was a secular gov't before we went. Now Iraq is turning into Iran II.

I'm sure you think saddam should have been left in charge there. a kind and benevolent dictator. Hell women had all sorts of freedoms under him. The freedom to get raped and murdered. The freedom to be executed along with their husband and children. A great example of a secular government. And now there is an effort to make it an iran2. Just maybe that can be prevented by our military.

#2) Get a clue. Bush's "plan" has already failed. Miserably.
well, believe it or not I agree. But its because he has the same western mentality as everyone else. Thinking the muslims have the same dreams and goals as we do. They don't. They have been indoctrinated since birth that the koran is the only law and the word of god and nothing else matters. The surest way to heaven is to martyr ones self. If you die peacefully in your bed you must walk through hell to get to heaven.


LOL, are the apologists coming full circle again and using mushroom clouds as a fear tactic again.
The more things change the more they stay the same.
Click to expand...

Don't know about the full circle comment but I don't think this country and especially those that think like you will wake up to the threats until a nuclear attack is made on this country. But then I'm just one of the right wing warmongers that you love to hate.
 
Gaffer said:
Don't know about the full circle comment but I don't think this country and especially those that think like you will wake up to the threats until a nuclear attack is made on this country. But then I'm just one of the right wing warmongers that you love to hate.
Click to expand...


Yeah, well thats what chimp was purporting before the war: that Saddam had an arsenal of WMDs. Turns out he was dead wrong. People like you, despite the facts bought into the whole mushroom cloud propaganda and it looks like its coming around full circle again.
 
LadyT said:
Yeah, well thats what chimp was purporting before the war: that Saddam had an arsenal of WMDs. Turns out he was dead wrong. People like you, despite the facts bought into the whole mushroom cloud propaganda and it looks like its coming around full circle again.
Click to expand...

He said saddam had bio weapons and chemical weapons. There was never a claim he had nukes. Though he wanted them. The bio and chem weapons went into syria. The mushroom cloud will come from iran, which is the real threat here. Of course they will want to sneak it in to avoid fingerprints that point back to them cause then we would blow their whole country away. But not to worry, first they want to consolidate the middle east. So we probably have a couple of years before they strike here. Nukes are a great way to intimidate their neighbors tho. Ahmalittlehitler wants to start an apocolyptic war. That's what all this is about.

so now you can go back and rehash that Bush lied and yadda yadda....
 
Gaffer said:
He said saddam had bio weapons and chemical weapons. There was never a claim he had nukes. Though he wanted them. The bio and chem weapons went into syria. The mushroom cloud will come from iran, which is the real threat here. Of course they will want to sneak it in to avoid fingerprints that point back to them cause then we would blow their whole country away. But not to worry, first they want to consolidate the middle east. So we probably have a couple of years before they strike here. Nukes are a great way to intimidate their neighbors tho. Ahmalittlehitler wants to start an apocolyptic war. That's what all this is about.

so now you can go back and rehash that Bush lied and yadda yadda....
Click to expand...


"He said saddam had bio weapons and chemical weapons. There was never a claim he had nukes."



DICKE CHENEY: "we believe he (saddam) has, in fact, reconstituted nuclear weapons"

http://www.cnn.com/2003/ALLPOLITICS/07/08/wbr.iraq.claims/


Not to mention Bush lied his ass off about iraqs nuclear progam, with tall tales based on dubious intelligence about aluminum tubes and yellow cake.
 
Well, I'd have to see example of recent operations where the Brits have gone in it alone without being led by US forces.

Northern Ireland, Sierra Leone, Falklands, leading the Nato mission in Afghanistan and running southern Iraq to name but a few....

Plus our regular Army trains many many nations forces, and our special forces train most of the special forces in friendly countries. The US Delta Force was copied from the SAS after Col. Charlie Beckwith was sent on a tour with them...

The BA doesn't have the kit (hence the nickname 'the borrowers') but when it comes to fieldcraft, tactical ability and tactical discipline, pound for pound I'd take the BA any day....

Don't forget the Falklands. The Argies invaded and occupied, we simply sent down an expeditionary force of the Royal Marines and Paras, they landed on the opposite side of the Island, marched across and kicked the Argies into the sea.

As for the IDF I'd agree that lately, they've been awful at keeping the peace. Neither have the US and the UK for that matter, but as for their army, I think they are unparalleled.

The BA is the counter-insurgency expert, few nations have resolved an insurgency in the way that they did in Northern Ireland. We simply closed the insurgents down...

The IDF is terrible at counter-insurgency, and their war-fighting ability was revealed to not be that great with their recent incursion into Lebanon. they are a conscription army, which innately weakens them compared to professional troops.

Don't get me wrong, pound for pound, I'd put the US and IDF against any army in Europe except the BA, having trained / been on operational duties with the French, Dutch and German forces, they are shockingly slack...

 
Pound for pound, the U.S. air force and navy are better than the UK's, I would guess. We have the best pilots and aircraft. Helicopters too.

The US has the kit, no-one denies that... The RN and RAF have been crippled by defense cuts lately, by both the Tories and Labour .

As for their quality, depends on the role. At low-level bombing I'd take the RAF Tornadoes over anything. And Little is as effective at infantry support as the Harrier. I'll give you fighter aircraft, but that's because I know little about the new Euro-fighter (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Eurofighter)

The UK's navy suffers from its size, it has been whittled away at for years until it is now too small to be majorly effective. Pound for pound I am unsure about performance capability.

Helicopters, the US has the edge, simply because of the capability of the Apache, which we use too.

As for airmobile capability, as an ex BA Airmobile infantryman I have to say we are most effective.. :)
 
The F-15 Eagle is on its 5th-generation upgrade (F-15E I think), and its still untouchable by anything the chinese, north koreans, or russians have.

It isn't up to the eurofighter apparently...

In June 2005, Scotland on Sunday reported that, when 'attacked' by two USAF F-15E Strike Eagle strike fighter aircraft, a Eurofighter on a 'Case White' conversion training sortie was able to out-manoeuvre the attacking aircraft and "shoot them down" (i.e., achieve radar lock for a long enough period of time to accurately launch missiles, had this been real combat). [17] The Strike Eagle is primarily a ground attack craft (the successor of the F-111 Aardvark), which may have affected the outcome. It is, however, generally agreed that the Eurofighter Typhoon's performance is significantly better than that of the F-15C/D, the current air superiority fighter variant of the F-15.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Eurofighter#Combat_performance
Click to expand...
 
AnyOldIron said:
The F-15 Eagle is on its 5th-generation upgrade (F-15E I think), and its still untouchable by anything the chinese, north koreans, or russians have.

It isn't up to the eurofighter apparently...
Click to expand...


This same article suggests that the F-22 Raptor outperforms the Eurofighter.


:flagsal:
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top