in but not with

Since the beginning of the war in March 2003, I thought that it was wrong. I thought that we had jumped, vigorously, into quicksand. A bottomless pit; a quagmire to easily rival the Vietnam War of my childhood. I never really thought the US would lose a war in Iraq. I guess that’s because I, perhaps naively, thought a war in Iraq would be a war with Iraq.

7 thoughts on “in but not with

  1. Yep, our old buddies the neocons. Asshats. I notice they haven't updated their statement of principles since 1997. Because their principles are about as timely as the belief in a flat planet.

  2. I'm skeptical that anything so mundane and utilitarian as greed, or even revenge, is still a factor in Bush's plans. I doubt that he has a cogent plan at all, anymore. His deliberations are more like those of a monkey with its fist in a pickle jar. In other words, Bush's brain is a runaway train. The crew jumped off in a creek, back in '03.

  3. Bush seemed to have forgotten his goal and the stated national goal of killing Osama bin Laden at some point and was reminded that a lot of money could be made in the war game.

  4. I wonder if we keep losing because we try to fight insurgencies, not nation-states. There's no friggin battlefield. The enemy is like an astrocytoma, a cancer that spreads tentacles through an otherwise healthy brain. Not that there hasn't been plenty of collateral damage. But I said at the start of this thing that there would be no way to know who to shoot at, until/unless they start shooting too. But here's an interesting question for you: Why did the USSR lose in Afghanistan?

  5. Interesting post. I always knew we'd "lose the war" in Iraq because of our recent record. We "lost" in Korea (the DMZ between North and South is still patrolled by 30,000 US troops) and we lost in Vietnam. We can "win" only when we attack the littlest guys, Panama, Grenada, places like that, that have no consequence. In fact, we were doomed to lose, in the sense that we'd only be fueling the fire of hatred for our colonial domination of that region.

Comments are closed.