"Boater" wrote in message
...


We certainly don't have the wherewithal to fight a major war against a
big-league country, we've been fighting in a fifth-rate non-country (Iraq)
for more than five years, we're doing diddley in Afghanistan, and we can't
even interdict Somali pirates.
Oh, and thanks to the military and officers like you, we got our asses
kicked in Vietnam.


Good job, Brownies.


What a strange and bizarre summary of military capability by someone who
knows so little about it.
Even I, if inclined, could blow holes is every statement you made, but I
won't. It's too much fun watching you make an ass of yourself.

I'll give you a couple of hints to get you started again.

We aren't "fighting" a military war in Iraq. That part was done in very
short order and in an overwhelming manner. We are using assets designed to
fight and win wars as training agencies and police forces.

As for "big league" countries, there isn't another one on earth that can
compare with the US military capabilities. Sorry to disappoint you.

Carry on, expert..

Eisboch

Eisboch wrote:
"Boater" wrote in message
...


We certainly don't have the wherewithal to fight a major war against a
big-league country, we've been fighting in a fifth-rate non-country (Iraq)
for more than five years, we're doing diddley in Afghanistan, and we can't
even interdict Somali pirates.
Oh, and thanks to the military and officers like you, we got our asses
kicked in Vietnam.


Good job, Brownies.


What a strange and bizarre summary of military capability by someone who
knows so little about it.
Even I, if inclined, could blow holes is every statement you made, but I
won't. It's too much fun watching you make an ass of yourself.

I'll give you a couple of hints to get you started again.

We aren't "fighting" a military war in Iraq. That part was done in very
short order and in an overwhelming manner. We are using assets designed to
fight and win wars as training agencies and police forces.

As for "big league" countries, there isn't another one on earth that can
compare with the US military capabilities. Sorry to disappoint you.

Carry on, expert..

Eisboch




Gee, I was wondering why we are still in Iraq with what, 150,000 troops.
We're training. Right.

As for capabilities, do they really matter when most of our adversaries
and potential adversaries have or have access to nuclear and biological
weapons? Capabilities don't mean what they used to mean, when our
adversaries believed in M-A-D.

"Boater" wrote in message
...



Gee, I was wondering why we are still in Iraq with what, 150,000 troops.
We're training. Right.



Consider this:

New York City is composed of approx. 469 square miles.
The New York City police force consists of 37,838 officers.

That's about 80 officers per square mile.

Iraq is composed of approx. 167,400 square miles.
At a troop level of 150,000 personel, that's less than one person per mile
(not counting Iraq forces).

Eisboch

Eisboch wrote:
"Boater" wrote in message
...


Gee, I was wondering why we are still in Iraq with what, 150,000 troops.
We're training. Right.



Consider this:

New York City is composed of approx. 469 square miles.
The New York City police force consists of 37,838 officers.

That's about 80 officers per square mile.

Iraq is composed of approx. 167,400 square miles.
At a troop level of 150,000 personel, that's less than one person per mile
(not counting Iraq forces).

Eisboch




We don't have much "presence" in most of Iraq, and...are you saying our
troops are now the Iraqi police force? If so, why can't the Iraqis be
their own police force?

"Boater" wrote in message
...
Eisboch wrote:
"Boater" wrote in message
...


Gee, I was wondering why we are still in Iraq with what, 150,000 troops.
We're training. Right.



Consider this:

New York City is composed of approx. 469 square miles.
The New York City police force consists of 37,838 officers.

That's about 80 officers per square mile.

Iraq is composed of approx. 167,400 square miles.
At a troop level of 150,000 personel, that's less than one person per
mile (not counting Iraq forces).

Eisboch


We don't have much "presence" in most of Iraq, and...are you saying our
troops are now the Iraqi police force? If so, why can't the Iraqis be
their own police force?


You *do* watch the news or read newspapers, don't you?

Eisboch

Eisboch wrote:
"Boater" wrote in message
...
Eisboch wrote:
"Boater" wrote in message
...


Gee, I was wondering why we are still in Iraq with what, 150,000 troops.
We're training. Right.


Consider this:

New York City is composed of approx. 469 square miles.
The New York City police force consists of 37,838 officers.

That's about 80 officers per square mile.

Iraq is composed of approx. 167,400 square miles.
At a troop level of 150,000 personel, that's less than one person per
mile (not counting Iraq forces).

Eisboch

We don't have much "presence" in most of Iraq, and...are you saying our
troops are now the Iraqi police force? If so, why can't the Iraqis be
their own police force?


You *do* watch the news or read newspapers, don't you?

Eisboch




You mean, there still are problems with Iraqi civilian agencies, after
all the time and money we've wasted there? How can that be?

Boater wrote:
Eisboch wrote:
"Boater" wrote in message
...


Gee, I was wondering why we are still in Iraq with what, 150,000 troops.
We're training. Right.



Consider this:

New York City is composed of approx. 469 square miles.
The New York City police force consists of 37,838 officers.

That's about 80 officers per square mile.

Iraq is composed of approx. 167,400 square miles.
At a troop level of 150,000 personel, that's less than one person per
mile (not counting Iraq forces).

Eisboch



We don't have much "presence" in most of Iraq, and...are you saying our
troops are now the Iraqi police force? If so, why can't the Iraqis be
their own police force?

Why don't you go over there and find out for yourself?