I didn't know we had done that. Thus
Quote:
Originally Posted by
Rank amateur
...
Personally, I think the way we've defined "victory" and "defeat" in Iraq - and all the politics that surrounds those issues - pretty much guarantees that even if you can see what's actually happening, not very many people are going to agree with you.
...
I'm curious as to what those definitions are?
One thng which might be considered
Quote:
Originally Posted by
Rank amateur
Near as I can tell, anyone who wants to withdraw troops is admitting defeat and anyone who wants to stay supports victory. There doesn't seem to be a very big "weigh the costs and benefits" camp and those people seem to end up being quickly labelled defeatists. It might change after our election but both candidates have a vested interest in keeping the debate binary until then. I don't really see any candidate saying "I just saw a 15 slide PowerPoint that made me change my mind."
Is that the idea that everyone including the GOI wants large amounts of American forces there for any longer than absolutely necessary is highly lacking a realistic assessment. Everyone wants the same thing for a variety of different reasons. The difference is to be found in the fact that some don't like it when the world doesn't move to their beat. A wise approach is to consider what can be done while maintaining a forward momentum towards a long term solution.
This doesn't fit to well with those who think that
A: The world can go to heck in a handbasket and well still be able to avoid suffering for it because we our US
B: How can we fund our five thousand plus govt gimme programs if we actually have to spend money trying to help stabilize countries who may not be able to do it on their own(for a variety of reasons)and which if we don't could and probably will cost us much more in the long run
Let me ask you a question. If you are hired to run an advertising campaign for blue shoes and get the contract for 3 million then two months after you start the company decides it isn't happy because the results aren't what they want them to be. And lets just throw in that one week after you got the job there was a world wide boycott of blue shoes because black is the new blue what would you tell them.
A: ok here's your money back sorry bout that
B: You have to give it a little more time because we're working behind the scenes to make blue the new purple
C:(whatever your answer is since i'm pretty sure you won't pick either A or B)
Quote:
Originally Posted by
Rank amateur
Interestingly, I found a game theory simulation that suggested we should be lowering our definition of victory. Which would suggest that I'm wrong or the country isn't being rationale.
As to that sometimes simulations are good for telling you that you might have to adjust your expectations in order to match them to the given scenario:D
How much does it cost when you put the wrong name on an add?
Quote:
Originally Posted by
Rank amateur
B, but when they asked "how long is a little more time?" I'd give them an answer, because this is what I do for a living and I know what a reasonable time is. I know how to set metrics and see if we're on the right track or not. I also know that if I don't get results it's because I screwed up. (None of my clients have ever made a mistake.;))
.)
As to this as Ken said metrics for real time decisions in war are pretty fuzzy and more often than not if one gets stuck on them one will probably get stuck
Also consider that the client not being liable for bad luck in an ad campaign at worst cost someone their livelihood. In War whether the "clients" like it or not if it goes wrong someone or many someones die. It is largely different doing risk management in markets vs in war and it would be better for all of us if some would come to realize that. Unfortunately probably won't happen because most that have that problem aren't really paying attention to the war itself but what propaganda value it holds for them
Not a prob. Life, as always, goes on...
Quote:
Originally Posted by
Rank amateur
...
To summarize my thoughts. War is messy. COIN particularly so, but I think we need to move beyond "it takes a long time" to "A COIN effort is going down the wrong track if [or the right track if]...."
I agree. Now all we have to do is convince the politicians and that 1/3 who are adamantly opposed to the Iraq intervention at all levels that should happen...
Quote:
I think we can discuss the issue here, which is one reason why I like having discussions here, but I can't see the Senate having a reasonable discussion about it.
Sadly true. Even more sad is the fact that neither Iraq or US policy are the real issues.
Quote:
An excellent example of how a single word can make it difficult to wrap everything up. Imagine how long we'd both go on if we both believed that this was a debate, instead of a conversation, and that one of us would be declared a winner and the other a loser.
Also totally true and a sad commentary on public and politics in the US today.
Quote:
An excellent point. I think the analysis really depends on how the debate is framed. Losing a battle in a long war isn't a problem. In a long war, you can have Pyrrhic victories. On the other hand, if you frame Iraq in black and white terms, no one likes to lose.
Also true though I would submit some battles are far more important than others and their loss can affect the future course of the war.
Heh. Truer words were never spake..
Quote:
Originally Posted by
Ron Humphrey
Life's never quite so predictable as some might think it is:wry:
or writ or supm'n... :wry:
Fortunately, I'm all for that; life would sure be dull and boring, otherwise. :D
We're not wanted by the Iraqis - it's time to go
Under this title in The Daily Telegraph (UK) the author Con Coughlin, who supported the Iraqi invasion advocates UK forces leave Basra airbase: http://www.telegraph.co.uk/opinion/m.../11/do1104.xml
The comments it has attracted do include some reasoned responses.
He has also written an article on Afghanistan 'Whose side are the Afghans on?', which reveals he is accompanying the UK's most senior military officer, Air Chief Marshal Jock Stirrup: http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/main...wafghan112.xml (which I will copy to an Afghan thread).
davidbfpo