Quote:
Originally Posted by glb
This reminds me:
You didn't, to my knowledge, answer my questions about:
1. Why, if Iraq is so important, did we go in on the cheap? Lack of armor, equipment, troops.
2. If experts and manuals say we need another 300,000 or so troops to actually control Iraq, would you be for a draft, as it's the only way to get those troops?
Pls respond.
thx
|
We went in with what we had after 8 years of budget cuts in defense spending. In the 1st Gulf war we were able to field 500k troops. We didn't have that capability in 2003.
I'd be really hard pressed to support a new draft. If that is the only way to get the manpower to defend the USA I might 'hold my nose' and accept it.
glb
If you could devise a battle plan that would not change after contact with the enemy and would achieve all of its objectives you would be better know than Eisenhower, Rommel, Lee, US Grant ........
The enemy does not sit idly by allowing us to have our way. They change tactics to compensate for our actions. That is the nature of warfare. It's not possible to go into the field with everthing you need because you can't anticipate every thing the enemy might do. I wish war could be that easy.