| Page: 1 | Rating: Unrated [0] |
The War Goes On
| Good [+1]Toggle ReplyLink» basdini replied on Wed May 4, 2005 @ 12:50am |
 Coolness: 146145 | WASHINGTON - The U.S. military may not be able to win any new wars as quickly as planned because the conflicts in Iraq and Afghanistan have strained its manpower and resources, the nation's top military officer told Congress in a classified report.
Gen. Richard Myers, chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff, described the U.S. military as in a period of increased risk, according to a senior defense official, who described the report Tuesday on the condition of anonymity. "We will prevail," Myers said when asked about the report. "The timelines (to winning a new war) may have to be extended and we may have to use additional resources, but that doesn't matter because we're going to be successful in the end." Myers predicted the risk would go down in a year or two, the official said. Myers provided the report to Congress on Monday. Still, the report says the U.S. military is able to win any conflict it becomes involved in, said Pentagon spokesman Bryan Whitman. "We are at war and that level of operations does have some impact on troops," White House spokesman Trent Duffy said. "But the president continues to be confident, as well as his military commanders, that we can meet any threat decisively." The military's reorganization toward Defense Secretary Donald Rumsfeld's vision of a lean, agile force, should reduce what increased risk it is facing, Whitman said. Among the most likely conflicts the Pentagon foresees in the near term are with North Korea and Iran, the two remaining members of President Bush's "axis of evil." The Bush administration accuses both of having ambitions to become a nuclear power; North Korea has already claimed it has nuclear weapons. The U.S. military has timelines in place for defeating its potential adversaries, given enough soldiers, tanks, aircraft and warships to do the job. But with so much of those resources tied up fighting insurgencies in Iraq and Afghanistan, those timelines could slip, Myers said, according to the defense official. About 138,000 American troops are in Iraq, according to U.S. Central Command. Another 18,000 are in Afghanistan. Military officials have given no precise estimate when they will be able to significantly draw down the number of U.S. troops in Iraq, but some generals have suggested it could come next year if Iraqi security forces continue to improve in quality and grow in numbers. |
| Good [+1]Toggle ReplyLink» Screwhead replied on Wed May 4, 2005 @ 6:24am |
 Coolness: 686535 | I much imagine Bush kinda like a kid poking a dog with a stick because he thinks the dog's leash is tied, but it's not, and eventually the dog is gonna get pissed. |
| Good [+1]Toggle ReplyLink» cinderella_soul replied on Wed May 4, 2005 @ 8:28am |
 Coolness: 57145 | nice metaphore^^.
It makes me so happy that people can see the insanity of it all. It appears to be ironic to be so optimistic about war. "We will be successfull in the end" -- what is that supposed to mean?! |
| Good [+1]Toggle ReplyLink» Lone_Star replied on Wed May 4, 2005 @ 9:09am |
 Coolness: 154000 | It means... whatever happens is EXACTLY what they had planned for. :P |
| Good [+1]Toggle ReplyLink» basdini replied on Wed May 4, 2005 @ 11:33am |
| Coolness: 146145 | it means we are all going to die, but first we are going to suffer |
| Good [+1]Toggle ReplyLink» Mico replied on Wed May 4, 2005 @ 1:25pm |
 Coolness: 151405 | I think it means this war won't be over for a very long time. |
| Good [+1]Toggle ReplyLink» basdini replied on Wed May 4, 2005 @ 1:35pm |
| Coolness: 146145 | i hope it ends some day... |
| Good [+1]Toggle ReplyLink» cinderella_soul replied on Wed May 4, 2005 @ 10:04pm |
| Coolness: 57145 | I think it means even if the human species gets annihalated-- atleast we built USselves a bomb shelter and have the ability to leave the planet till the dust settles. |
| Good [+1]Toggle ReplyLink» Lone_Star replied on Wed May 4, 2005 @ 10:44pm |
| Coolness: 154000 | wtf? |
| Good [+1]Toggle ReplyLink» basdini replied on Thu May 5, 2005 @ 12:04am |
| Coolness: 146145 | ya, thats not cool at all |
| Good [+1]Toggle ReplyLink» cinderella_soul replied on Thu May 5, 2005 @ 8:06am |
| Coolness: 57145 | no kidding |
| Good [+1]Toggle ReplyLink» elka replied on Fri May 6, 2005 @ 3:44pm |
 Coolness: 53375 | yay -_-
this is gonna last for a long time..and there we probably be no "winner. now all the poor kids i went to high school with that couldnt afford college and enlisted in the army to make money for it, are gonna die and all for a "wonderful" cause :/ |
| Good [+1]Toggle ReplyLink» basdini replied on Sat May 7, 2005 @ 3:31pm |
| Coolness: 146145 | sucks to be them... |
| Good [+1]Toggle ReplyLink» cinderella_soul replied on Sun May 8, 2005 @ 10:21am |
| Coolness: 57145 | Gen. Richard Myers, chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff, described the U.S. military as in a period of increased risk, according to a senior defense official, who described the report Tuesday on the condition of anonymity.
Why the anonymity? The only sttatement in here, which might make the war look like not a good idea is done anonymously. It's peculiar. "We will prevail," Myers said when asked about the report. "The timelines (to winning a new war) may have to be extended and we may have to use additional resources, but that doesn't matter because we're going to be successful in the end."
The media should ask him or I should ask him what he means by successfull. War is about violence and since when does violence equal success. Sure war can have relatively good outcomes-- ie. the economy can flourish as a result. Myers predicted the risk would go down in a year or two, the official said. Myers provided the report to Congress on Monday.
Of course, Myers is some kind of expert. I would like to see the report. Will go check if I can find it. It also doesn't mention if the risk will stay down. All things that rise fall, but it doesn't neccessarily end there. They also don't tell us what the percentage is of the said calculated prediction. When we calculated the potential outcome of a thing in Quantitative methods, we could calculate the percentage or likelhood in percentage of somthing occuring. People still rely on experts to make decisions for them. This is why I say these things. Plus, experts are liable to make an error, and in this case it might be just a comment to mislead people into supporting the war. Who wrote the article? Who's funding the paper or online paper where this article comes from? Still, the report says the U.S. military is able to win any conflict it becomes involved in, said Pentagon spokesman Bryan Whitman.
There's confidence and then there's over-confidence. The fact that the report says that makes the report appear less valid. However, it doesn't state arguments as to why they can win any conflict. Moreover, I highly doubt the fact, while imagining a nuclear explosion in which case everyone loses atleast not in theory but in practice. "We are at war and that level of operations does have some impact on troops," White House spokesman Trent Duffy said. "But the president continues to be confident, as well as his military commanders, that we can meet any threat decisively." Synonyms: decisive, conclusive, crucial, definitive, determinative These adjectives mean determining or having the power to determine an outcome: the decisive vote; a conclusive reason; crucial experiments; a definitive verdict; the determinative battle. hmmm... |
| Good [+1]Toggle ReplyLink» basdini replied on Mon May 9, 2005 @ 2:00pm |
| Coolness: 146145 | drop beats not bombs,,, |
The War Goes On
| Page: 1 |
[ Top Of Page ] |
Post A Reply |
You must be logged in to post a reply.
[ Top Of Page ] |
