Letters to the Editor

• Reponse to Joe's Response

  [Read the article: Attacking Iran: Are they nuts?]
  [Read more letters about this article: Here]

  "The idea that the US cannot "lose" a limited war in the Mideast is a foolish boast that would make the Vietnamese laugh."

  Could we "lose" a war in the Middle East? Of course we could, but that's not what your letter was directly addressing. You were stating we'd lose a direct military encounter, and just like in Vietnam, we'd never lose such a direct military engagement.

  The problem is that winning wars means more than winning military battles. The United States is exceptional in the ability to win military battles, but we are not that good in winning low intensity wars like are being fought in Iraq at the moment. Our military abilities are geared toward killing the other side, but you can't always just kill everyone you encounter.

  When you present scenarios that people with even basic knowldege of US military capabilities see as immpossible, it reduces the weight of your other arguments.

  The whole idea of Iran militarily cutting off supply our supply, or that our stopping such an advance would destroy the supplies lines requires an ignorance of how the military operates.

  The Iranians could cut oil supplies lines, they could disrupt logistics in the interior of Iraq, they could do all this without ever sending any troops into Iraq, what they can't do is somehow send military forces to capture and hold territory.

  Persians are not stupid, their military is not stupid, they know what they can and cannot accomplish, and they will focus on what gives them their best odds of winning and that's not a direct military conflict.

  Part of the reason why Iraq is a mess right now is because those who opposed the war presented arguments such as you are advancing right now that showed a lack of military understanding and when such scenarios did not occur, and it was obvious that they wouldn't, the self absorbed lunatics in this administration took that as "Look, see we were right all along."

  Obviously the US military would roll over Iraq, and it's just as obvious it would roll over Iran, though it would be a bit harder, what is equally obvious is that this means little to nothing in the long term of winning the war.

  Iraq was not going to be won or lost based on who controlled Bagdad, it was going to be won or lost based on how well or poorly the country was run and rebuilt, and we are losing that battle, partly because the critical window of time after Saddam was removed was squandered.

  Let's focus less on what the military can acheive and let's focus on the important aspect of what happens after the military battles are won, because that's where any war would be decided.

  Permalink Friday, April 21, 2006 10:29 AM