Presidential Debate

[Medicine Man]

The civil war also provides an opportunity for those inimical to the US to be targeted and killed because their recruiters lied to them.  Many a young man is induced into heading into the fray in Iraq, with the promise of being able to kill lots of Americans.  Some are trained, a few are well trained, and many are minimally trained.  They die by the dozens every week.

One of these days, the word is going to get out that the recruiters are lying.  When these amateurs run into Marines or Soldiers, trained and dedicated professionals, they tend to get slaughtered, by the cartload.

The strategy of attrition undertaken by the Anti Iraqi Forces (those against the nation getting stable and getting back on its feet, to include such jagovs as Sadr and Zarqawi) attempts to challenge and overcome American will.  Their assumption is that Viet Nam is a cookie cutter template for how to deal with Americans.
[right][snapback]57019[/snapback][/right]

I sometimes worry that heavy attrition amongst their own people may in fact be the goal of these terrorist masterminds. It seems counter-intuitive, but a recent article by a retired general, Willian S. Lind, got me thinking about modern assymetric warfare (what Lind calls 4G, or fourth generation) and its goals. It is entirely possible that the enemy feels that even while losing tactically, they may be winning strategically and operationally. Looking at the way things are going in Iraq, I wonder if they may have a point.

If you are at all interested, Occhi, I think I can find a link to Lind's article. It has a lot of interesting observations about the capabilities of state militaries. I know I would certainly be interested in hearing some second opinions about its content.

Cheers.