I consider the Iraq Invasion as Barbarossa, American style.

[Veggie Meathead]

We all know that the original version of Barbarossa was Hitler's invasion of Russia that got his army mired in the snows of Moscow and Stalingrad and sounded the death knell of Nazism.Without realizing it, Bush has stepped into a long war in the Asian land mass that would keep us mired for decades and drain the lifeblood of our country
in pursuit of his openly stated belief of being a Global Hegemon.
The Imperial Dreams of other conquerors have perished in unforeseen calamities before.Bush will join that long list of historic casualties in the end.Innocent men, women and children of poor nations will pay the ultimate price.

[slor]

1. I have said often...

that Iraq is less like Vietnam and much more like Stalingrad. Typically, people will ask me wtf I am talking about, and I will explain that, as Americans we need to stop looking at things with only an American perspective, that the world does not often fit neatly into that paradigm. I continue to explain the strategic significance of the German defeat at the Battle of Stalingrad, and how the defeat in Vietnam cannot even begin to compare with the catastrophic repercussions of the fiasco and folly of the war in Iraq.

[teamster633]

2. It was only after the Nazis "conquered"...

...Stalingrad that Stalin surrounded their sorry asses and forced them to surrender. Think there might be a lesson there?

[Yupster]

21. The strategic significance of the

German defeat at Stalingrad was the German armies no longer were able to put up a long term resistance to Russia's building juggernaut and Germany was crushed, completely defeated and totally occupied in about 2 1/2 years.

You think our situation will be like that?

It's a lot worse than I thought then.

[Tierra_y_Libertad]

3. Quite right. We are mired in the entire middle east.

With no way out but a long, slow, deadly, retreat. The next step will be the full sledgehammer approach of "installing Democracy" as we try to "win" an unwinnable war.

[Veggie Meathead]

4. Because our perspective is short term,we are unable to see the

long march of history which is just now beginning its inexorable grind.It may take two three or even more decades for any one to see the blunder we have made and gone on the wrong side of history once more.

[Tierra_y_Libertad]

5. Well, it took 10 years to get out of Vietnam.

Not only that, but we have been stuck in the middle east for a long time with our thirst for oil. We've been backing despotic regimes to ensure the supply, Iran, Iraq, Saudi Arabia, Kuwait, etc. And, we've blindly backed Israel against the Palestinians.

Now we've plunged into briarpatch and are stuck there with no allies in the area. Even the subject states, our "allies", in the middle east, know that to back us is tantamount to suicide.

As soon as Bush tries to fight his way to "victory" by launching the brute force of the military, the situation will only get worse.

They will eventually throw us out, but it will be a long bloody trek.

[Veggie Meathead]

6. Our embrace of any regime there is like the kiss of death to the

current regimes.Watch as one by one our puppets fall like the Shah of Iran did.

[Tierra_y_Libertad]

7. And, the tragedy is that they won't be replaced by humanitarians.

The nascent resistance to the tyrants was once western leaning with some sort of democratic structures as the goal. Now, they are being replaced by a much more vigorous crew of what amounts to right wing religious fantatics. BushCorp and the pablum Democrats who went along with the madness have sown the wind and the results will be the crumbling of the American Empire.

The United States has no sense of history, and no sense of unforeseen results. Most of the American people still see this country as detached from the rest of the world. They have no concept of the ripple effect of our actions.

Our de facto defeat in Iraq, which is being ignored, is showing innumerable people that we are, in fact, a paper tiger.

Our much vaunted military is grand at blowing up big things but at loss as how to handle a few determined guerillas.

[Veggie Meathead]

8. World events are like football games that last three or four hours

on TV with a lot of beer and pretzels consumed.After one game is ended, on to the next one.

Chauncey Gardner is alive and thriving in America.

[Strelnikov_]

11. Iraq Has Reveled The Inherent Weakness In Our Force Structure

That is, a shortage of manpower ('boots on the ground') to occupy even a small nation.

The United States military was designed to project the threat of mutually assured destruction to the Kremlin. As such, it was designed around the concept of maneuver warfare (or Air-Land, Blitzkrieg, or whatever they are calling it this week). Highly mobile, 'high-tech', well trained forces, supported by ground attack aircraft made possible through air superiority, would slash into the rear of Soviet formations, breaking up the attack of a much larger force.

The problem with our military is that most of the advantages our military has as a maneuver warfare force are lost during urban combat or occupation. As we have witnessed in Iraq, the modern assault rifle and RPG-7 can counter U.S. forces once they leave the maneuver field, and the firepower of the U.S. can be a two-edged sword when trying to win the 'hearts and minds' of the occupied. It appears that even with our great advantage in maneuver warfare, when the missions degenerates to occupation traditional force level estimates still govern (I have seen figures of 500,000 for the Iraq occupation).

Another concern I have had for years is the cost and complexity of our military. Again, our military was designed for a short, high intensity war against the Soviets. We are now using these high cost, complex weapons for occupation. Due to the time and cost required to replace these systems, have we jeopardized our short term security?

However, my biggest concern is that Iraq has highlighted the inherent weaknesses of our military to potentially hostile nations. Before Iraq, the implied threat of U.S. military action could probably help defuse most crises at the diplomatic level. I am afraid that the 'stick' now looks a lot smaller. While our military is more than adequate for defense, it is incapable of carrying out a petro-jihad of Mideast conquest.

[Karenina]

14. Analyses of "military weaknesses"

are all fine and good when assessing a situation. BEFOREHAND. Especially when those who HAVE EXPERIENCE and KNOWLEDGE are given their props in the decision-making process. Once the first shot is fired it's a whole new ballgame. "Pre-emptive" invasions based on dross that morph into BLOODY QUAGMIRES, backed by the most deadly weapons the world has ever seen, require a new level of awareness. We need no longer "fight" as negotiation and cooperation have many times over proven themselves best for our "common good." Die Welt ist nun viel zu ENG dafur. Unfortunately that concept does not square with the Amurikkan KICK BUTT AND TAKE NAMES mentality.

The U.S. no longer has "diplomatic" cred. NONE. Keep watch on yo "duly selected" gub'mint as it continues to wave it's limp, pus-filled, shingle-covered dick about demanding the ROTW fall in line. VIOLENCE is NOT the solution for sentient beings on this planet. But there's a WHOLE LOT OF $$$$$ in it, the aquisition of which will spur that 1% of self-proclaimed Übermenschen to use what considerable power they have to foment it.

Missile shield, indeed. :eyes:

[Mayberry Machiavelli]

17. Yes. No one can match us with M1A1 Abrams on the move, stealth

fighers and bombers dropping JDAMs on buildings, F-16s and F-18's buzzing around killing anything that flies, Tomahawk cruise missiles etc.

But that phase is enormously expensive and can't be sustained forever.

There is no T-2000 Robot Occupation Trooper. Yet.

Occupation is still boots on the ground with 19 year old pimple faced soldiers from Shit Creek, Georgia. Standing in front of a building or riding in a Humvee. Who can be capped with an AK-47, sniper rifle, or blown up with a cell phone triggered car bomb.

So it would seem the lesson for other countries is, if they are subject to our imperial wrath, to not even resist us in the JDAM phase. Save rifles, ammo, RPG's and conventional weapons. Make plans for a long term insurgency against occupying forces.

[TahitiNut]

9. More like the occupation of the Middle East by the Roman Empire.

There are lessons to be learned throughout history - virtually all of which indicate we've put a regime into power that has global conquest as an objective.

The only criterion that seems to distinguish 'friend' from 'foe' for the current regime is the degree to which the country's ruling regime exploits both its resources and its people for narrow, private enrichment and extra-national 'ownership.'

[Veggie Meathead]

10. This is why a man like Chavez who wants to use the resources of his

country to better the lives of the dispossessed people in Venezuela is anathema to our rulers.Could set a bad example, you know?

[TahitiNut]

16. That's exactly what I believe.

When I look at the "foreign policy" of the US, the sole consistent criteria isn't whether the other government is democratic or authoritarian, or whether it's 'left' or 'right' - it's whether the wealth of that country can be controlled, with the support and enforcement of the extant regime, by global private interests. Saddam's big error was in trying to go his own way, not at all because he was a despot or because he was an authoritarian or because he was a Muslim or even because he was militaristic. The US has 'allies' of all kinds that meet those criteria. It was only because he didn't toe the line and let the global interests own (and control) more and more and more - and his own people own less and less. It's only about serving the existing global wealth. Aristide didn't do that. Chavez isn't doing that. Castro won't do that.

[Karenina]

15. Ah yes, "ownership..."

There are Roman ruins scattered throughout this city... Didn't work then. Won't work now.

[kodi]

19. Athens' disastrous invasion of its colonies in Sicily is more apropos

Bush however, is no Alcibiades.

[Eloriel]

12. )h my. Your post makes me remember something

I'd "forgotten" all about it. In the run-up to the war, I had a very, very strong intuitive sense that in addition to everything else that was WRONG about the proposed war, all the reason NOT to do it, that it would be the beginning of the end to the U.S., possibly even as a nation.

:scared:

[Veggie Meathead]

13. That certainly a possibility we cannot ignore.But the perpetrators of

these crimes would have vanished from the scene before that happens.

[Disturbed]

18. Saddam's major mistake was...

announcing that he would start selling Iraq's oil via Euro-dollars. He sealed his fate.

[Yupster]

20. Bush openly said he believed in a

global hegemon?

LOL

I wonder what he was trying to say? Maybe go "git my green hat man."

Also, the defeat at Stalingrad hardly left Hitler's armies mired in a land war in Asia for decades. In fact, Germany was completely overrun and occupied in scarcely more than two years after the battle ended.

I don't see the Iraqis overrunning and occupying America, and I see a lot more similar comparisons than Stalingrad.

Sorry to be harsh on your analogy. It's the former history teacher in me looking for my long-lost red pen.