Should the US assault Falluja? - Page 3




View Poll Results :Should the US assualt Falluja?
YES 18 75.00%
NO 3 12.50%
NOT SURE 3 12.50%
Voters: 24. You may not vote on this poll

 
--
 
November 8th, 2004  
Missileer
 
 
Quote:
Originally Posted by AussieNick
I believe they need to make an example of Fallujiah. They need to assault it, and despite losses drive out the insurgency and hold the city. If they back down they show they can be defeated. If they "Win" they will send a clear message.
Fallujah is, like it or not, the lynch pin for many scattered cells of terror. Pull it, and you will see the others start to lose their cohesiveness. I think the City will fall in three days or less. Like Patton, hit them hard with everything you've got.
November 8th, 2004  
GuyontheRight
 
Quote:
Fallujah is, like it or not, the lynch pin for many scattered cells of terror. Pull it, and you will see the others start to lose their cohesiveness. I think the City will fall in three days or less. Like Patton, hit them hard with everything you've got.
I cant help but feel that we have misunderstood the situation on a grander scale. As my History professor reminds me often, their are always outside forces and connections at work. In this case, I think we have to took at Damascus and the Baath Party In Syria, which, according to a recent TIME article, is actually equipping members to fight with Zarqawi and his militia. I hate to suggest another conflict In Syria, but it looks to be taking over as the Bastion of Islamic Terror. My suggestion, work more with lebanon, rally the opposition to Lahoud and boot Syria, reclaim the Beeka, and work from there.

Yet Fellujah has to be reclaimed, so I'm entitled to support this offensive. However If the damn United Nations would only recognize the suffering of these poor people and get their asses In there, we may be able to persuade some of the city's residents to come out so that massive airstrikes can obliterate Zarqawi and his thugs for good.
November 9th, 2004  
egoz
 
I don't believe Fallujah is by any means the lynch pin for terrorists. Stopping them in one city will only move them somewhere else, or spur more support. Besides, this initial attack is nothing. The terrorists will put up a half ass fight and allow the troops to enter and "control" the city. Then they'll conduct ambushes and hit and run attacks once the troops have settled. I'm not saying it's impossible to take the city. But "taking the city in 3 or 4 days" doesn't mean we've actually taken the city. The terrorists know better than to conduct head on operations against a US assault. They will wait until we settle in and put up COM centers or check points, etc. Then they will hit those with suicide bombs and car bombs. It's the only way they can fight effectively against a heavily armed US presence.

The problem with going ahead and attacking targets related to the terrorism in Iraq at the moment is that the US will look like they're starting a war with the entire middle east. The only way to safely pull that off is with help from the UN. Not that it'll make things easier, we all know the UN is a joke when it comes to fighting wars, but politically, we'll be in a better position.
--
November 9th, 2004  
Chocobo_Blitzer
 
Well, that's why there's an Iraqi government. It's supposed to be the one declaring war on the terrorist in Fallujah.
November 9th, 2004  
egoz
 
Quote:
Originally Posted by Chocobo_Blitzer
Well, that's why there's an Iraqi government. It's supposed to be the one declaring war on the terrorist in Fallujah.
The Iraqi government is a joke at the moment. They have nothing to enforce their power, assuming they had power in the first place. They can't even retain soldiers without those same soldiers and police officers leaving their ranks to go and fight for the terrorists.