[ALawPoker]

[ QUOTE ]
There's one important point most everyone has missed regarding Iraq...

Even with 21st century technology, the US military can't subdue a population that refuses to be subdued.

And the lesson?

There's always hope for revolution if we as a people would rise up. Tyranny can only prevail if we accept it. I'm going to Google how to build my own IEDs now... just in case.

[/ QUOTE ]

You seem to not understand that the reason the insurgency is able to maintain some semblance of "success" is that they're low enough on their luck (and realize they have no hope of defeating us militarily) where their objective becomes simply to stir violence amongst innocents to try to weaken our resolve politically.

That inspires you? I think the idea of that being the best option is actually kind of depressing.

If you're inspired by the idea of intentionally killing your own people (and often yourself) because living in turmoil (or dying) is better than the alternative, then, OK. But I think you grossly underestimate how effective "21st century technology" has actually been, when you consider how ridiculous of a mission Bush sent us on.

Yes, subduing people (even weak people) is very hard. Subduing an entire population who is determined to fight against each other and against you at all costs while also facing global political restraints that prevent you from using your technology well in the first place is very, very hard. The fact that some semblance of democracy is even in place, in the middle of what is effectively a civil war amongst rival political sects in the heart of the Middle East, is sort of mind boggling.

Clearly Bush does not have much of a hand in the actual day to day combat, or it would have gone much worse.