Posted by
Icarus on Wednesday, December 06, 2006 2:53:27 PM
I wondered if the term "American military" was used and in what context, in the Baker-Hamilton-Chamberlain Committee report after discovering that it only discusses victory as it would apply to Al Qaeda, . This is what I found:
"Many military units are under significant strain. Because the harsh conditions in Iraq are wearing out equipment more quickly than anticipated, many units do not have fully functional equipment for training when they redeploy to the United States. An extraordinary amount of sacrifice has been asked of our men and women in uniform, and of their families. The American military has little reserve force to call on if it needs ground forces to respond to other crises around the world." (p. 7) (Emphasis added)
"There is no action the American military can take that, by itself, can bring about success in Iraq. But there are actions that the U.S. and Iraqi governments, working together, can and should take to increase the probability of avoiding disaster there, and increase the chance of success." (p. 70) (Emphasis added)
And some might wonder why I call this the "Defeat through Diplomacy" report.
If the American military killed the Islamo-Nazis attempting to create yet another Islamic totalitarian regime, that, by itself, would bring about success in Iraq. But absurd rules of engagement and foolish diplomatic niceties ties its hands.