I don't understand how you can talk about getting rid of Saddam, but no invasion.
Unless you're willing to assassinate him and plunge the country into anarchy.
Perhaps a few well placed bombs could have been effective at getting Saddam compliance. But if the goal were to be larger than that, you'll need to actually place troops on the ground.
Quote:
|
Originally Posted by Spencer Collins
Could not agree more,if a decision has been made to use troops,use them to annihilate the enemy! We worry too dam much about collateral damage..
|
Just out of curiousity, what enemy are we annihilating?
And how are we differentiating between them and those that are "greeting us as liberators"?
Or is that a facade that just needs to be abandoned?
And what the heck are we holding back on?
Is there a report that the U.S. has information as to where the resistance elements are who use IEDs and the like? And we just don't do anything about it?