The following paragraph is, or should be a wake up call for W & Co.
_____
"Unfortunately, the problem is not training, but loyalty. All the training in the world is worthless if the people being trained have no reason to fight for those who are training them. And a paycheck isn't much of a reason, especially when the fellow Iraqis they are to battle are fighting for God."
_______

I dont think there's any question that the Iraqi army will be useless if insurgents continue what they're doing.  The question is: What will Kerry do about it?

This is why I have consistently stated that we should not have gone into Iraq at the time that we did.  We had a enough on our plate with Afganistan.  To take on another hotbed of fanaticism at the same time that we are working to bring Afganistan under control was not a good decision.
    The reality now is that we are stuck in Iraq and are going to have to solve the problem there by ourselves.  I do not think even Britain is going to be of much help over the timeframe that will be required to make Iraq stable, or at least get it to the point where it will not be a breeding and nurishing ground for fanatics that will attack us all over the world, and especially here at home.  In Britain, Mr.Blair appears to be in political trouble, with defeat a very real possibility.  If he is defeated then it is a near certainty that the incoming PM will pull all of the British troops in the manner that the current Spanish PM did after defeating the previous incumbent PM.
    I do not think that Mr.Kerry, if elected, will have any other choice but to send in more troops, with far more of those troops that having military policing skills and skills at dealing with insurgencies.  Also, if elected, Mr.Kerry HAS to improve the planning that is taking place both at the Defense Department and the Middle East Central Command - the performance of those two organizations, while having some short term successes, has been horrific overall.  Mr.Kerry, if ellected, will also have to insure that Iraqis see some significant improvement in their lives, and that improvement in things like electric power supplies, roads, employment and personal security must be visible and widespread.  
    Also, contractors that are in the country to bring about improvements need to be protected better - a lot of people that attempt to defend the state of conditions there like to compare the death toll in Iraq to that in US inner cities, but there is no comparison.  Even in inner cities, if one mind their own business and use law enforcement wisely, the probability that injury or death will occur is very small, so much so that when it happens, it is big news.  In Iraq, contractors can be routinely kidnapped and killed if that is the desire of their captors.  There is no way that the situation that exists now for contractors in Iraq can logically be compared to the situation that exist for street thugs (probaly 99%+ of the people being killed in the inner cities) here in the US.
    In addition, our relationship with western europe has to be improved back to where it was before the series of disagreements that have taken place recently happened.  I am not talking about giving them control of our defense or veto power over our actions, I am saying that they are partners that we will need fully engaged in helping us deal with the problem of global terrorism.  Many western european countries have valuale experience in dealing with terrorism, given that they have either largely solved the problem during the past (Germany, with the red army faction) or have dealt with it over a period of years and have gained insight into how best control it and slowly reduce it (Spain with Basque separatists, and France, with north african terorists).  It is one thing to ignore legitimate concerns of a partner as opposed to having continous dialogue and calling them on inconsistencies in their positions.  We appear to have gotten in a mode where we go to our european allies when we need them to help us solve a problem, but do not take into account their counsel against involving ourselves in certain activities to begin with.

It plays right into the hands of OBL et al.

We gave up that chance in 2001 at Tora Bora and I trully feel that our nation is worse off because of that failure.  Killing or capturing them while they were trapped like rats would have taken the wind out of the sails of their followers long enough for us to get the upper hand on even them.  Yet, we diverted to Iraq and are involved in a tough, must win sitution that has needlessly inflamed the islamic world, with little or no benefit coming to us for having done so.

Tora Bora was not THE chance, just one of several. I know we're worse off for having allowed OBL to fester and grow and plant agents here under our noses the past decade.

If Clinton knew then what we know now. he would have leveled Mogadishu instead of tucking his tail between his legs and packing up...I'm confident about that. The problem is, he did'nt know then what we know now.

Iraq is a tough as hell proposition. The intel was split. My point is that by feilding troops ANYWHERE it fuels OBL's cause. But what if SH DID have WMD stockpiles and WAS feverishly funding OBL operatives and we waited till a suitcase nuke was blown up outside of the Starlite club in downtown and smoked all those asian cuties and 1/2 million others as well....Fact is, these are tough times with tough choices.

Was rather clear.  Saddam was a paper tiger and could have been taken care of at a later date.  UN weapons inspectors were doing a good, credible job, the public now has found out that exactly what they were saying publicly was in fact the truth.
    There is probaly more radioactive material from Iraq on the market now as a consequence of our failure to put an adequate number of troops in the country to police the pathetic "research" sites that Saddam did manage to set up.  Fortunately, the material that was taken appears to be of such a low grade that if used, it will more than likely give the victims radiation sickness instead of blowing them to kingdom come.

That's trouble, but not the trouble represented by the bomb grade material unsecured from the former Soviet Union, I'm glad Kerry made that a point in the debate.

Unmentioned, I guess because it's domestic, are the lightly guarded nuclear materials in the US.  Many of them at university reactors.  

I think production of plutonium, BTW, should be made a crime against humanity. Most people just can't imagine how dangerous that element is to any life.

/Zin

... will be faced with a depressing reality under a Kerry administration.  Kerry will hold out until 6 mos after election and start to withdraw troops.  We will probably find a way to fund WPA like projects in the country where there is some stability.  Elections won't happen in many parts of the country.  The country will split or turn into a federation of three states.  Faced with this, things in the country will start to settle down & international  help will start to come into the country.  A destablized Iraq will be something two awful to contemplate for many countries in the world.  We have less problems than Turkey, Iran, and the Saudi's if things don't get fixed.

The problem is, we did'nt. Even Hans Blix has said as much.

Here's the whole problem in my mind. If you put yourself into the shoes of CIC and the preponderance of the evidence says SH has wicked shit and you just got spanked big time, ie 9/11, what do you do???? Wait? Just how much "shit" does he needs to use to kills 100's of thousands???

A vial??? A suitcase???

That aint much..and what do you tell the American people???

Well, Hans Blix was'nt sure? Chirac thought we should wait??

Tough choices, tough times.