How would you approach this problem...any thoughts?

TMT


U.S. Spending Billions to Stop Iraq IEDs By CHARLES J. HANLEY,

The United States is pouring billions more dollars and fresh platoons
of experts into its campaign to "defeat IEDs," the roadside bombs
President Bush describes as threat No. 1 to Iraq's future.

The American military even plans to build special, more defensible
highways here, in its frustrating standoff with the makeshift munitions
- "improvised explosive devices" - that Iraqi insurgents field by
the hundreds to hobble U.S. road movements in the 3-year-old conflict.

Out on those risky roads, and back at the Pentagon, few believe that
even the most advanced technology will eliminate the threat.

"As we've improved our armor, the enemy's improved his IEDs. They're
bigger, and with better detonating mechanisms," said Maj. Randall
Simmons, whose Georgia National Guard unit escorts convoys in western
Iraq that are regularly rocked, damaged and delayed by roadside blasts.

Lt. Col. Bill Adamson, operations chief for the anti-IED campaign, was
realistic about the challenge in a Pentagon interview. "They adapt more
quickly than we procure technology," he said of the insurgents.

Casualty charts show a growing problem.

Better armor and tactics lowered the casualty rate per IED attack last
year. But attacks almost doubled from 2004, to 10,593, meaning the U.S.
death toll from IEDs still rose. Since mid-2005, an average of about 40
Americans a month have been killed by improvised explosives, twice the
rate of the previous 12 months, according to icasualties.org, an
independent Web site that tracks casualties in Iraq.

Meanwhile, the overall U.S. death rate held steady from 2004 to 2005,
making IED fatalities comparatively more significant. Last month, for
example, 36 of 55 American military personnel killed in Iraq were IED
victims.

The bomb makers have the White House's attention. In a radio address on
Saturday, Bush said roadside bombs "are now the principal threat to our
troops and to the future of a free Iraq."

Bush said in a speech Monday that Iran had supplied IED components to
Iraqi groups, but U.S. officials have presented no evidence to support
that, nor did Bush explain why Shiite Muslim Iran would aid Iraq's
Sunni-dominated insurgency.

For their IEDs, Iraqi insurgents, who are believed under the direction
of former military and intelligence officers, rely on the tons of
military ordnance left over from the era of Saddam Hussein, and on
store-bought electronic and other items for ignition systems.

The Pentagon's upgraded Joint IED Defeat Organization is getting a
sharply increased $3.3 billion this year to foil the often rudimentary
weapons, which the Iraqi resistance generally fashions from artillery
and mortar rounds. The "JIEDDO" staff of explosives experts and others
will almost triple, to 365.

From 2004 to 2006, some $6.1 billion will have been spent on the U.S.
effort - comparable, in equivalent dollars, to the cost of the
Manhattan Project installation that produced plutonium for World War
II's atom bombs.

The investment has paid dividends in Iraq: in "jammers" installed on
hundreds of U.S. vehicles to block radio detonation signals; in
massively armored Buffalo vehicles whose mechanical arms disable
roadside bombs. Forty-five percent of emplaced bombs are cleared before
detonation, the U.S. command says.

In one initiative showing how seriously it takes the threat, the
Defense Department proposes spending $167 million to build new supply
roads in Iraq that bypass urban centers where convoys are exposed to
IEDs.

But experts like the Air Force's Bob Sisk, an explosives-disposal
specialist whose teams are daily disarming IEDs north of Baghdad, said
the most important investment is in intelligence.

"The idea is to get the pieces of an IED to `Sexy,'" said this senior
master sergeant.

"Sexy" is CEXC, the Counter Explosive Exploitation Cell, a secretive
group at Baghdad's Camp Victory that is building a database on IED
incidents, in search of patterns and defenses.

"The initiation system" - detonators - "is always of interest,"
Sisk said. The bomb makers have progressed from using washing-machine
timers and pressure switches for initiating explosions, to cell phone
and walkie-talkie signals, and even infrared beams.

The IED analysts are vitally interested in placement-concealment
tactics. The bombs can be found in roadside garbage bags or sandbags,
in piles of rocks, buried in holes, in sheep or dog carcasses. One was
recently discovered disguised as concrete street-side curbing.

Hoaxes are a peril. "The enemy's very smart," said Capt. Peter Weld,
Sisk's commander. "They plant a harmless device that soldiers find and
gather around, and then they hit them with a real device nearby."

"Shaped charges" are also proliferating - killer explosives that
direct armor-piercing projectiles into U.S. vehicles.

The Pentagon's Adamson said new ways to neutralize IEDs on the ground
are critically important. But "we'll never keep up with the enemy's
agility," and the top priority must be "taking down the human component
- the financiers, the suppliers, the bomb makers."

For that, he said, "our goal is to get better technical and forensic
data off the ordnance" - from digital photos, measurements, explosive
residue, fingerprints, debriefings of troops on the scene.

The U.S. command claims significant success, saying it has captured or
killed 41 bomb makers since November. But soldiers still face the bombs
at seemingly the same rate.

The Georgia National Guard's Sgt. Robert Lewis couldn't help being
impressed while on duty in central Iraq.

"There's a road we called IED Alley that the ordnance disposal guys
would clear regularly," Lewis, 47, of Carrollton, Ga., said at his
current post in western Iraq. "But no sooner would they reach the end
of that stretch" - eight miles - "than the insurgents would be
planting IEDs again at the beginning."

On 13 Mar 2006 16:53:40 -0800, "Too_Many_Tools"
wrote:
How would you approach this problem...any thoughts?
TMT
U.S. Spending Billions to Stop Iraq IEDs By CHARLES J. HANLEY,
snip
==========================
George Santayana built his career as historian on his
observation "those who will learn nothing from history are bound
to repeat it."

There are several good historical monographs available about the
German attempts to control the partisans in several areas they
"liberated," many of which were *NOT* under soviet/communist
control. Indeed after the Germans were driven out (and in some
cases while the Germans were ther), the first order of business
in several countries such as Yugoslavia and Greece was the
settling of accounts between the various national and
soviet/communist partisan groups, as their only point of
agreement was they did not like the Germans in their country.

One of the best is a study published by the Center for Military
History of the US Department of Defense. This was written by a
committee of high ranking German officers "who been there and
done that." This study offers penetrating insight into the
insolvable problems of attempting to control huge areas of
territory populated with warlike peoples, with insufficient
forces and unsuitable equipment, where all problems are
continually being exacerbated by arbitrary changes in policy and
endless counter-productive directives by the "High Command." In
the last analysis "pacification" was rendered insolvable because
of the contradictory requirements of an endless supply of passive
slave labor and the need to exterminate those who could/would not
be assimilated into this "new order" (which turned out to be the
majority of the population).

Ignoring questions of ethics the foundational problem in Iraq is
that Iraq is a geographical area and not a country. The British
spent 20 years after WWI attempting to create an "Iraq" country
and eventually declared victory and came home. Saddam Hussain
knew this vital fact and acted accordingly.

This is an important difference and not logic chopping because if
you have an actual country such as France or Czechoslovakia, the
people are more or less pacified, and not particularly restive.
The odds are good that you can "conquer" the country by simply
occupying the capital and using the existing governmental
structures to rule.

A geographical area is far different in that occupation of the
[nominal] capital, and especially if any reliance is placed on
the decorative appendages such as parliament, and the coercive
elements of government such as the party, secret police and armed
security services that were the actual "glue" that kept things
together and under control are disbanded.

From the historical record, pacification/"civilization" of a
geographic area *CAN* be accomplished, but the tactics required,
such as deliberate genocide by starvation and disease, are so
abhorrent to modern sensibilities that this is no longer an
option. It is also a slow process. For example, it required
about 200 years for the original people of North America to be
"pacified," and some Indian areas in rural Mexico are still only
marginally controlled by the "government." Unless the original
culture is totally erased, problems are sure to again arise, e.g.
Ireland and Wales.

Until and unless the US is willing to take traditional
pacification actions such as eliminating mobility and
communications such as the confiscation of automobiles, draconian
fuel rationing, elimination of civilian telephone and wireless,
draconian rationing of electricity, and food rationing to about
1,000 calories a day the problems will only get worse.

Additionally, severe reprisals must be imposed such as the
execution of random hostages from the incident location and the
demolition of their houses, and temporary reductions in
deliberately marginal fuel/food rations for every American/Allied
service person injured or killed, possibly on a sliding scale
based on rank and severity of injury. Say 5 for causing a
hangnail on a private to 100 for killing a general.

Given that the US people will not permit these historically
necessary actions, and even if the US government was willing,
implementation would prevent the economic exploitation of Iraq
and require the importation of "safe" labor for the petroleum
fields/refineries.

While the technology appears to be different, i.e. precision
guided munitions and pilotless drones v suicide bombers and IEDs,
in reality the asymmetry is totally different. The U.S. troops
are there because they were sent there, and are trying to impose
a foreign culture/economic structure while the "Indians" are
fighting for their lands and "way of life." As long as there are
suicide bombers there is no answer, short of a general
pre-emptive massacre, to the threat of IEDs.

The least bloody (and costly) "solution" is for the U.S. to
declare victory and come home after establishing three successor
states with good boundaries, and possibly arranging for the
exchange of populations. One for the Kurds, one for the Sunnis,
and one for the Shiites. Almost immediately, The Shiiets
[religious fundamentalists] will closely align with Iran, The
Sunnis [modernist/secular/fascist] will closely align with Syria,
and Kurdistan will be a major pain for Turkey.

Unfortunately, this is unlikely to happen until the president
after next [next one won't want to appear "soft" on terrorism no
matter which party wins], so we must anticipate at least another
6 years of carnage unless a foreign exchange/trade catastrophe
resulting in a hyper-inflation/depression intervenes.

The big winner will be the PRC as it will provide the consumer
goods and arms the new states want and it needs the oil. Look
for a gas pipe line. Counter-trade [direct swap of so much oil
for so many anti aircraft missiles] is likely, with the Euro
being used where required. Brasil is another likely winner with
lots of production capacity, big need for oil, and no historical
baggage in the area.

German philosophical insights / bon mots may prove more
explanatory of the current problem.

"How good bad music and bad reasons sound when we march against
an enemy. -- Friedrich Nietzsche"

"The only thing we learn from history is that we never learn from
history." -Hegel (1770-1831)


Unka George
(George McDuffee)

What a country calls its vital economic interests are not
the things which enable its citizens to live, but the things
which enable it to make war. Petrol is more likely than wheat
to be a cause of international conflict.
Simone Weil (1909-43), French philosopher, mystic.
«The Power of Words», in Nouveaux Cahiers (1 and 15 April 1937;
repr. in Selected Essays, ed. by Richard Rees, 1962)

"Ignoring questions of ethics the foundational problem in Iraq is
that Iraq is a geographical area and not a country."

So if the United States was invaded, would the United States be a
geographical area or a country?

Would we fight or roll over?

TMT

On 13 Mar 2006 19:35:01 -0800, "Too_Many_Tools"
wrote:

"Ignoring questions of ethics the foundational problem in Iraq is
that Iraq is a geographical area and not a country."

So if the United States was invaded, would the United States be a
geographical area or a country?

Would we fight or roll over?

TMT
===================
My best guess is the citizens rural areas would fight and the
residents in the urban areas would shrug their shoulders and go
on with business as usual as they are used to taking orders.




Unka George
(George McDuffee)

What a country calls its vital economic interests are not
the things which enable its citizens to live, but the things
which enable it to make war. Petrol is more likely than wheat
to be a cause of international conflict.
Simone Weil (1909-43), French philosopher, mystic.
«The Power of Words», in Nouveaux Cahiers (1 and 15 April 1937;
repr. in Selected Essays, ed. by Richard Rees, 1962)

So do you think the roundup would start with those who have registered
guns?

It is much harder to resist when you are throwing rocks and Ipods.

TMT

On 13 Mar 2006 22:25:45 -0800, "Too_Many_Tools"
wrote:
So do you think the roundup would start with those who have registered
guns?

It is much harder to resist when you are throwing rocks and Ipods.

TMT
==============================
As much as the members of the NRA [and I am a life member] would
like to think that "guns" would be the difference, it does not
now appear this would be the case, in other than isolated and
easily contained instances.

The primary requirement for any sort of resistance is a well
developed sense of duty/community combined with a feeling of
"ownership." In turn this generates the "will to resist" and a
willingness to "risk it all for freedom."

People in our large urban areas (and something like 70% of
Americans now live in large urban areas) generally lack this
sense of duty/community. This is due to several reasons:

(1) A significant fraction of the population in large urban areas
are *NOT* citizens and so "have no dog in the fight."
Additionally, the countries they come from have no tradition of
private firearms ownership and thus they are in favor of the
round-up of guns and gun owners.

(2) A significant number of the non-citizens are here illegally
and thus have every incentive to keep their head down.

(3) Urban citizens have been conditioned to not "make a scene,"
and reach some sort of compromise, especially with someone else's
property/rights (i.e. you can't fight city hall, so sell out the
guy down the hall and maybe they will leave me alone...). In the
larger urban areas there is a low rate of home ownership, and
thus little sense of property "ownership." The sense of
community/duty is also highly compromised by the extreme mobility
and social isolation.

(4) A much higher fraction of our young adults with families live
in large urban areas, and their children are continually
"brainwashed" in our public schools with the idea that "violence
never solves anything," "guns are bad," "government knows what's
best for us," and "compromise is good." It is a given that these
little gapers will turn in anyone with a gun including their
parents, especially if they can get free Game Boys and/or Air
Nikes by doing so.

(5) While there is some firearm ownership in the large urban
areas it is "static", simply because of the logistics and social
disapproval, i.e. most owners do not consistently shoot and are
out of practice, and have minimal ammunition.

In the last analysis there is no good reason [other than
excessive administrative testosterone ala Waco] for attempting to
confiscate firearms. All that is required for total control is
to make noises about expropriating the IRAs/stock holdings etc.
as part of the "War on the Federal Debt," and possibly cutting
back on the food supplies, probably justifiable as part of the
"War on Obesity." The mass of people will roll over like a puppy
dog to get their belly rub.




Unka George
(George McDuffee)

What a country calls its vital economic interests are not
the things which enable its citizens to live, but the things
which enable it to make war. Petrol is more likely than wheat
to be a cause of international conflict.
Simone Weil (1909-43), French philosopher, mystic.
«The Power of Words», in Nouveaux Cahiers (1 and 15 April 1937;
repr. in Selected Essays, ed. by Richard Rees, 1962)

google chain cannon.

There are some very good wmv files of a chain cannon used on insurgents
placing an IED. Range, 4,000 yards. 30mm chain cannon recoil ............
9,000# sending out an explosive projectile at up to 300 rounds per minute.

Entertaining.

Steve

"Steve B" wrote

30mm chain cannon recoil ............
9,000# sending out an explosive projectile at up to 300 rounds per minute.

Sorry, 625 per minute

"There are some very good wmv files of a chain cannon used on
insurgents
placing an IED. Range, 4,000 yards. 30mm chain cannon recoil
.............
9,000# sending out an explosive projectile at up to 300 rounds per
minute.

Entertaining.

Steve "

So are you saying that we need to place chain cannons along every road
in Iraq?

Even if you could (which of course you can't), how would that fix the
problem?

TMT

"Too_Many_Tools" wrote in message
oups.com...
"There are some very good wmv files of a chain cannon used on
insurgents
placing an IED. Range, 4,000 yards. 30mm chain cannon recoil
............
9,000# sending out an explosive projectile at up to 300 rounds per
minute.

Entertaining.

Steve "

So are you saying that we need to place chain cannons along every road
in Iraq?

Even if you could (which of course you can't), how would that fix the
problem?

TMT


I am confused. Are you asking if I said what I said or if I said something
different than what I said, or if what you heard is what you think I said,
or what I said is what you think you heard, or what I said wasn't what I
said, or what I said wasn't what I meant, or what I meant wasn't what I
said,

OR,

that I said, "Hey, have a look at this."

You can see the source of my confusion.

Steve

http://www.zippyvideos.com/202106025827375.html

speaks for itself

On Mon, 13 Mar 2006 21:15:55 -0600, F. George McDuffee
wrote:

The least bloody (and costly) "solution" is for the U.S. to
declare victory and come home after establishing three successor
states with good boundaries, and possibly arranging for the
exchange of populations. One for the Kurds, one for the Sunnis,
and one for the Shiites. Almost immediately, The Shiiets
[religious fundamentalists] will closely align with Iran, The
Sunnis [modernist/secular/fascist] will closely align with Syria,
and Kurdistan will be a major pain for Turkey.


Excellent synopsis

Gunner



"A prudent man foresees the difficulties ahead and prepares for them;
the simpleton goes blindly on and suffers the consequences."
- Proverbs 22:3

Good post George, thanks for taking the time.

- -
Rex B

F. George McDuffee wrote:
On 13 Mar 2006 16:53:40 -0800, "Too_Many_Tools"
wrote:
How would you approach this problem...any thoughts?
TMT
U.S. Spending Billions to Stop Iraq IEDs By CHARLES J. HANLEY,
snip
==========================
George Santayana built his career as historian on his
observation "those who will learn nothing from history are bound
to repeat it."

There are several good historical monographs available about the
German attempts to control the partisans in several areas they
"liberated," many of which were *NOT* under soviet/communist
control. Indeed after the Germans were driven out (and in some
cases while the Germans were ther), the first order of business
in several countries such as Yugoslavia and Greece was the
settling of accounts between the various national and
soviet/communist partisan groups, as their only point of
agreement was they did not like the Germans in their country.

One of the best is a study published by the Center for Military
History of the US Department of Defense. This was written by a
committee of high ranking German officers "who been there and
done that." This study offers penetrating insight into the
insolvable problems of attempting to control huge areas of
territory populated with warlike peoples, with insufficient
forces and unsuitable equipment, where all problems are
continually being exacerbated by arbitrary changes in policy and
endless counter-productive directives by the "High Command." In
the last analysis "pacification" was rendered insolvable because
of the contradictory requirements of an endless supply of passive
slave labor and the need to exterminate those who could/would not
be assimilated into this "new order" (which turned out to be the
majority of the population).

Ignoring questions of ethics the foundational problem in Iraq is
that Iraq is a geographical area and not a country. The British
spent 20 years after WWI attempting to create an "Iraq" country
and eventually declared victory and came home. Saddam Hussain
knew this vital fact and acted accordingly.

This is an important difference and not logic chopping because if
you have an actual country such as France or Czechoslovakia, the
people are more or less pacified, and not particularly restive.
The odds are good that you can "conquer" the country by simply
occupying the capital and using the existing governmental
structures to rule.

A geographical area is far different in that occupation of the
[nominal] capital, and especially if any reliance is placed on
the decorative appendages such as parliament, and the coercive
elements of government such as the party, secret police and armed
security services that were the actual "glue" that kept things
together and under control are disbanded.

From the historical record, pacification/"civilization" of a
geographic area *CAN* be accomplished, but the tactics required,
such as deliberate genocide by starvation and disease, are so
abhorrent to modern sensibilities that this is no longer an
option. It is also a slow process. For example, it required
about 200 years for the original people of North America to be
"pacified," and some Indian areas in rural Mexico are still only
marginally controlled by the "government." Unless the original
culture is totally erased, problems are sure to again arise, e.g.
Ireland and Wales.

Until and unless the US is willing to take traditional
pacification actions such as eliminating mobility and
communications such as the confiscation of automobiles, draconian
fuel rationing, elimination of civilian telephone and wireless,
draconian rationing of electricity, and food rationing to about
1,000 calories a day the problems will only get worse.

Additionally, severe reprisals must be imposed such as the
execution of random hostages from the incident location and the
demolition of their houses, and temporary reductions in
deliberately marginal fuel/food rations for every American/Allied
service person injured or killed, possibly on a sliding scale
based on rank and severity of injury. Say 5 for causing a
hangnail on a private to 100 for killing a general.

Given that the US people will not permit these historically
necessary actions, and even if the US government was willing,
implementation would prevent the economic exploitation of Iraq
and require the importation of "safe" labor for the petroleum
fields/refineries.

While the technology appears to be different, i.e. precision
guided munitions and pilotless drones v suicide bombers and IEDs,
in reality the asymmetry is totally different. The U.S. troops
are there because they were sent there, and are trying to impose
a foreign culture/economic structure while the "Indians" are
fighting for their lands and "way of life." As long as there are
suicide bombers there is no answer, short of a general
pre-emptive massacre, to the threat of IEDs.

The least bloody (and costly) "solution" is for the U.S. to
declare victory and come home after establishing three successor
states with good boundaries, and possibly arranging for the
exchange of populations. One for the Kurds, one for the Sunnis,
and one for the Shiites. Almost immediately, The Shiiets
[religious fundamentalists] will closely align with Iran, The
Sunnis [modernist/secular/fascist] will closely align with Syria,
and Kurdistan will be a major pain for Turkey.

Unfortunately, this is unlikely to happen until the president
after next [next one won't want to appear "soft" on terrorism no
matter which party wins], so we must anticipate at least another
6 years of carnage unless a foreign exchange/trade catastrophe
resulting in a hyper-inflation/depression intervenes.

The big winner will be the PRC as it will provide the consumer
goods and arms the new states want and it needs the oil. Look
for a gas pipe line. Counter-trade [direct swap of so much oil
for so many anti aircraft missiles] is likely, with the Euro
being used where required. Brasil is another likely winner with
lots of production capacity, big need for oil, and no historical
baggage in the area.

German philosophical insights / bon mots may prove more
explanatory of the current problem.

"How good bad music and bad reasons sound when we march against
an enemy. -- Friedrich Nietzsche"

"The only thing we learn from history is that we never learn from
history." -Hegel (1770-1831)


Unka George
(George McDuffee)

What a country calls its vital economic interests are not
the things which enable its citizens to live, but the things
which enable it to make war. Petrol is more likely than wheat
to be a cause of international conflict.
Simone Weil (1909-43), French philosopher, mystic.
«The Power of Words», in Nouveaux Cahiers (1 and 15 April 1937;
repr. in Selected Essays, ed. by Richard Rees, 1962)

F. George McDuffee wrote:


George Santayana built his career as historian on his
observation "those who will learn nothing from history are bound
to repeat it."

Unfortunately, learning from history does not prevent repeating it.

This is an important difference and not logic chopping because if
you have an actual country such as France or Czechoslovakia, the
people are more or less pacified, and not particularly restive.
The odds are good that you can "conquer" the country by simply
occupying the capital and using the existing governmental
structures to rule.

Obviously, Czechoslovakia is not a good example of an "actual country."

David

"
F. George McDuffee wrote:
George Santayana built his career as historian on his
observation "those who will learn nothing from history are bound
to repeat it."


Unfortunately, learning from history does not prevent repeating it.


This is an important difference and not logic chopping because if
you have an actual country such as France or Czechoslovakia, the
people are more or less pacified, and not particularly restive.
The odds are good that you can "conquer" the country by simply
occupying the capital and using the existing governmental
structures to rule.


Obviously, Czechoslovakia is not a good example of an "actual country."


David "


Obviously, Iraq is not a good example of an "actual country" either.

TMT

Too_Many_Tools wrote:
"
F. George McDuffee wrote:
George Santayana built his career as historian on his
observation "those who will learn nothing from history are bound
to repeat it."


Unfortunately, learning from history does not prevent repeating it.


This is an important difference and not logic chopping because if
you have an actual country such as France or Czechoslovakia, the
people are more or less pacified, and not particularly restive.
The odds are good that you can "conquer" the country by simply
occupying the capital and using the existing governmental
structures to rule.


Obviously, Czechoslovakia is not a good example of an "actual country."


David "


Obviously, Iraq is not a good example of an "actual country" either.

Actually, Iraq and Czechoslovakia are very similar. Both were an
artificial country imposed by outsiders on a geographic area with two or
more very diverse peoples.

"Actually, Iraq and Czechoslovakia are very similar. Both were an
artificial country imposed by outsiders on a geographic area with two
or
more very diverse peoples. "

That definition could be applied to Iowa and California also. ;)

My comment was commenting on how talking about fighting a war versus
fighting a war always differs...too bad we don't let authors fight
wars, the result would be fewer wars and better books.

TMT

Too_Many_Tools wrote:

Obviously, Czechoslovakia is not a good example of an "actual
country."


David "


Obviously, Iraq is not a good example of an "actual country"
either.

TMT

For now, though, Iraq exists, unlike Czechoslovakia.

David

1) --**** 'em; let's go home.
2) --Assuming we don't, the Humvee is an accident looking
for a place to happen. We should scrap them all and switch to something that
works, like one of the South African carriers that are specifically designed
to deal with these sort of threats.
--
"Steamboat Ed" Haas : Better an early adapter
Hacking the Trailing Edge! : than an early adopter..
http://www.nmpproducts.com/intro.htm
---Decks a-wash in a sea of words---

On 13 Mar 2006 16:53:40 -0800, "Too_Many_Tools"
wrote:

How would you approach this problem...any thoughts?

TMT

U.S. Spending Billions to Stop Iraq IEDs By CHARLES J. HANLEY,

The United States is pouring billions more dollars and fresh platoons
of experts into its campaign to "defeat IEDs," the roadside bombs
President Bush describes as threat No. 1 to Iraq's future.

We've done a good job of cleaning out the 'regular rats' that the
amateurs from other countries are running in to try and disrupt the
progress we've made.

The Islamic nations in the area are scared to death that a peaceful
and law-abiding representative form of government might get a toehold
in Iraq - when the terror nations' stated goal since the time of
Mohammed is to spread Islam and Sharia Law across the world, and kill
any infidels who oppose them.

And they won't listen to reason - "Can't we all just get along?"

We could not, can not, and will not 'Cut And Run' - we need to stay
till we get the Iraqis up and running their own country, and they can
root out and capture or kill the terrorists and handle it themselves.

If the Iraqi citizens are convinced that their country is
salvageable, they'll fight for it - they have already formed their own
"Neighborhood Watch" style groups to notify the military of terrorist
activities. And when it's in full swing the Iraqi military will show
up as the bombmakers are planting their device, and send them to meet
Allah a little earlier than planned.

Once the Iraqis have control of the country the IED's should start
to go away on their own, and the surviving terrorists will go back to
Syria Iran and Lebanon (among other places) where they came from.

Like it or not, Saddam was in gross violation of the cease-fire
terms from the "first half" of the Gulf War before the ink on the
agreement was even dry, and we showed incredible restraint in not
going back in there sooner. Now that we've got the *******s out of
power, we have to clean up the mess and not leave a power vacuum.

-- Bruce --

--
Bruce L. Bergman, Woodland Hills (Los Angeles) CA - Desktop
Electrician for Westend Electric - CA726700
5737 Kanan Rd. #359, Agoura CA 91301 (818) 889-9545
Spamtrapped address: Remove the python and the invalid, and use a net.

" We've done a good job of cleaning out the 'regular rats' that the
amateurs from other countries are running in to try and disrupt the
progress we've made.

The Islamic nations in the area are scared to death that a peaceful
and law-abiding representative form of government might get a toehold
in Iraq - when the terror nations' stated goal since the time of
Mohammed is to spread Islam and Sharia Law across the world, and kill
any infidels who oppose them.


And they won't listen to reason - "Can't we all just get along?"


We could not, can not, and will not 'Cut And Run' - we need to stay
till we get the Iraqis up and running their own country, and they can
root out and capture or kill the terrorists and handle it themselves.


If the Iraqi citizens are convinced that their country is
salvageable, they'll fight for it - they have already formed their own
"Neighborhood Watch" style groups to notify the military of terrorist
activities. And when it's in full swing the Iraqi military will show
up as the bombmakers are planting their device, and send them to meet
Allah a little earlier than planned.


Once the Iraqis have control of the country the IED's should start
to go away on their own, and the surviving terrorists will go back to
Syria Iran and Lebanon (among other places) where they came from.


Like it or not, Saddam was in gross violation of the cease-fire
terms from the "first half" of the Gulf War before the ink on the
agreement was even dry, and we showed incredible restraint in not
going back in there sooner. Now that we've got the *******s out of
power, we have to clean up the mess and not leave a power vacuum.


-- Bruce -- "

Whoa...who's been hitting the crack pipe?

Whether or not you have been paying attention Bruce, this war is not
going the way Baby Boy George promised.

"Cut and Run" is what America is good at aka Vietnam....that is after
billions of dollars and thousands of lives have been lost looking for
those WMDs that weren't.

And oh, isn't Osama Bin Forgotten is still laughing his ass off at
us.....


TMT

"Cut and Run" is what America is good at aka Vietnam....that is after
billions of dollars and thousands of lives have been lost looking for
those WMDs that weren't.

Talk about your slow learner. tsk

clue ----- Syria

"Rex B" wrote in message
...

"Cut and Run" is what America is good at aka Vietnam....that is after
billions of dollars and thousands of lives have been lost looking for
those WMDs that weren't.

Yep. They found the mass destruction and all the bodies, but no WMDs.

Ironic.

Steve

On Wed, 15 Mar 2006 07:09:34 -0800, "Steve B"
wrote:
"Rex B" wrote in message
...

"Cut and Run" is what America is good at aka Vietnam....that is after
billions of dollars and thousands of lives have been lost looking for
those WMDs that weren't.

Yep. They found the mass destruction and all the bodies, but no WMDs.

Ironic.

Of course not - Saddam got the vast majority of his Chemical and
Biological WMD capabilities out of the country in those "earthquake
relief" airlift flights to Syria. And he buried the rest - they've
got many big deserts and lots of laborers to do the work. And when
everything's buried, the last trench is used to get rid of most of the
witnesses...

Without a "treasure map" or a guide to show where they are, it could
be a while before these dumps surface.

We've found a lot of evidence that doesn't get properly covered in
the press - little bits of nuclear chemical and biological weaponry
and materials all over the place. Several small "Smoking Guns", just
not the huge ones where the liberal nay-sayers will have to agree that
they did in fact exist and were in fact there.

If Saddam has the empty chemical and biological artillery shells and
missiles on hand, tested and ready to go, it's no big trick to brew up
the 'fillings' for them. Safer to make the materials when needed,
rather than chance your stockpile leaking and killing your own people.

Unless you want to use them on your own people - ask the Kurds.

Oh, and that big stash consisting of several hundred tons of
unenriched and partially-enriched Uranium Oxide 'yellowcake' should
count as proof of intent to develop a nuclear weapons program at the
very least. But even though that's another provable "Smoking Gun",
again the liberal nay-sayers want to ignore any facts that do not fit
nicely within their preconceived notions.

I am not a hawk, but we can't hide in a corner and hope they leave
us alone - 9/11 proves that won't work. You try peaceful means first,
but sometimes war IS the answer, like it or don't.

-- Bruce --

" "Cut and Run" is what America is good at aka Vietnam....that is
after
billions of dollars and thousands of lives have been lost looking for
those WMDs that weren't.


Talk about your slow learner. tsk

clue ----- Syria "

Yeah, yeah...blame it on the neighbors.

REAL leaders would have expected for sympathic support from the
neighboring countries and would have prepared for it.

Instead we have...well, we don't have leaders, do we?

Once again the United States is being beaten by a third world country.

TMT

- -
Rex Burkheimer
WM Automotive
Fort Worth TX

Too_Many_Tools wrote:
" "Cut and Run" is what America is good at aka Vietnam....that is
after
billions of dollars and thousands of lives have been lost looking for
those WMDs that weren't.


Talk about your slow learner. tsk

clue ----- Syria "

Yeah, yeah...blame it on the neighbors.

REAL leaders would have expected for sympathic support from the
neighboring countries and would have prepared for it.

http://www.2la.org/syria/iraq-wmd.php

On 15 Mar 2006 08:59:20 -0800, "Too_Many_Tools"
wrote:
snip
Once again the United States is being beaten by a third world country.
snip
Its not the country -- its what was attempted.

As Townsend observed in his book "Up The Organization" "when you
attempt the impossible you are bound to fail." This can't be
revised no matter who signs off on the findings or directives.


Unka George
(George McDuffee)

What a country calls its vital economic interests are not
the things which enable its citizens to live, but the things
which enable it to make war. Petrol is more likely than wheat
to be a cause of international conflict.
Simone Weil (1909-43), French philosopher, mystic.
«The Power of Words», in Nouveaux Cahiers (1 and 15 April 1937;
repr. in Selected Essays, ed. by Richard Rees, 1962)

I would like to know how it is that nobody notices these fools burying
bombs in the middle of well traveled roads. If sombody was digging a
hole in my street in the middle of the night I might take the matter
into my own hands.
All these explosives were sent to syria and lebanon and now being sent
back to cause this mayhem.
SUCK THE PLACE DRY OF OIL. GET THE HELL OUT. IHAVE COMIC BOOKS WITH A
BETTER EXIT STRAGEGY.
MORONS

daniel peterman wrote:

I would like to know how it is that nobody notices these fools burying
bombs in the middle of well traveled roads. If sombody was digging a
hole in my street in the middle of the night I might take the matter
into my own hands.
All these explosives were sent to syria and lebanon and now being sent
back to cause this mayhem.
SUCK THE PLACE DRY OF OIL. GET THE HELL OUT. IHAVE COMIC BOOKS WITH A
BETTER EXIT STRAGEGY.
MORONS

"SUCK THE PLACE DRY OF OIL. GET THE HELL OUT"?
Sure you're not the moron?
That has been the US intent all along.

I am no moron sir. The only way to get out of this mess is to extract as
many useable products and let the various factions whittle away at each
other.
Option 2 is to get more kids on the ground and just start getting
vicious.
Option three is is to just say "the hell with it" and let these people
do what they have been doing since forever.
It is gonna happen anyway. Pick up our toys and the stuff that can cause
harm and as much oil as we can, and get outta there.
This invasion was a huge mistake.

On Wed, 15 Mar 2006 12:14:05 -0800, (daniel
peterman) wrote:

I would like to know how it is that nobody notices these fools burying
bombs in the middle of well traveled roads. If sombody was digging a
hole in my street in the middle of the night I might take the matter
into my own hands.
All these explosives were sent to syria and lebanon and now being sent
back to cause this mayhem.
SUCK THE PLACE DRY OF OIL. GET THE HELL OUT. IHAVE COMIC BOOKS WITH A
BETTER EXIT STRAGEGY.
MORONS

Daniel,
Do a google for _IED Defense_ here's a couple of links
that I found enlightening.

http://www.defense-update.com/features/du-3-04/IED.htm
http://globalguerrillas.typepad.com/...d_marketp.html

Might be that the nutron bomb could be usefull afteralll

ED


----== Posted via Newsfeeds.Com - Unlimited-Unrestricted-Secure Usenet News==----
http://www.newsfeeds.com The #1 Newsgroup Service in the World! 120,000+ Newsgroups
----= East and West-Coast Server Farms - Total Privacy via Encryption =----

On Wed, 15 Mar 2006 12:14:05 -0800, (daniel
peterman) wrote:

I would like to know how it is that nobody notices these fools burying
bombs in the middle of well traveled roads. If sombody was digging a
hole in my street in the middle of the night I might take the matter
into my own hands.
All these explosives were sent to syria and lebanon and now being sent
back to cause this mayhem.
SUCK THE PLACE DRY OF OIL. GET THE HELL OUT. IHAVE COMIC BOOKS WITH A
BETTER EXIT STRAGEGY.
MORONS

Exit strategy?

Please remind us all of the exit strategy of the following Democrat
military actions

WW2
Vietnam
Bosnia
Haiti
Somalia

Ill be waiting with bated breath for your citations.

One should note btw..we are STILL in Germany, Japan, Bosnia, Haiti and
a host of other places.

Gunner


"The importance of morality is that people behave themselves even if
nobody's watching. There are not enough cops and laws to replace
personal morality as a means to produce a civilized society. Indeed,
the police and criminal justice system are the last desperate line of
defense for a civilized society. Unfortunately, too many of us see
police, laws and the criminal justice system as society's first line
of defense." --Walter Williams

Gunner wrote:
On Wed, 15 Mar 2006 12:14:05 -0800, (daniel
peterman) wrote:

I would like to know how it is that nobody notices these fools burying
bombs in the middle of well traveled roads. If sombody was digging a
hole in my street in the middle of the night I might take the matter
into my own hands.
All these explosives were sent to syria and lebanon and now being sent
back to cause this mayhem.
SUCK THE PLACE DRY OF OIL. GET THE HELL OUT. IHAVE COMIC BOOKS WITH A
BETTER EXIT STRAGEGY.
MORONS

Exit strategy?

Please remind us all of the exit strategy of the following Democrat
military actions

WW2
Vietnam
Bosnia
Haiti
Somalia

Ill be waiting with bated breath for your citations.

One should note btw..we are STILL in Germany, Japan, Bosnia, Haiti and
a host of other places.

I'd note that the only place listed where we DID have an exit strategy
was Viet Nam

Gunner I know you are well schooled in this field, but how the hell did
we wade into this mess unless there was
(1) a way out, or (2) some economic gain?
People can spin conflicts whatever way they choose to but we all know
it's about oil. You know that, most of Taft knows that and there ain't
no gettin' around that the world knows that.
You did your tours. I did not. And I respect that.
I don't have the best answer but I do have some ideas.

"Too_Many_Tools" wrote in message
oups.com...
How would you approach this problem...any thoughts?

TMT



OK, I've just got to ask all those opposed to our involvement in Iraq.

Given you have just been sworn in as President of these United States.

Given you have full support of Congress. I realize that one is really a
stretch but let's just say this is a political science test.

What actions would you take?

Note - answers requiring the existence of the Easy Button or flux-capacitor
equipped DeLoreans are invalid and get an automatic grade of "F".

Steve.

In article ,
"SteveF" wrote:

"Too_Many_Tools" wrote in message
oups.com...
How would you approach this problem...any thoughts?

TMT



OK, I've just got to ask all those opposed to our involvement in Iraq.

Given you have just been sworn in as President of these United States.

Given you have full support of Congress. I realize that one is really a
stretch but let's just say this is a political science test.

What actions would you take?

Since the invasion was wrong, put Saddam back on his throne and exit.
It's never too late to do the right think. Saddam might be scum but
Bush's 'solution' was worse.

--
Free men own guns, slaves don't
www.geocities.com/CapitolHill/5357/

"OK, I've just got to ask all those opposed to our involvement in Iraq.


Given you have just been sworn in as President of these United States.

Given you have full support of Congress. I realize that one is really
a
stretch but let's just say this is a political science test.

What actions would you take?

Note - answers requiring the existence of the Easy Button or
flux-capacitor
equipped DeLoreans are invalid and get an automatic grade of "F".

Steve. "

Well...house arrest for those who lied to the American public would
lead the list.

Then issue a schedule of when we are coming home....

Whether or not we turn and run or do organized retreat...either way we
are leaving Iraq.

I think you would be surprised how serious the other parties would
become in negotiations.

Then I would require the United States to use only the energy it can
produce...no outside oil.

Yeah it will cost money but have you looked at the national deficit
lately? The sooner the better.

Then I would stop all outsourcing...and make "buy American" law.

How am I doing so far?

TMT