WHY is it TAKING so DARNED LONG?

[Werewolf]

Dec 7, 1941 - Aug 9, 1945 is 3 years and 9 months.

Sep 11, 2001 - present  is 4 years 4 months.

I don't get it. We defeated two major nations both of whom at the onset of WWII had superior technology, better training, equipment and numericly superior forces to the USA. Wiped 'em out. Annhilated them and successfully installed governments of our choice and design.

Fast forward to the 21'st century. It's been more than 4 years and we have yet to defeat a bunch of semi-literate religious fanatics with homemade bombs and cheap rifles.

I just don't get it.

Someone explain it to me - PLEASE!

NOTE: Not a troll - I've got some ideas about the differences between WWII and WWIII but can't really articulate them right now. More a feeling than a thought through analysis. I think this could be an interesting discussion.

[charby]

Well in WWII  we pretty much blanket bombed anything we wanted too, lots of civilian casualties from firebombing cities. I know this is vague but you get the idea. Remember it took 2 nuclear bombs to get Japan to surrender.

If tried the same tactics the left media would be screaming like no other.

[280plus]

A lot of it has to do with the enemy hiding in amongst the non-combatants. We can't just go in and bomb them to oblivion and then roll tanks over what's left. Their strategy is to wear us down and makes us give up. We can't let them do that. Just my $0.02 of course...

[The Rabbi]

Compare this with other "small" wars and we're doing pretty well.  Vietnam took 10 years.  I think the US was in the Philippnes a whole lot longer.  We were in China for like 50 years.

[K Frame]

Uhm...

Mainly because during WW II we knew exactly who the enemy was, where his military infrastructure was, and where his military assets were.

How long did the British fight the IRA?

How long did the French fight the Algerian sepratists?

The answer to both of those questions is DECADES.

[Moondoggie]

I think a more accurate comparison would be the Revolutionary War...us hiding behind trees and rocks shooting at the nice neat lines of troops in those eye catching red uniforms.  Although we did actually engage the Brits in some "stand-up" European type battles.  Kinda like the BG's in Iraq fought in Fallujah.

When you look at the number of suicide bombers killing indiscriminetly, IED's, kidnapping/beheading, etc...you have to recognize that these folks might as well be from a different planet when it comes to their thought processes.

We won Afghanistan pretty handily, compared to the Russians who got their hinder handed to them by the same folks.  The Brits also got whipped there in the 19th century.  Guess it helps when you've got that "Hearts & Minds" thing working on your side.

[Gewehr98]

This is WWIII?

Really?

You're kidding, right?

A world-scale conflict, with Western democracy under attack by a mobilized nation or three with a dictator at the helm.  Sure.  Ok.

Me, I think it's more like forcing the KKK ass-pimples to go underground or give up and disband entirely.  It takes time and perseverence.

[TarpleyG]

Current news media and their abiltity to inundate the soccer moms with horrible images of war.  Said soccer moms raise a stink so now the people who should be fighting the war can't and instead a bunch of REMF are left to try and do it the PC way.  I have said it before and will say it again--warfare is a very private matter and the media needs to be run off post-haste, else suffer the ramifications.

Greg

[K Frame]

"Although we did actually engage the Brits in some "stand-up" European type battles."

That's actually how we fought the vast majority of the Revolutionary War.

Starting at Bunker Hill and going on through Yorktown, virtually every battle was fought in European style.

[Moondoggie]

I agree 100% about the media being imbeded in units engaged in combat.  

It's just something that the general population should not see.

I think it violates the privacy rights of the soldiers.

[Werewolf]

This is WWIII?

Really?

You're kidding, right?

Actually no...

I believe that what we are experiencing right now is the initial stage of what will eventually become a full blown knock down drag out war.

The WEST against the MIDDLE-EAST. I imagine that Chna and the Far-East will take a pass. Russia - could go either way. India - neutral or pro-west. South America - neutral. As long as it's just terrorism the west will continue in the mode we're in now. As soon as oil starts running short though, in about 20 or so years, it will heat up and terrorism and radical islam will be the excuse the pols use to get it going.

Absent pressure from oil shortages there is still the fundamental culture clash between Islam and the rest of the world's cultures. We may be enlightened and tolerant but evenutally, yes eventually, even the enlightened WEST will get fed up with the violence and one way tolerance. At that point it'll be all she wrote - for them or us.

One way or the other, either the WEST or the MIDDLE-EAST will suffer some very radical and forcefully imposed cultural changes.

[Guest]

How long after we invaded Germany did we mantain a military presence in the country? How about Japan? Oh, you mean were still there 60 years later?

[Standing Wolf]

We are, indeed, in a world war. It's between civilization and its avowed enemies. Lots of people energetically pretend otherwise, but their pretenses don't change the fact.

We think it's a land war in Asia.

Indeed, that's exactly what it is, although fighting it is tantamount to letting the enemy choose the battlefield and methods.

Land wars in Asia have a nasty way of lasting nearly forever and costing a great many American lives. We seem not to have learned the obvious.

[Pb]

We lost tens of thousands of soldiers in WW2, and drafted huge numbers of soliders.  We have lost a tiny fraction of that in the Afgan and Iraq wars, and have drafted no one.  There is no comparision of the efforts put forth between these wars.

[Werewolf]

We lost tens of thousands of soldiers in WW2, and drafted huge numbers of soliders.  We have lost a tiny fraction of that in the Afgan and Iraq wars, and have drafted no one.  There is no comparision of the efforts put forth between these wars.

So then the difference is that in WWII we really meant it but don't now?

[richyoung]

Dec 7, 1941 - Aug 9, 1945 is 3 years and 9 months.

Sep 11, 2001 - present  is 4 years 4 months.

I don't get it. We defeated two major nations both of whom at the onset of WWII had superior technology, better training, equipment and numericly superior forces to the USA. Wiped 'em out. Annhilated them and successfully installed governments of our choice and design.

Fast forward to the 21'st century. It's been more than 4 years and we have yet to defeat a bunch of semi-literate religious fanatics with homemade bombs and cheap rifles.

I just don't get it.

Someone explain it to me - PLEASE!

POP QUIZ:  when did U.S. troops leave Germany and Italy after World War II?

(Hint: they are still there...)

When did U.S. forces leave Japan?

(Hint: they are still there...)


...seems to me its been 61 years, and apparently, we still haven't finished the job..

[toro]

Werewolf
We mean it all right it is a different kind of war.  These people hide in their places of worship and behind the skirts of their women.  Except when they can talk their children into blowing up their enemies.  They are really cowards if you ask me.  Well, at least we know it is not the last war because the last war will involve every country against Israel.

Has anyone noticed that Germany and France are getting a little nervous about Iran trying to get nuclear bombs?  Has anyone read the Bible about Armageddon?  I am reading a book called Countdown to Armageddon the Final Battle and Beyond by Charles Ryrie it makes you stop and think about Bible prophecy.
Revelation 19:10
And I fell at his feet to worship him. And he said unto me, See thou do it not: I am thy fellowservant, and of thy brethren that have the testimony of Jesus: worship God: for the testimony of Jesus is the spirit of prophecy.  And I saw heaven opened, and behold a white horse; and he that sat upon him was called Faithful and True, and in righteousness he doth judge and make war.

-----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

The Bible says that Jesus will return to save Israel even though everyone is against Israel.  the description in the Bible sounds like a nuclear bomb to me.

2 Peter 3:10
But the day of the Lord will come as a thief in the night; in the which the heavens shall pass away with a great noise, and the elements shall melt with fervent heat, the earth also and the works that are therein shall be burned up.
and
Ezekiel 38:14to16
On that day when My people Israel are living securely, will you not know it?  You will come from your place out of the remote parts of the north (Russia?), You and many peoples with you (Muslim nations?), all of them riding on horses, a great assembly and a mighty army; and you will come up against My people Israel like a cloud to cover the land.  It shall come about in the last days that I will bring you against My land, so that the nations may know Me when I am sanctified through you before their eyes, O Gog.

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
None of this has happened.  This is for the future so it is yet to come.


                                     Mrs. Toro


===
Daniel 8:26
 "The vision of the evenings and mornings that has been given you is true, but seal up the vision, for it concerns the distant future."

[K Frame]

"So then the difference is that in WWII we really meant it but don't now?"

Swing and a miss.

In World War II our enemies (Germany, Japan, Italy were the major ones) had roughly 20 million or so men under arms.

[richyoung]

It's NOT taking so long - ever hear of the "Hundred Years War"?  OR the Cold war, for that matter - (which got pretty darn hot at various times and places....)

[The Rabbi]

We lost tens of thousands of soldiers in WW2, and drafted huge numbers of soliders.  We have lost a tiny fraction of that in the Afgan and Iraq wars, and have drafted no one.  There is no comparision of the efforts put forth between these wars.

So then the difference is that in WWII we really meant it but don't now?

Yes.  This war has actually been just a stunt.  Rumsfeld got bored with his job and Bush decided the country needed a little entertainment that would outdo presidential blow jobs in the oval office, so they cooked up this madcap scheme.
We have spent billions of dollars and thousands of lives on this little joke, never really intending to harm anyone.  Who knew Saddam would surrender?