Rumsfeld's 'Slog' Already Seen in Iraq

[NNN0LHI]

http://story.news.yahoo.com/news?tmpl=story&u=/ap/20031024/ap_on_re_mi_ea/iraq_hard_slog&cid=540&ncid=1480

BAGHDAD, Iraq - The "long, hard slog" foreseen by Donald H. Rumsfeld is already playing out in Iraq — in the tallies of attacks, in the toll of American dead, in the cold eyes of many Iraqis.

Statistics tell one story: In recent weeks, the daily average of attacks on U.S. forces has stepped up to 25 or 26, and even to 35 on one day, from around 20.

Those Iraqi eyes tell a deeper one, in such places as Fallujah, where 82nd Airborne Division troops came under attack every day this week, and where the main crossroads is adorned with graffiti proclaiming, "Fallujah will be the graveyard of Americans."

"Whenever they enter Fallujah, they'll be attacked," Assou Nadim Hamid told a reporter. The fact that he was a policeman may give Americans some insight into the quandary their forces face in parts of Iraq.

more

[nadinbrzezinski]

1. my, my we already lost

Iraq, that is clear to any body looking at this

[snippy]

17. One man's slog is another man's quagmire.

[loudnclear]

2. You know, Saddam said this was going to happen.

Our government believed everyone but Saddam and what he said seems to be true. No WMDs, American soldiers would die in the streets of Iraq one at a time, and America was using pretense to invade Iraq to further Israeli plans for the ME and for taking over Iraqi oil. So far, Saddam seems to have a better record of telling the truth than Bush.

[lefty_mcduff]

3. His poll numbers are better too.

n/t

[cliss]

4. Hard to believe, isn't it?

that a small country of 22 million people, ravaged by internal strife for decades, impoverished by UN sanctions, and subsequently blasted by US forces...could ever contend with the US.

But that is exactly what the objective Stratfor.com website said. About the insurgents and their guerrilla tactics, they wrote, "it's a battle they just might win". They just might win against the mighty, imperial US. Not by sheer power and nuclear capabilities, but by other means. By grass-roots, individual strategies, fought "man to man".

We lost in Vietnam. And we just might lose in Iraq.

[NNN0LHI]

5. We didn't do too hot in Somalia or Lebanon either n/t

[leesa]

6. Of course we will lose. We lost the day we invaded a defenseless country

The entire world knows we behaved immorally and they will work against us, as they should.

[PATRICK]

13. another vaporizing American myth

To wage war like the bad guys you need more than the quick massacres of blitz and air bombings, you need hard brutal dominance on the ground. The theory was that the psychological mask of dominance- if quickly imposed with great show- would lessen the need for the real thing.

But as lethal as the weapons, as invincible and as well trained(in war) as the soldiers are, the US cannot have what it takes to REALLY conquer an unyielding people. And are not allowed to do what it takes to win them over as friends and equals.

We went in like Jekyll and Hyde. Jekyll was supposed to immediately pacify the grateful peons but this administration has no capacity for even understanding what the good side of America the "Liberator" is all about. Democracy, rebuilding, goodwill, all a sham at the top and fragile to the stubborn resistance America as Mr. Hyde could not crush.

Not good enough and not "bad" enough. ALL the sham lies exposed to encourage ANY enemies of America or Amerika as failure, weakness, the bleeding of a dumb giant. It's lose-lose when insanity(Right wing) thinks otherwise and pushes the sane too far.

As in Vietnam only worse, because we were cut more slack for more brutality for a much longer time. ANY decent variation of Ghandiism(unfortunately a difficult import for the ME) could walk the US out the country. Any result of this war would be bad and the "empire" a short lived sad joke on the historical stage with actors who are just that actors- chickenhawk flunkies of profit margin outlaws. Theuy even match up poorly with the thugocracy of the dismal fantastic failures of the REALLY brutal 3rd Reich.

By now it would be enough to be a travesty and bitterly opposed by the US public, but as before, progress to the awakening is resisted and impeded on all sides. SO the unnecessary futile deaths when the end is fairly certain. Such unfortunately is the nature of all lost wars.

The WH has squandered all of our mythical capital and we are left with money going down the drain, a world in crisis that hates the US regime, a semi-potent military crippled by absurd hypocrisy(thankfully, or hundreds of thousands would be dead by now)weapons we cannot use, terrorism we cannot defend against, liberties we are afraid to protect, and the very antithesis of all ideals and what it takes to survive either brutally or idealistically.

[NNN0LHI]

14. I think you are correct

We either can't, or won't be brutal enough to actually win, but we will manage to be just brutal enough to make them hate the hell out of us, and cause us to lose.

Don

[snippy]

15. Very true.

[Rose Siding]

7. Did anyone see this?

snip>
Just this week, 82nd Airborne soldiers were accused of coldly shooting an Iraqi detainee dead, a charge disputed by the division, and were caught on camera beating a truck driver in Fallujah.
end snip>

I don't know if that made it through the new 'good news' filter.

[Spazito]

9. Geez, I saw the clip of them beating the truck driver on Canadian TV...

the anchor didn't refer to it, just showed it.

[Ardee]

8. Rumsfeld's own words condemn this administration

http://www.msnbc.com/news/984733.asp?vts=102420031538

Eleanor Clift, Newsweeks rather perceptive editorialist writes:

The fact that Rumsfeld dares to say the administration lacks “the metrics to measure” progress in fighting terrorism is the most chilling aspect of his frosty analysis. “It seems the harder we work, the behinder we get,” he says. They can put that on the administration’s tombstone.

[0007]

10. Donald Rumsfield's name

is purposely spelled with an (i) - that stands for idiot.

[ElsewheresDaughter]

11. Donald Slogger Rumsfeld

[goforit]

18. And we all thought Bush was dumb....LOL!!!! Cheney/ Rummy surpasses

him and now deserve first place in the DUNCE award!!!

[0rganism]

12. Hahaha! Nothing damns these jackals like that rare moment of candor

Rummy just couldn't resist his natural tendency to pessimism, especially couched in sarcastic sloggery. I'll sure miss his cranky attitude, cos it belies the whole charade that is the misadministration.

[snippy]

16. "sarcastic sloggery" is excellent.

[realFedUp]

19. slogs, swamps and foggy bottoms

...the current administration's foreign policy

[mistertrickster]

20. Did anyone see William Safire on PBS Newshour? He said "slog" means

to attack unrelentingly. So when we "slog through the mud," we are attacking the mud unrelentingly, apparently.

This from a language pedant who writes long-winded articles on the "misuse" of English in a school-marmish tone.

The spin would make a gyroscope dizzy . . .

[GAspnes]

22. that *is* what it means

Main Entry: 1slog
Pronunciation: 'släg
Function: verb
Inflected Form(s): slogged; slog*ging
Etymology: origin unknown
Date: 1824
transitive senses
1 : to hit hard : BEAT
2 : to plod (one's way) perseveringly especially against difficulty
intransitive senses
1 : to plod heavily : TRAMP <slogged through the snow>
2 : to work hard and steadily : PLUG
- slog*ger noun

[The Stranger]

23. I had reached a point where I no longer felt that there was "Evil" in the

world.

And then along came Bill Safire.

[Skittles]

21. ya know, I saw Rumsfeld on TV . .

I SWEAR HE SAID SLUG AND NOT SLOG. HE SAID *SLUG* AND MORE THAN ONCE.