Tuesday, March 27, 2007

Pulling Out Under Fire

I was visiting the Democratic Underground where they are actually having an intelligent discussion of the logistics of a pull out. The thread is kind of short (probably not many military experts at DU) but one commenter cuts right to the chase:
Moving the initial invasion force took three months, and nobody was shooting at us, and Halliburton started with the bases I believe six months in advance of intial forces

Pulling out also involves force protecion, since it will be under fire.
Let me look at my military dictionary for "pulling out under fire" and see what I come up with. I come up with retreat and defeat.

Not a surprise.

Cross Posted at Power and Control
at

4 comments:

  1. DavidCyrus10:04 PM

    Actually, your military dictionary should have at least mentioned that pulling out or retreating under fire is a classic tactic of guerrilla warfare.

    However, if you really do want to remain under fire for the time being (even though more sensible options are available) can you at least speak to the idea of when you would plan to pull out? Are you simply envisioning an ongoing struggle with no end? Might it be five, or ten, or twenty years down the road? In short, is there any plan whatsoever to do anything other than continue to fortify the soldiers over there, rather than offer them a ticket home?

    ReplyDelete
  2. Reliapundit11:31 PM

    david:

    when al qaeda retreats under fire we can withdraw most of our troops - keeping several brigades (if the iraqi govt reqsts) as back up for a few decades as we did in europe and south korea and japan.

    ReplyDelete
  3. Reliapundit11:32 PM

    this is a multi decade multi generational war which has already been waged for 1000 years.

    so don't set artificial deadlines.

    that's no way to win.

    ReplyDelete
  4. M. Simon3:05 PM

    You win wars by being able to fight one day longer than your enemies. However long that takes.

    ReplyDelete