<?xml version="1.0" encoding="UTF-8"?><rss version="2.0" xmlns:content="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/content/" xmlns:dc="http://purl.org/dc/elements/1.1/" xmlns:atom="http://www.w3.org/2005/Atom" xmlns:sy="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/syndication/" > <channel><title>Comments on: Who Gets More: Afghanistan or Iraq</title> <atom:link href="http://www.dodbuzz.com/2008/07/18/who-gets-more-afghanistan-or-iraq/feed/" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml" /><link>http://www.dodbuzz.com/2008/07/18/who-gets-more-afghanistan-or-iraq/</link> <description>Online Defense and Acquisition Journal</description> <lastBuildDate>Thu, 09 Feb 2012 16:16:23 +0000</lastBuildDate> <sy:updatePeriod>hourly</sy:updatePeriod> <sy:updateFrequency>1</sy:updateFrequency> <generator>http://wordpress.org/?v=3.3.1</generator> <item><title>By: LEON HOUSTON</title><link>http://www.dodbuzz.com/2008/07/18/who-gets-more-afghanistan-or-iraq/#comment-969</link> <dc:creator>LEON HOUSTON</dc:creator> <pubDate>Mon, 18 Aug 2008 20:16:00 +0000</pubDate> <guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.dodbuzz.com/?p=242#comment-969</guid> <description>Afghanistan is closer to Russia. Let&#039;s steal the opium money! Conventional warfare is out the window.</description> <content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Afghanistan is closer to Russia. Let’s steal the opium money! Conventional warfare is out the window.</p> ]]></content:encoded> </item> <item><title>By: Cole</title><link>http://www.dodbuzz.com/2008/07/18/who-gets-more-afghanistan-or-iraq/#comment-391</link> <dc:creator>Cole</dc:creator> <pubDate>Mon, 21 Jul 2008 17:42:10 +0000</pubDate> <guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.dodbuzz.com/?p=242#comment-391</guid> <description>Believe these articles shed a bit more light on what happened in Afghanistan. Most of the 9 KIA were in the vicinity of an OP. This is the second time 173rd Airborne Brigade experienced heavy action in this general area.http://www.stripes.com/article.asp?section=104&amp;article=63479&amp;archive=truehttp://www.strategypage.com/htmw/htinf/articles/20080721.aspx</description> <content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Believe these articles shed a bit more light on what happened in Afghanistan. Most of the 9 KIA were in the vicinity of an OP. This is the second time 173rd Airborne Brigade experienced heavy action in this general area.</p><p><a href="http://www.stripes.com/article.asp?section=104&#038;article=63479&#038;archive=true" rel="nofollow">http://www.stripes.com/article.asp?section=104&amp;article=63479&amp;archive=true</a></p><p><a href="http://www.strategypage.com/htmw/htinf/articles/20080721.aspx" rel="nofollow">http://www.strategypage.com/htmw/htinf/articles/20080721.aspx</a></p> ]]></content:encoded> </item> <item><title>By: Joseph B. Cryer</title><link>http://www.dodbuzz.com/2008/07/18/who-gets-more-afghanistan-or-iraq/#comment-390</link> <dc:creator>Joseph B. Cryer</dc:creator> <pubDate>Mon, 21 Jul 2008 13:09:55 +0000</pubDate> <guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.dodbuzz.com/?p=242#comment-390</guid> <description>I really like the new Naval Officer Uniform.I think the key in Iraq is for the Central Government to assume the debt of the provinces (if that is possible).Similar approach to how Alexander Hamilton got the individual States to fall in order after the Revolutionary War.We all had a common interest in the Countries credit health &amp; growth, etc.Also, this did lead for us to have the credit to purchase of the Louisiana Purchase from France. Maybe one day Iraq will just buy Syria. :-)Obviously we will have dissent from some parties because of personal self interests.Once implemented though this will dramatically stabilize the region and could allow us to transfer some resources (with moderation) between Iraq to Afghanistan.</description> <content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>I really like the new Naval Officer Uniform.</p><p>I think the key in Iraq is for the Central Government to assume the debt of the provinces (if that is possible).</p><p>Similar approach to how Alexander Hamilton got the individual States to fall in order after the Revolutionary War.</p><p>We all had a common interest in the Countries credit health &amp; growth, etc.</p><p>Also, this did lead for us to have the credit to purchase of the Louisiana Purchase from France. Maybe one day Iraq will just buy Syria. :-)</p><p>Obviously we will have dissent from some parties because of personal self interests.</p><p>Once implemented though this will dramatically stabilize the region and could allow us to transfer some resources (with moderation) between Iraq to Afghanistan.</p> ]]></content:encoded> </item> <item><title>By: chris</title><link>http://www.dodbuzz.com/2008/07/18/who-gets-more-afghanistan-or-iraq/#comment-381</link> <dc:creator>chris</dc:creator> <pubDate>Sun, 20 Jul 2008 11:41:14 +0000</pubDate> <guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.dodbuzz.com/?p=242#comment-381</guid> <description>First and formost Iraq is not &quot;last year&#039;s&quot; war. To simply discount the US lives lost, and capital put into getting that country stable again is ridiculous. We must complete what &quot;we started&quot; period. Our crediability has a world power is at stake and to cut and run dilutes this notion big time. More important we need to be &quot;proactive and stop being reactive&quot; and in my opinion this is exactly what we are doing with Afghanistan. We are relying so much on techno answers that we have failed to truly understand how this time of war must be approached. Second, sending more troops does not always equate to a road to victory. They way we are using our forces are ineffective in this theater .commanders are more concerned with risk factors, constraits and ridiculous rules, in essence their is a general lack of aggressivness in theater (based off my experience in OIF/OEF). Third, if Afghanistan has not shown us the lack of total committment of NATO and its usefulness I don&#039;t know what will. Look at the reporting NATO is somewhat part of the problem. This organization needs to step up to the plate and show its capable of combating modern-day threats!Finally, the strategy is flawed. Think back to the beginning of the fight, it was being conducted they way it should have been as &quot;unconventional warfare&quot;. In less then 12 months this changed and the &quot;big army&quot; got involved and look at where we are now. Historical speaking and especially in this country using conventional methods has not worked the terrain is too unforgiving, populous bent on tribal issues, ideology and the constant influx of fighers make it very difficult. The fact that in both OIF/OEF SF does not own the theater is ridiculous. essentially SOF has to ask the &quot;battlspace owner&quot; for permission to operate in his area. This is not a way to prosecute this type of fight! The bottom line is more troops will go to Afghanistan regardless of what the strategy is because in Afghanistan we are offically at &quot;POLITIC&quot; not war. My question is where are they going to get them from. Those that make policy failed to realize one crucial item. Troops are getting tired and i don&#039;t care what they say, its the truth. So before we go off on &quot;knee jerk reactions&quot;, how about developing an effective strategy and including people who actually know how to fight guerilla warfare!</description> <content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>First and formost Iraq is not “last year’s” war. To simply discount the US lives lost, and capital put into getting that country stable again is ridiculous. We must complete what “we started” period. Our crediability has a world power is at stake and to cut and run dilutes this notion big time. More important we need to be “proactive and stop being reactive” and in my opinion this is exactly what we are doing with Afghanistan. We are relying so much on techno answers that we have failed to truly understand how this time of war must be approached.</p><p>Second, sending more troops does not always equate to a road to victory. They way we are using our forces are ineffective in this theater .commanders are more concerned with risk factors, constraits and ridiculous rules, in essence their is a general lack of aggressivness in theater (based off my experience in OIF/OEF).</p><p>Third, if Afghanistan has not shown us the lack of total committment of NATO and its usefulness I don’t know what will. Look at the reporting NATO is somewhat part of the problem. This organization needs to step up to the plate and show its capable of combating modern-day threats!</p><p>Finally, the strategy is flawed. Think back to the beginning of the fight, it was being conducted they way it should have been as “unconventional warfare”. In less then 12 months this changed and the “big army” got involved and look at where we are now. Historical speaking and especially in this country using conventional methods has not worked the terrain is too unforgiving, populous bent on tribal issues, ideology and the constant influx of fighers make it very difficult. The fact that in both OIF/OEF SF does not own the theater is ridiculous. essentially SOF has to ask the “battlspace owner” for permission to operate in his area. This is not a way to prosecute this type of fight!</p><p>The bottom line is more troops will go to Afghanistan regardless of what the strategy is because in Afghanistan we are offically at “POLITIC” not war. My question is where are they going to get them from. Those that make policy failed to realize one crucial item. Troops are getting tired and i don’t care what they say, its the truth. So before we go off on “knee jerk reactions”, how about developing an effective strategy and including people who actually know how to fight guerilla warfare!</p> ]]></content:encoded> </item> <item><title>By: eliana</title><link>http://www.dodbuzz.com/2008/07/18/who-gets-more-afghanistan-or-iraq/#comment-357</link> <dc:creator>eliana</dc:creator> <pubDate>Fri, 18 Jul 2008 20:20:10 +0000</pubDate> <guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.dodbuzz.com/?p=242#comment-357</guid> <description>Obama and McCain finally found something to agree on: Afghanistan is where the real war&#039;s at! While McCain still wants to fight in Iraq some more, Obama thinks Iraq is totally last year&#039;s war and we should just throw everything we have at Afghanistan. Regardless of what they think of Iraq, the verdict is in. Afghanistan is the war to watch!How must Iraq feel to be yesterday&#039;s quagmire? If only these two chaotic regions could talk... http://www.236.com/news/2008/07/17/if_they_imd_iraq_and_afghanist_7775.php</description> <content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Obama and McCain finally found something to agree on: Afghanistan is where the real war’s at! While McCain still wants to fight in Iraq some more, Obama thinks Iraq is totally last year’s war and we should just throw everything we have at Afghanistan. Regardless of what they think of Iraq, the verdict is in. Afghanistan is the war to watch!</p><p>How must Iraq feel to be yesterday’s quagmire? If only these two chaotic regions could talk…<br /> <a href="http://www.236.com/news/2008/07/17/if_they_imd_iraq_and_afghanist_7775.php" rel="nofollow">http://www.236.com/news/2008/07/17/if_they_imd_iraq_and_afghanist_7775.php</a></p> ]]></content:encoded> </item> </channel> </rss>
<!-- Performance optimized by W3 Total Cache. Learn more: http://www.w3-edge.com/wordpress-plugins/

Minified using apc
Page Caching using apc (User agent is rejected)
Database Caching using apc
Object Caching 651/652 objects using apc
Content Delivery Network via images.dodbuzz.com

Served from: dodbuzz.com @ 2012-02-09 11:27:20 -->
