PDA

View Full Version : Dammit. This War, This Government



Kathianne
06-11-2007, 09:56 PM
How fu can it get? Seems no limits:

http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2007/06/08/AR2007060802405.html


Improvised Explosive Defeat?

By David Ignatius
Sunday, June 10, 2007; B07

The photographs gathered by The Post each month in a gallery called Faces of the Fallen are haunting. The soldiers are so young, enlisted men and women mostly, usually dressed in the uniforms they wore in Iraq and Afghanistan. What's striking is that most of them were killed by roadside bombs known as improvised explosive devices, or IEDs.

The United States is losing the war in Iraq because it cannot combat these makeshift weapons. An army with unimaginable firepower is being driven out by guerrillas armed with a crude arsenal of explosives and blasting caps, triggered by cellphones and garage-door openers.

This is Gulliver's torment, circa 2007. We have thrown our money and technology at the problem, with limited effect. In 2004 the Pentagon created a special task force called the Joint IED Defeat Organization (or JIEDDO, in Pentagon-ese). It has spent $6.3 billion and assembled a staff of nearly 400, but every day more of our brave young people die, and we seem unable to stop it.

"Once the bomb is made, it's too late," says Rep. Ellen Tauscher, a member of the House Armed Services Committee who has studied the IED problem. She says the best hope is to disrupt the money and supplies that allow the bombs to be constructed.

...

Someday, perhaps, the Pentagon will track and target bombers by identifying biological tags -- smells or DNA traces that are unique signatures. Someday, we will be able to examine the microbes on an insurgent's skin or in his gut to find out if he was trained in Iran or the Bekaa Valley or Afghanistan. But in a world with an ever-expanding supply of suicide bombers, will such technology make any difference?

The insurgents who kill our young soldiers are ruthless, but we have sometimes been cautious in our response. Take the question of targeting bomb makers: There may be an unlimited supply of explosives in Iraq, but there is not an unlimited supply of people who know how to wire the detonators. In 2004, CIA operatives in Iraq believed that they had identified the signatures of 11 bomb makers. They proposed a diabolical -- but potentially effective -- sabotage program that would have flooded Iraq with booby-trapped detonators designed to explode in the bomb makers' hands. But the CIA general counsel's office said no. The lawyers claimed that the agency lacked authority for such an operation, one source recalled.

There are technologies that would allow us to detonate every roadside bomb in Iraq by heating the wires in the detonators to the point that they triggered an explosion. But these systems could severely harm civilians nearby, so we're not using them, either. "In our system, we often are not given credit for the fact that we are very concerned about collateral damage," Meigs said.

...

Gunny
06-11-2007, 10:22 PM
How fu can it get? Seems no limits:

http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2007/06/08/AR2007060802405.html

This army of "unimaginable power" loses its advantage the very second political BS takes away it's ability to employ that unimaginable power and puts it in a mostly defensive role.

JohnDoe
06-12-2007, 12:32 AM
How fu can it get? Seems no limits:

http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2007/06/08/AR2007060802405.html
Enough civilians have already been killed via collateral damage, no?

this sheds more light that this isn't a war to be fought with our military in iraq, imo.

nevadamedic
06-12-2007, 12:46 AM
This army of "unimaginable power" loses its advantage the very second political BS takes away it's ability to employ that unimaginable power and puts it in a mostly defensive role.

We need to go on the offense and shoot first and ask questions later.