Clark: Quick victory 'not going to happen'
 

(CNN) -- The scenario of a quick coalition victory in Iraq is "not going to happen," according to retired U.S. Army Gen. Wesley Clark, a CNN analyst and former NATO supreme allied commander.

"The simple fact is that the liberation didn't quite occur. They didn't uprise," Clark said Tuesday night.

Clark said that more than a quarter of coalition troops are "tied up in a messy fight in Basra."

British troops have gathered outside Basra after Iraqi paramilitary forces retreated into the southern Iraqi city.

An apparent local uprising began Tuesday, and the troops are prepared to assist civilians to attack the military regime once the scope and scale of the rebellion is determined, according to British military officials.

Clark said another significant portion of coalition troops are fighting in Nasiriya, where Marines seized a hospital on the third consecutive day of fighting. "We've got logistics problems," Clark said.



So, where are the iraqi forces, why don't they surrender as Bush claimed before the beginning ?

suprise suprise :(

I've said a few times that the assumption this entire campaign hinges on -- that the vast majority of Iraqi people will welcome the U.S. "liberating" them -- might not be a safe one to make.

Welcome to the last week!

I don't think the Generals expected it to be so easy, but the politicians did.

We also still hear that the politicians think "Democracy" is a good idea for the area.

Do you ever get the idea the people at the top are not quite in full possession of the facts. Or worse don't realise Iraq and the people ares not the same as the US or UK?

I personally think it's a combination of things........ in the first gulf war they actually DID surrender and people felt that they where being liberated. Wich didn't happen, Saddam kept his seat. Years of Saddam and his sons brutal ways of pushing his own ideas to all of them has gone by and people lost trust in the UN and the US (let's call it the former coalition). Not to mention the UN and it's embargo caused alot of civilians in Iraq to live in poor surcomstances. "What happens if they stand up to Saddam and we don't get liberated from that maniac again" is what people must be thinking becaus i'm pretty sure alot of Iraqis where killed after the first gulf war because they stood up to Saddam. People are just scared of that maniac. But i think this time they WILL be liberated and they will be happy about it after all. I don't think anything can be worse then to live under the Saddam regime so i praise the troops trying to overthrow it.

I think that both sides are fucked.

Informational war.

hehe

It might be instructive to remember the survey taken on the 50th anniversary of Stalin's death on March 5th. Nearly 40% of Russians still believe that Stalins influence was more positive than negative, and even more startling, only 29% held fimly to the opposite view.

Not bad for a man who directly caused the deaths of around 20 million people, mostly his own countrymen.

You are right about that but there is one differnce here, Russian economy fell to pieces when Stalin was gone....... and things went from bad to worse for them. Russian money wasn't worth shit anymore and people made 100$ a month to feed 3 to 5 mouths. I think that is the main reason people overthere now say "things where better under Stalin". Not to mention that the people now are another generation and most of them don't really know what it was to live under Stalin :) Iraqi has got a better perspective in that case.

Time will tell. I was wrong about the numbers anyway, they were worse that I remembered...

From the Washington Times:

A March 4 report of its latest poll shows that more than half of all Russians, 53 percent, interviewed last month in 100 Russian towns and cities in 40 regions approved of Stalin overall, 33 percent disapproved and 14 percent declined to indicate any opinion. Poll conducted by the All-Russia Center for the Study of Public Opinion.

http://www.washtimes.com/commentary/beichman.htm

You Yanks won't see our good friend Sadaam for 6 months.

Yugoslavia + Iraq + 1970s = impenetrable bunkers

Iraki dont want the US army in their country to steel the oil!
So you could be sure that everybody in Irak will fight against US.
:feels-hot Shit US is killing Innocent people every day, you think that CNN or FOX is giving real news??:1orglaugh

Bunker busters perhaps?

'EVERYBODY' in Iraq? The population of Basra will more than likely support the coalition as they don't want Saddam in power either. There will be a mixed reception... stop seeing things so one-sided.

If they have to choose between Sadam or a american dumbass General to have the power???

who you think they will choose???

OPERATION FREEDOM:1orglaugh

Is this really that big of a surprise... This is an invasion of a country the size of France. This is an invasion of a country with a long history and a fierce people that have a long history of fighting against and coping with colonial/imperial ambitions.

After Vietnam, the US has been lulled into a false sense of comfort in thinking that many countries will fold like Noriega's Panama, Cedras' Haiti, or Bishop's Grenada. These are relatively small areas with relatively small political groups controlling power with relatively small histories over countries that have long experiences with American colonial policies.

This war will be long and costly...the length and cost mostly resulting from the struggle to build a new society after the shooting has stopped.

The COALITION..... go and read some unbiased history books and you might figure out why. Hint, Saddam killed over 10,000 people from Basra after their last revolt. Like I said, I believe they will support the coalition, but I should imagine they will be wary because the US abandoned them last time.... If the coalition 'proves' it's going to remove Saddam's regime this time fully, yes we should get their support.

American compagnies just recieve millions in contract to rebuilt the country or Irak ! :Hollering

WTF??

What did you expect? Someone has to do the rebuilding work and companies don't work for free... Did you expect the contract to go the French who don't want the war but what the rebuilding contracts?

Here is what is going on in the brain of an Iraki:

The ennemy of my ennemy is MY ennemy ....


Same type of thinking of your president...

Just got on CBC the report that civilians in Baghdad are taking arms and will fight the " imperialist invader"....

I could make a wmv file, but you wont even look at it...


PS: G- Man : your analisys is quite accurate . This is not a " picnic" or "sunday walk in the park" as Dick Cheney declared .

this country doesn't need to be rebuilt Dumbass!!
expect if USA and UK destroy it!

link for that or just your perception...

Do you know what is Halliburton???

Not my president...

Why not... I believe you. Citizens farther away from Baghdad will more than likely side with the coalition or put up the least resitance. Why would civillians in Baghdad not take up arms? It's the political centre, that's where most of the bombing has been taken place, that's where their public figure makes his speeches from... I fail to see the logic in your post.

Yes it is my perception that rebuilding contracts will be carried out by US companies or coalition companies. I would find it quite insulting if contracts would go to country which opposed the war.

Halliburton? texas based, but international company.. in energy and construction? What about them?

Palaces and buildings have been destroyed already... so too late DUMBASS.

http://www.gofuckyourself.com/showth...=hallib urton


That is what it is... if you do take the time to read it....

The battle plan is 30 days. Its only been since Friday when this all started.

If you study the history of wars they usually took years,

for god sake from Kuwait border to Baghdad is over 400 miles?

during D-DAY of WWII it took like a month to get into 2 miles from the coast


They might have said its a short war, but what is the defination of a short war?,, weeks, months, years??

Directfiesta..

I don't see your point....

Thrawn$ was apparently shocked that a US company should get the contract. I've stated I think the coalition countries companies should get the contract for rebuilding... that's it.

You just seem to be confirming what I'm saying, so what's your point. That's it 's crooked company? that is has government connections? Yeah I know where you are coming from with this... I said the contracts should go to a coalition country... and not to a country such as france, and why should that be so surprising.

yup.

Did you read from me that it should go to another country? if so, which one? tell me wich one I wrote...

You said re : Halliburton -- What about them. I gave you a link about a thread here ( both sides - point of vue- not just mine) as info since you seemed ignorant about implications and legalities relating to this firm.

Sorry if info is offending.