"And for honest argument's sake, when troops in Europe, Korea, and the Balkans find themselves being killed in the midsts (sic) of a civil war where the majority of indigenous people want them gone, we will have to consider leaving."

So, under Kevin King, our national security will be dictated by the will of other countries or the majority of their citizens? Cuba for example?

"The war in Iraq, against Sunnis, or Shiite, or insurgents, or whomever (sic) is going the direction it's going due to what can only be called gross mismanagement by people whom you feel somehow cannot be opposed." (Maybe a lack of commitment and support by the politicians like Harry Reid play a role Kevin?)

Regardless, I cannot accept that a part time Major now knows more about national security, strategy and foreign policy than a General.
(Must be the Delta Pilot flight time - or did you stay at a Holiday Inn Express last night?)

On a related note: One of my cohorts was killed by a 'sapper' in Korea in 1980 while coming back on to base from downtown. I had another cohort killed by a hand grenade in the Philippines in '79 while in a bar on MacArthur Blvd. We are dying if other countries. Should we leave?

I was also at Gallant Eagle, Brave Shield, Bold Eagle, Jack Frost, Red Flag and several other exercises when people were killed both in the USA and abroad. I recall one guy who was run over by a tank at Hurlburt Field in Florida, USA. We are also dying here. Should we leave Florida too?

Regardless, I can't see how comparing the first few years of an ‘occupation’ during the birth of a democracy to the 50th year or occupation in any other country (Europe, Korea, and the Balkans) is somehow congruent.

Have you considered comparing the timeline of the democracy being developed in Iraq to that of our own country?

Maybe you should consider allowing the war college graduates who put in the time and made the grade actually decide when and where to use your services as an A-10 reserve pilot.

__*__*__*__*__*__*__*__*__*__*__*__*__*__*__*__

Please help stop the genocide in Darfur
__*__*__*__*__*__*__*__*__*__*__*__*__*__*__*__

It's interesting that you brought up the War College. Did you know that the War College had a thesis and comprehensive plan for what a successful occupation of Iraq would require? did you know that it required over 300,000 troops? Do you know who did not listen to the War College? Don't listen to me, an average citizen with an opinion. But Colin Powell, General Zinni, and the War College would have been worth listening to. Here is an interesting quote from the US Army War College writings:

According to recent unpublicized U.S. Army War College studies being read with increasing interest by some Pentagon planners, "The possibility of the United States winning the war and losing the peace in Iraq is real and serious."

And that's especially true if occupation force soldiers are not retrained to be "something similar to a constabulary force" and imbued with the understanding that "force is often the last resort of the occupation soldier." The War College studies explore in detail a troubling paradox: While all experts agree that stabilizing post-Saddam Iraq would be a protracted endeavor, "the longer a U.S. occupation of Iraq continues," one of the studies notes, "the more danger exists that elements of the Iraqi population will become impatient and take violent measures to hasten the departure of U.S. forces."

What is winning in Iraq Mixer, and when do you think it will be time to leave? Are you pullling for Sunni or Shiia (I don't think Kurds stand a chance)?

Mixer, our national security will be dictated by threats, ACTUAL threats, to our nation. We cannot call Iraq free yet stay there beyond the will of the Iraqi people. I believe we have no right to invade sovereign nations that are not an imminent threat to us. I do not believe there are bloody civil wars that our military can solve for other countries. We worked too hard to bring the Berlin Wall down to rebuild it in Baghdad. You can hold closely your opinion that our troops being in Iraq is good for our nation and somehow good for the troops actually extended in Iraq, but I believe you will find the national will to be a bit contrary to your view. 08 will solve many of these arguments for us. My motivation is to not see our brightest and bravest military warriors stuck in a situation with no clearly defined exit. And that's where my liberal heart will always be.

Kevin "Hack" King

ps: You might not want to read Col Wade Williams' letter to the Editor.....

Hi Hack and Enigma,

So, Hack, you will support sending 300,000 troops to Iraq NOW?

How do you justify quoting one General while discounting another?

What about General Petraeus? I noticed you did not cite his statements.

"U.S. Army War College studies being read with increasing interest by some Pentagon planners, "The possibility of the United States winning the war and losing the peace in Iraq is real and serious."

Harry said the war WAS "Lost" - that's past tense.

Do you disagree with Harry Reid and banmani (aka: most army veterans, MAV) who you called a 'warrior spirit"?

Bush has defined winning in Iraq many times. Do you really need me to repeat what you have ignored so many times already?

__*__*__*__*__*__*__*__*__*__*__*__*__*__*__*__

Please help stop the genocide in Darfur

I tend to believe the judgment of Generals who have been proven correct by history.
I remember something about elections. Then it shifted to a government.
I remember something like this: "As they stand up, we will stand down." We just sent more troops. We are keeping the troops already there in country longer. So are Iraqis standing up or sitting down? Please do explain the clear exit strategy that I somehow missed. I will read it and give it all due consideration.

Kevin "Hack" King

banmani changes his name in shame - Click Here for the cut and paste queens blog of the week

For the record, I do not think we can or will pack up and leave anytime soon. I do not think adding more Americans to an Iraqi problem will fix it. If we could eliminate all of the Sunni Al Qaida, this still would not address the Iran influence with Shiites, or the Baathist Sunni issues. I'm not sure how long we can bang our heads against this wall, but I've yet to hear an estimate set for the American people. How long do you think Americans should wait to see a light at the end of this tunnel as we funnel resources into Iraq? We can't ignore the national will much longer.

Kevin "Hack" King

The following document articulates the broad strategy the President set forth in 2003 and provides an update on our progress as well as the challenges remaining:

"The United States has no intention of determining the precise form of Iraq's new government. That choice belongs to the Iraqi people. Yet, we will ensure that one brutal dictator is not replaced by another. All Iraqis must have a voice in the new government, and all citizens must have their rights protected.
Rebuilding Iraq will require a sustained commitment from many nations, including our own: we will remain in Iraq as long as necessary, and not a day more."
-- President George W. Bush
February 26, 2003
-----------------------------------------------------------------

Please take the time, if possible to read this blog:

One Soldiers Blog

Here it is also:

INTRODUCTION
People have many different motivations for making the claim that we're losing the war in Iraq. Based on my research, I can only conclude that a large majority of the people who make this claim do so for reasons other than honoring our country or our new ally, Iraq, and that, more importantly, this claim is not based on the truth. Let me be more direct. People who say that America is losing the war in Iraq are lying.

As a Soldier, I don't care to comment on policy or politics. It is wrong for me to second guess an order or chip in my 2 cents worth whenever I think I know more than my leaders. Once I have assessed an order as legal, it's my duty to make sure that it happens whether or not I agree or understand why. It is my job to accomplish the mission. As a Soldier, I do care to inform people who mistakenly think that we're not winning the war – people who say that we're not accomplishing the mission, people who say that we're doing a bad job.

Unfortunately, many of these people have not read the National Strategy for Victory in Iraq, which was published by the National Security Council in November 2005. This strategy describes the conditions that must be met in order to declare victory, and provides a plan to achieve those conditions. This is the guide for conducting the war in Iraq. This is where my mission comes from. The war in Iraq is being won by Iraqi Security Forces and the Coalition despite what one may hear on the daily news. As for the violence that said news is fond of telling us all about, this violence is to be expected. It is the nature of conflict for things to get violent before they get peaceful. Without the threat and action of good men with guns, kindly asking the bad men to stop will accomplish nothing when they are so committed to their cause that they would gladly welcome death rather than allow those under their influence the simple freedoms like, for example, letting women vote or letting someone of a different religion worship openly. If we are to win in Iraq, these bad men must be killed or captured. By its very nature, this means violence. When you send good men with guns into neighborhoods to find bad men with guns, there is a very good chance that there will be violence. As these bad men are taken down, others like them will attempt to use the same tactics of brutality and intimidation in order to impose their tyrannical will, but they will also be taken down. As this cycle continues, we are faced with two options: The first is to say, "Enough! There are more bad men with guns than we are willing to deal with though we are able to", and we retreat back into the borders of our own country hoping that the bad men we had just been fighting don't come knocking on our door. The second option is to continue to train and work with the ISF to kill or capture the bad men with guns until THEY say "Enough! There are more good men with guns than we are willing or able to deal with", and make sure that these bad men never knock on anyone’s door again.

WHY I'M DOING THIS
Prior to coming to Iraq, I was skeptical about the situation here. I had never been deployed before and I had only been on Active Duty for about a year and a half. All I really knew were the stories that I'd heard from the Soldiers who had already been here and from the news, both of which I took with a grain of salt. I always believed that we were doing a lot more good in Iraq than was being reported, but I had no way to verify that belief. Upon arriving "in country", I was assigned to the International Zone (IZ) in Baghdad, also known as the Green Zone by the media. The IZ is home to the US Embassy and the Headquarters of the Multi- National Forces-Iraq (MNF-I). MNF-I is the brain that plans and organizes the war in Iraq. When President Bush says that he's conferring with commanders on the ground, he's talking about general officers in the IZ. Early in my deployment, I had the opportunity to sit in on several strategic briefings.
Without going into details, let me say that after watching several of these high level briefings, I was impressed with the level of commitment to doing the good and right thing found at such a high level in the command. The focus that the Command Staff put on quality of life for the average Iraqi, along with the Command's attention to detail concerning the security situation and the progress on transferring total sovereignty back to the Iraqis, was impressive. I was and am shocked that this wasn't being portrayed in the media. That wasn't enough to motivate me to do something about it, though. The event that finally spurred me into action was an interview on FoxNews in which an "expert" being interviewed said, "We're losing this war." I couldn't believe it. This American had just looked straight into the camera and told millions of other Americans that we in the military weren't doing our jobs. More importantly, he implied that my brothers and sisters in arms were getting shot and blown up for a lost cause.
I was irate. I nearly lost it. I had to restrain myself from putting my fist through the screen. This was my motivation for writing this article. Here was this chump in a suit and tie saying that we in the military weren't doing our job, and disrespecting the sacrifices made by so many. Allow me to clarify this point. While I'm relatively certain that the intent of the comment was not to discredit the Coalition's efforts in Iraq, that was the effect it had. A person's motivation or intent for making this claim is irrelevant. We in the military have been given a mission and that is to win the war. When we're given a mission, we are expected and we expect to accomplish the mission, regardless of the obstacles in our way. For someone to imply, even indirectly, that we are failing to accomplish our mission, that we're losing the war, is not only offensive, it's wrong.
After calming down, I tried to think of his statement from a logical, factual standpoint. What could possibly make him think that we're losing the war? As I thought more and more about it, I realized that his apparent ignorance wasn't totally his fault. I concluded that he probably had never been to Iraq for any length of time and that he wasn't in contact with anyone who had been either. As a result of this conclusion, I determined that all he knew was what he saw on TV and read in the news, just like most of America and the rest of the world for that matter - just like I used to be. I initially faulted MNF-I for not sharing their success stories with the media. I figured that, in an effort to maintain operational security (OPSEC) they were just keeping it all quiet. I began to search for as
much good news as I could find, so that I could publish it on my blog to help it get better circulation, small as it may be. I didn't have to look far before I realized that MNF-I was, in fact, putting out TONS of information showing the progress that we're making here - pages and pages and pages of quantifiable data and positive news stories showing our progress. This is when I came to my current conclusion that the blame lay squarely on the media. If one guy in the middle of Baghdad with nothing more than an internet connection and some spare time can find all this material, the 24-hour news channels and networks with all their resources certainly can as well. MNF-I was pushing this mountain of good news into the hands of the media and none of it was making the evening news.
I'm skating on the edge here. My goal is not to flog the mainstream media. My goal is to counter the tidal wave of negative reporting. This is the mission I have assigned to myself.

WHAT IS VICTORY IN IRAQ?
Allow me to start off this section by saying the following: Victory will not be achieved when we pull Coalition troops from Iraq. Removing troops from Iraq will be a product of victory, not a source of it. So then what is victory? How will we know when we've achieved it? These questions may seem like pipe dreams, and under the tidal wave of negative news, unfortunately many people write them off as such. However, according to the National Strategy for Victory in Iraq which was published by the National Security Council in November 2005, this is not the case. On page 1 of this document one can find the following:

Victory in Iraq is Defined in Stages:
• Short term, Iraq is making steady progress in fighting terrorists, meeting political milestones, building democratic institutions, and standing up security forces.
• Medium term, Iraq is in the lead defeating terrorists and providing its own security, with a fully constitutional government in place, and on its way to achieving its economic potential.
• Longer term, Iraq is peaceful, united, stable, and secure, well integrated into the international community, and a full partner in the global war on terrorism.

Page 3 of the same document goes into further detail of exactly what each stage means. The point is, we have realistic and attainable goals that we are working towards so that we can achieve victory in Iraq. Nowhere in here is the mention of sending troops home.
Let me leave no doubt in anyone's mind about how this impacts me personally.

On June 25th of this year, my wife had our first child. I was lucky enough to be home when the little guy made his way into the world. Shortly after getting my wife and son back out of the hospital I returned to Iraq to serve the remaining 5 months I have here. Keeping in mind that at any moment a mortar, rocket or stray bullet could find me and prevent me from ever being able to tell my son that I love him and hear him tell me the same; I am exactly where I should be, doing exactly what I should be doing. I am helping win the war. I am helping achieve victory.

MEASURING VICTORY
Now that victory has been defined, how are we achieving it?
• On January 30, 2005, millions of Iraqis participated in their first free election, defying the threats of insurgents who sought to deny them their opportunity for democracy.
• A constitutional referendum was held on October 15, 2005, with an 81% increase in voter turnout reported in Sunni majority provinces.
• On December 15, 2005, roughly 12.4 million Iraqi voters went to the polls to elect a Council of Representatives. That's a voter turnout of over 79% in spite of the threat of terrorist attack. Compare that to the 50% voter turnout in the last US presidential election where the biggest threat was a paper cut. Did you vote? I did.
• Currently, over 268,000 Iraqi security forces have been trained and equipped.
• Three divisions,18 brigades, and 71 battalions of the ISF now have lead security responsibility in their respective areas of operation. The ISF have security responsibility for 60 percent of Baghdad and for 30,000 square miles of the country. As of June 26, the MOD, MOI, or the Ministry of Finance has assumed control of 41 Forward Operating Bases from Coalition forces.
• Security responsibility for the entire province of Muthanna, Iraq's second largest, has been transferred to Iraqi control.
• As a result of intelligence captured after killing al-Qaeda in Iraq leader Abu Musab al-Zarqawi much of his organization's senior leadership has been killed or captured.
• The final cabinet positions for the Government of Iraq have been filled.
• Currently, terrorist groups are negotiating for reconciliation with the democratically elected and constitutionally based Iraqi government.
• Two thirds of Iraqis think that Iraqi Security Forces are beating terrorism.
• According to a poll conducted in December, over 70 percent of Iraqis surveyed oppose the immediate withdrawal of American troops.
• USAID is providing support to the Ministry of Trade to deliver more than 480,000 tons of food each month.
• Over 4600 schools have been renovated, over 60,000 secondary school teachers have been trained and more than 8.7 million new school books have been distributed.
• Health care funding has increased 30-fold since Iraq was freed from Saddam Hussein.
• USAID has immunized 98 percent of children under 5 years old against measles, mumps, and rubella and 97 percent of children under 5 against polio.
• Over 1,200 primary health clinics and 240 Iraqi hospitals are in operation.
• 3.7 million more Iraqis have access to fresh water
• 5.1 million more Iraqis have access to sewage treatment
• The Iraqi dinar has maintained its value with only a 1% variation over the last year.
• Oil production has exceeded pre-war levels by 15%
This is a short list of the strategic victory milestones that we've achieved here in Iraq. But since we're supposed to be losing this war, let's go over the list of strategic victory milestones that the terrorists have achieved:

• According to polling data from the Pew Institute, less than half of the American public thinks that the Coalition and Iraqi Security Forces are winning the war.

The good news is that they are beginning to lose on this front as well. Don't take my word for it, listen to what Zarqawi himself had to say about it. In a letter that was captured after Zarqawi was killed, he details how the Coalition and Iraqi Government are beating him, he goes on to talk about what the terrorists need to do to fight back. The very first thing on the top of his list? "To use the media for spreading an effective and creative image of the resistance." Let's continue to examine the rest of Zarqawi's comments in this letter, specifically the points he makes about how the Coalition and Iraqi Security Forces are winning. Consider this Zarqawi's list of our accomplishments in Iraq. For the sake of brevity I'll paraphrase, but if you'd like to see the whole letter for yourself you can do so here.

• The training and operational success of the Iraqi Security Forces
• Coalition combat operations that capture/kill anti-Iraqi forces.
• Increasing popular support for the new Government of Iraq.
• Restricting terrorist's finances.
• Creating division between terrorist groups.
• Taking advantage of anti-Iraqi forces mistakes and showing them publicly. (An obvious reference to the video of him that was captured showing him unable to operate a US machine gun.)
Zarqawi goes on to say that the situation is "bleak" and is a "crisis". If the individual who was formerly the head of the largest terrorist organization in Iraq thinks that we're winning, why don't more Americans?

THE WAY AHEAD
So what now? We're clearly winning the war. We're making documented and verifiable progress. Life is getting better for the average Iraqi. The terrorists are on the run. What do we do now? We drive on. We strap on our body armor and go back at it. We keep filing reports and pushing paper. We keep doing what we're doing. And we get better at it. We keep accomplishing the mission. Iraq has made and continues to make amazing progress towards building a stable democratic government that can manage a stable country. If the decision is made that there are too many bad men with guns than we are willing to deal with and we get sent home we will leave the developing Iraqi Security Forces to fend for themselves. We would have abandoned Iraq to terrorists and murderers. We must stay the course. It's working. We're winning. Yes there are still bad men who blow up innocent Iraqis and provide gruesome headlines with highly printable body counts that drown out the positive stories. Does that mean that we're losing? Does that mean that we should go home?
The terrorists know they can't win militarily. In large-scale combat they get their butt kicked every time. The people of Iraq see life getting better despite the terrorist attacks. The terrorists are losing what little popular support they had to begin with. So how are they going to beat us? How can they win?
They win if you quit.
Period.

If you don't quit, we win. Help us win. Don't quit on us.

__*__*__*__*__*__*__*__*__*__*__*__*__*__*__*__

Please help stop the genocide in Darfur

Last I heard was that the army would evaluate the situation in September and decide what to do next. By next, they mean some other change such as a surge was.
There is no way to "win" this game as most games have. The winner is "when they step up, we will step down." There is no time limit or schedule for such standing up or down.
I'm not sure the suicide bomb rate (or whatever they come up with next to kill us) has anything to do with winning. Maybe how much we spend there or give them to spend has some limitations, but I haven't heard what it might be.
It is an interesting game. We have promoted and retired more four-star generals in this six years 2001-2007, than we had in the previous 15 years. All were retired well and make lots of money at Halliburton and such places. But that is just a secondary part of the game.

Hack, you and I really don't know what is best. I can accept that. Can you? I'm not sure I even know WHO knows what is best. Do you?

Why does this have to be so filled with anger and divisiveness? I served- you served- we don’t have to agree...but we sure as heck better get this one right on the “world wide war on Muslim extremists” or a lot of American civilians are going to die - again. When I was in the job one (at OUR expense) was to keep that from happening. Has it changed?

I will not let this keep me from considering you a friend. We just don't agree.