Military "swift"

James Rogers jamesr@best.com
Thu, 27 Mar 2003 15:55:33 -0800


>=20
> You don't think that it's even a little bit "reasonable" to=20
> assume that=20
> when military spokesmen say "swift" that they might've meant=20
> something=20
> like "ground war no longer than the first one?"


The Gulf War was six weeks, and with simpler, smaller objectives.  In =
that
war, they used a campaign strategy that was appropriate to their =
objectives.
The objectives of this war are substantially different and would not =
have
benefited nearly as much from six weeks of non-stop bombing before =
sending
in ground troops.

As for the ground war specifically:

I would point out that, with fewer soldiers and without six weeks of
bombing, the US has managed to recapture all the territory they took in =
the
Gulf War in the same amount of time or less.  If you compare apples to
apples, they've done more with less in this war.  If you thought the =
Gulf
War was "swift", then I don't know how you could reasonably consider the
Iraq War to not be moving at least as=20
swiftly.


-James Rogers
 jamesr@best.com