The surrender of Falluja will become the "turning point in the war"

[Walt Starr]

Mark my words here, folks. The war of aggression by the United States against the Iraqi people will forever be changed. The surrender of Falluja to the Republican Guard is a HUGE retreat of a magnitude the American public has not witnessed in almost thirty years. This is perhaps the most aggregiously humiliating moment in the history of the United States Marine Corps, and every Marine in the world can place the blame for the humilation of their beloved Corps squarely at the feet of George W. Bush.

We have lost the Battle of Falluja. There can be no doubt that we are retreating on the field in the face of the opposition. This would be akin to surrendering Frankfurt to SS Obersturmbannführer Kurt Meyer in April of 1946. There can be no spinning away the stunning defeat the United States has suffered today. Let everybody know, the United States has lost a major battle in the Iraq War.

Let this also be a lesson to any nation who through arrogance and foolishness may decide in the future to so blatantly disregard international law and launch a war of aggression against a nation which poses no threat that they can, and will, lose miserably.

Today, I am ashamed for the Marine corps and I am ashamed for my once great nation. George W. Bush has made a mockery of everything the United States stands for.

The United States will lose stature in the world over this. The bitter taste of defeat will remain long in our mouths.

[Solomon]

1. Im on record as saying we lost the war the moment we bombed Iraq.

People laughed at me and said I was stupid. Don't be so fast to write off Fallujah though. There are still a lot of people who want to "sanitize" the place. (The words we come up with are great, right?)

This should be headline news, but of course, Michael Jackson has a court date so.....

[BJ]

2. It wouldn't be a victory had the Marines won, either.

The Marine Corps made a complete mess of the Fallujah situation. It was a lose-lose.

Nor is it truly a defeat, since the Corps is leaving in relatively unscathed. This can not be viewed in the same light as a truly significant turning-point battle as Teutoburg Forest of 9CE, Gettysberg or Stalingrad.

[Walt Starr]

4. There can be no true victories in a war like this

But I guarantee you, historians will point to Falluja and say, "this is where it became evident the occupation of Iraq could not continue."

[BJ]

17. Better yet, occupation could not "succeed."

The occupation will continue as long as American politicians believe there is reason for U.S. forces to remain. Even Kerry is not calling for an immediate and complete withdrawal of American troops.

It is past time that the UN became involved in peace keeping. American forces must be involved, as the U.S. has the world's most powerful military machine, but not under American command.

If UN peace keeping troops are inserted in Iraq the command should be in the hands of Canadian, Swedish, German or French generals.

[Zero Gravitas]

24. we've lost Fallujah

Like you say its was a lose/lose situation. Sure the Marines could have gone in and taken territory, but at the costs of many more 100s of dead Iraqi civilians which would have increased resentment and Resistance. Now we have chosen the other way of loosing, giving it over to Iraqi forces who will not fight the resistance. The resistance will be encouraged by this as they have, in effect, taken Fallujah and now they will want to control more territory.

Whether or not this is a significant turning point remains to be seen.

[Ganja Ninja]

3. Turning point is exactly right.

Bush had two choices. Wipe-out the Fallujains or give in and loose in Iraq. Now all the other population centers in Iraq where people decide they want the Americans out will do as the Fallujaians did. Bush is looking like toast now more than ever.

[alfredo]

5. Falluja, even before this battle, was seen as the symbol of resistance

against the occupation. This will embolden the insurgents.

We shouldn't have even gone in unless we were willing see it through regardless the death toll.

[Walt Starr]

6. Najaf, Basra, Tikrit, Ramadi,

Baghdad....

We're fucked.

[alfredo]

46. We were when we accepted the supreme court's appointment

of King George.

[jackstraw45]

7. I feel for the Marines

and those who lost their lives for NOTHING.

How can handing control over to Saddams Republican Guard be ANYTHING but a defeat?

Where is the F-ing media reporting this!?!?

[chookie]

18. That's one of the talking points

To protect his fuzzy pink peach, he says stuff like "We have to think of the families of the dead. We can't let them think their loved ones died for nothing."

They did die for nothing -- we just can't own up to it..

Sorry George, maybe I am not in "the mainstream", but I wouldn't want people believing lies to make them feel better about someone's death, and exploiting their emotions to cover up for your mistakes is the sickest thing that you do.

[Arianrhod]

30. Pardon my ignorance here,

but didn't we go into Iraq to fight the Republican Guard?

This invasion becomes more twisted and bizarre every day.

[BurtWorm]

8. I think this decision to pull back is a good decision.

I think any time the military shows the wisdom to pull back and pull out, we should applaud them. The alternative was much worse. I wouldn't paint this as a defeat or humiliation. I would paint it as the right choice. Let the Freepers feel humiliated. Reason won this time.

[Walt Starr]

9. Accepting defeat was the right thing to do in Falluja

because invading Iraq in the first place was the wrong thing to do.

It does not change the fact that this was a military defeat and the invasion of Iraq is a military debacle.

[BurtWorm]

11. I absolutely agree with you. It's not the Falluja retreat that's wrong.

It's the whole freakin' war that's wrong.

[chookie]

22. Passing the Mother of All Hot Potatoes

Come June 30, 2004, the Talking Point will be "We liberated Iraq. Bush is a Hero."

They will then go into complete denial about the chaos that will ensue. It's a beautiful thing to see a Free People TM fight a civil war. Sigh.

But they need someone to hand the mess over to. They had planned on Challabi, but apparently he's a popular as pork.

So some of Saddam's former generals comes forth, and says he's crazy enough to want to take over. Things are so out of control that the Bushistas are DELIGHTED to have him. He's Our New Friend now. Can't wait to see the photo of Rummy shaking hands with him.

So, what's we're going to have is a totalitarian Iraq that is called a Democracy by the Americans. Meet the new boss, same as the old boss.

But Bush is going to bravely pretend that it's not HIS problem any more.

I love this cartoon:

[sendero]

29. I kind of agree with you....

... this is not a "win", but going in and committing a massacre would not only be morally wrong, it would have been militarily and politically the worse course.

I think, faced with a lose/lose propososition, the correct decision has been made. I don't think it is very significant in the long run, because this "war", at least in terms of its stated goals, is lost at this point already.

[BurtWorm]

31. And I agree with you. The US cannot "win" in Iraq.

Thanks not only to the Bushists' failure to plan intelligently for the post-war but to the untenability of the US position in the country as an occupying army pretending to be creating a "free democracy."

[ewagner]

10. Pentagon vs State Department

This is a problem because the Pentagon and not the State Department is running the Iraq post-invasion show.

The State Department would have never ordered the Marines to take seige of Falluja in the first place. Further, the State Department would have been involved in finding political solutions from day one as opposed to military solutions.

The Marines (an I do have a very high respect for the Marines!) should have never been placed in a totally defensive position with the only options being to get picked off one-by-one or to go totally on the offensive and win a battle that would have negative,long range political and social consequences.

[Walt Starr]

12. DING DING DING DING DING DING DING DING DING

The Marines (an I do have a very high respect for the Marines!) should have never been placed in a totally defensive position with the only options being to get picked off one-by-one or to go totally on the offensive and win a battle that would have negative,long range political and social consequences.

And it was a dumbass smirking chimp who put the Corps into a no-win scenario and allowed them to end up in utter humiliation because they were given no possible military solution to what was ultimately a political problem.

[BurtWorm]

13. I do seem to remember one of the generals talking about making

Falluja pay for what they did to the Blackwater guys. I thought of the seige in those terms, that it was a military response to the mob scene. I thought it was an idiotic response myself.

[chookie]

27. Bingo!

They had to rush us into this war, lying that it was an imminent threat hanging over us, and ready to pounce on us as did the 19 creeps of Sept 11.

They knew that once we were in there, we were going to be stuck. Maybe Bush and the NeoCons have some crazed ideas about transforming the Middle East, about the necessity to fight WWIII out in the open, and maybe bring about Armageddon and enable Jesus to return to earth, but it's mostly about cash.

The only win/win in this is for Halliburton, because they make a bundle no matter how well or how badly it goes.

Lots of people tried to warn them that what has actually transpired was going to happen. Lots of them were in the Pentagon, and some were in George the First's administration. But they always want to dismiss the people who really understand things, and play up the bad intelligence and the idiotic ideas.

The Marines were put in an impossible situation. Bush was warned of the consequences -- but he's a gambler, and a talented liar, so in they went, for the Mother of All Turkey Shoots.

I wonder how the military vote is going to go this November? Something tells me Jeb isn't going to be too eager to get those overseas ballots back this time.

[napi21]

14. Don't ever threaten something unless you're willing to follow through.

I'm sorry I can't remember who said those words about 2 days ago during an interview I was listening to. They were talking about the "We're going to go into Falluja and capture or kill the leader if the town didn't disarm".

That's the fight we lost! First making the threat!!! But then not carring it out when they called our bluff.

I'm not sure this was a turning point because I think this was a war that couldn't be won even before it was started, but we I hope we're learning something from the MANY mistakes we've made.

[Walt Starr]

16. Look at some historical comparisons

The South could never win the Civil War because the North had all of the Industry and a Navy so the South could not produce the necessary military equipment in the necessary time frame nor could they effectively import the equipment due to the naval blockade by the North.

The South lost that war the day it fired on Ft. Sumpter and it was a war of attrition from that day on. Gettysburg was still the turning point in the war, though.

Japan lost WWII the day it hit Pearl Harbor, but Midway remains the turning point of the war.

Yes, we lost the Iraq War the day we invaded, but Falluja is the turning point because now all cities know, if they hold out they can have their country back.

Falluja, even though tyhe American casualties are not high as in previous turning points of wars, remains the turning point because from this day forward the Iraqis have a means of winning.

[napi21]

19. Valid point! I agree. n/t

[sandnsea]

42. If it's not worth 100 men dieing,

it's not worth 1 man dieing. The lesson of Vietnam. Don't start a military action unless you MUST win. And then know exactly how to win.

And the Rule of Law. Who exactly did we want out of this action? Did we lay down any evidence? Oh, all those silly questions this Administration never asks.

100 troops dead, for absolutely nothing. Not that any of them died for anything more than a grand ideological scheme. We're going to "change the world". Yeah, right.

The bastards.

[Iceburg]

15. The US LOST its stature when it invaded IRAQ.

"The United States will lose stature in the world over this. The bitter taste of defeat will remain long in our mouths."

The US LOST its stature when it invaded IRAQ.

Retreating from Fallujah is a turning point -- turning away from military might and toward diplomacy.

[stopbush]

20. Hmm. Great minds think alike. See my post from late last PM

here:
http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=show_topic&forum=116&topic_id=5405

[ElsewheresDaughter]

21. Walt this is a "ruse de guerre" bush will use massive MOABS on Faluja as

soon as the troops pull back to a safe distance....NEVER forget that bush is EVIL and said he will NOT give up or in to terra issssst...he is a killer and a dry drunk too boot...i am afraid for the people of Faluja :scared:


mark my words....bush* is gonna destroyed Faluja ...remember his mom pointed out how he use to shove firecrackers and M80s down little froggies throats and blow them up, then he became govn. of texas and killed inmates now Iraq is his playground ......bush* is a classic FBI profiled seriel killer :cry:

[northernsoul]

36. I hope you're wrong

unfortunately, what you're talking about is not outside the realm of possibility

[Norquist Nemesis]

45. I agree they're getting ready to aim and fire

One thing goes awry and *boom*. For the past several days, military "analysts" have stated in no uncertain terms...watch for when the forces pull back. Then you can expect a real offensive power and show of our strength.

[thecrow]

54. Boom yeah...

...and then we'll get to kill off the Republican Guard as well..
B*SH thy name is destruction.

[DrWeird]

23. The US lost the initiative.

What does that mean?

[havocmom]

25. Iraq? Iraq? Didn't you get the memo? Cuba is a terrorist state

and something has to be done about it/// I wish it were sarcasm, but it seems to be the ruse de jour

[nostamj]

26. agree, but...

would say that the United States lost stature in the world by starting this monstrosity.

and the insipid chimp has cemented his place in history as the WORST president EVER.

may he be tried, convicted and punished along with his entire cabal.

[Mountainman]

28. They are not retreating they are advancing in a different direction

I think that was what was said when the Marines were pushed back by the Chinese in Korea.

[DrWeird]

33. Is this what they said about Hamburger Hill?

I guess the difference is we actually took Hamburger Hill before leaving it, while we never took Fallujah. Still..

[Devil Dog Dem]

38. Not quite the quote, or the sentiment.

Gen. O.P. Smith, the Commander of the First Marine Division, was asked if the Marines were retreating from the Chosin Reservoir when the Marines were outnumbered and completely surrounded by the Chinese in an 8 to 1 ratio (some estimates had it as high as 16 to 1).

Considering the fact that the Marines had to fight their way to the sea and break out of the enemy's encirclement he replied, "No, more like attacking in another direction." Smith turned down offers from MacArthur to have the Marines airlifted out of the area. Because they would have had to abandon all their vehicles, artillery, and heavy equipment he thought doing so would have been a true retreat, or "bug out."

"There will be no Dunkirks in the Marine Corps" he is said to have uttered when he gave the order to take the fight to the enemy in the 75 mile march to the sea, taking with them all the division's equipment, weapons, and wounded.


The Chosin campaign was a shining moment in Marine Corps history, despite its being a complete strategic defeat for the U.S.

I think that description might apply to what would have happened in Faluja: there is no doubt that the Marines would have "taken" the city and destroyed the combatants within, thus producing a tactical victory for the Corps. However, the amount of damage to the city and the likely high numbers of civilian casualties would have been astronomical, thus producing a strategic defeat for the U.S.

[heidler]

32. I watched Kissinger warn against doing this Wed. night on TV.

I personally like it. Perhaps it will accelerate our total withdrawal from Iraq. This has been a loser from the get go.

[BurtWorm]

35. What was Kissinger's objection to it?

Something about how the Arabs only respect power? :eyes:

[heidler]

59. The way I understood it was,

that capitulation would destroy are own long term resolve. This is probably true, but to carry on with a stupid plan that will never work anyway is going to also destroy our resolve. The position that we must carry on because failing is so bad, don't make sense to me. Neither does the position that yes it was stupid to invade Iraq, but now we have to finish the job. We don't even know what the job is from a functional standpoint and neither does Bush he changes the intent whenever the point is unraveling. The real problem is that Bush put us on a path of failure and our troops have to die to protect his ignorance. Many people including me thought our resolve was insufficient for this war and that should of been a big part of why we should have stayed on a political path.

[Devil Dog Dem]

34. Save your pity for for someone else pal, the Marines don't need it.

This wasn't a defeat for the Marines. Does anyone really doubt they
would have killed the combatants in Falluja, thus producing a tactical victory for the Corps?

The reasons for not going in had nothing to do with the Corps, or its abilities, so spare the Corps your shame.

The reasons for not going in had to do with not wanting to level the entire city and kill thousands more civilians - which would have happened had the Marines gone in and killed the enemy combatants - thus producing a strategic defeat by creating more enemies than we had killed.

[DrWeird]

37. I don't think it was a forgone conclusion.

Could the marines have really gone in and killed all 300,000 Fallujhans without taking enormous casualties, and without carpet bombing the whole city?

And since when has the US cared about killing thousands of Iraqi civilians?

[Devil Dog Dem]

40. Didn't have to kill all 300,000 Fallujhans.

Just those willing to fight, which I assure you would be WAY under 300,000 once the battle began.

Yes, the Marines would take casualties, but they would have remained a combat effective unit. Yes they would level the city (or portions) if they deemed it necessary (they wouldn't actually carpet bomb, but your point is well taken in that they would have leveled it). That is my point. The Marines could and would have done that if ordered and "won."

The decision was made not to do that though because of the high number of civilian (and Marine) casualties.

So save the pity for someone else, the Marines were ready, willing, and able to do their job. Let's all be thankful they didn't have to.

[DrWeird]

55. The "surprise" the brass came to realize

and part of the big reason for the "strategic withdrawal" was that the resistance wasn't a few "radical baathists loyalists" but the general population of Fallujah itself.

Kind of like the Russians learned in Grozny.

[ewagner]

39. I do not see this as a defeat for the Marines

As I said in the earlier post I have great respect for the Marines and I know that if you want a combat mission undertaken with absolute dedication, the Marines will damned well do it!

I see this as a complete failure of LEADERSHIP right from the White House to Centcom. I see it as an unwise and bone-headed use of the military.

If I'm ever in a bar and see a Marine, in uniform or not, they'll never have to take their wallet out of their pocket....that comes from an Air Force type......

[Devil Dog Dem]

41. "I see this as a complete failure of LEADERSHIP"

Amen!

As I said in another post, I have no doubt the Marines would have done their job, but let's be thankful they didn't have to go in and level that city in doing so.

[Walt Starr]

44. Absolutely the Marines would have done their job!

But Centcom and the White House left them flapping in the wind and ultimately sold them out to surrender the city to the Republican Guard.

[RafterMan]

47. Well put

But I think it does have to do the the Corps and their abilities. The Marines were successful in the south (their original deployment area) by working with locals to set up mutually agreeable leadership and withdrawing from the direct line of authority. Not because they're a bunch of cowards, but because it worked. It worked so well that raw replacements from many countries were able to take over Marine areas with far less friction than most people expected.

Now they're trying the same, proven formula in Fallujah and the hardliners on both sides are saying they scampered. For people who are so often accused of the opposite, there must be some consoling amusement to the Marines in all the criticism for having used brains over brawn.

[Devil Dog Dem]

49. "used brains over brawn"

Good point.

[Walt Starr]

50. The problem is, they handed Falluja over to the Republican Guard

That's a retreat in anybody's book. They have handed over a major urban area to the very military forces they were out to destroy a year ago.

[Arianrhod]

48. Hm

We couldn't take the city, so we pulled out and turned it over to members of the very army we went into Iraq to destroy--an army that was cheered when it arrived. How is that not a defeat?

The shame of it, however, lies with *, and with a nation that has gone along with this insanity for far too long. I think we as a people need to demand that * produce a genuine plan for getting us out of there, instead of just intoning the mantra of June 30th.

If Kerry had such a workable plan, it might just win him the WH.

[Devil Dog Dem]

57. So you think the Marines couldn't take the city, huh?

That's what the NVA and VC said about the Marines taking Hue City.
That's what the North Koreans said about the Marines taking Seoul.
That's what the Japanese said about the Marines taking Iwo Jima.

No way these guys are more formidable than those foes. The difference would be more dead civilians, a prudent decision, so far.

How is being told NOT to attack by their superiors a defeat for the Marine Corps?

[Arianrhod]

58. Did they take the city, or not?

What they "might be able to do" is irrelevant. What they have done in the past is irrelevant. Who gives the orders is irrelevant. The facts are that they failed to take the city, failed to impose order, failed to stop the "insurgents"--while killing many innocent civilians in the process. They then "repositioned" and turned the city over to the enemy, a Ba'athist Republican Guard general who, as one DUer pointed out, even looks like Saddam Hussein. This is not a "victory" in any book--except, perhaps, 1984.

I don't know if this is a turning point or not. Perhaps, with the release of the coffin photos and the investigation into torture allegations, it will be enough to change the American people's minds about this invasion, and move us to get the troops out of there once and for all. Maybe not. But I agree with those on here who think that this retreat will not enhance American stature in the world. The Marines themselves may have nothing to be ashamed of--I withhold judgement there for the moment--but they certainly can't be looking on this with great pride.

[bobthedrummer]

52. The 604th Platoon USMC fought against militarism and fascism in WWII.

As sole surviving son of a Marine, I think they have been abused by the administration of George W. Bush aka The War President who employs mercenaries paid for with our taxes, and, if memory serves me correct, led to the USMC taking reprisals for POS mercenaries in Falluja, the shutting down of local newspapers, the targeting of world press and, worst of all imo, actually aiding both the cause of Osama Bin-Laden and PNAC via inciting anti-Americanism worldwide.

Walt Starr has a supporter here too.

[Zolok]

43. Well....no offense but

anything that spares our corps the burden of house to house fighting is a good thing.
The political context here is all eff'd up to the max...we've got Saddam lets blow this popsicle stand and stop dickering with every freeper Imam and Baathist General who is hanging out on the street corner by the green zone.
BRING THE BOYS-N-GIRLS HOME!
Leave the RNC volunteers in the coalition authority behind though...
:)

www.chimesatmidnight.blogspot.com

[robbedvoter]

51. Does anyone have Rummy's bragging: This is a battle victory that will go

in history as one of the mostest..."?

[JCMach1]

53. We NEVER had Fallujah

[Walt Starr]

56. We WERE trying to take it

and then we surrendered.

Does this make Georgie a "pork-eating-surrender-chimp"?