Life

Well, Iraq is on an upswing, I am getting deeper into game design, and politics are annoying. Game design is what I'll focus on today. So me and another designer are told to give a good description of our characters.

Mine is easy. A massive robotic tank with a Thickly armored body on six thick, armor plated legs. Not tentacle-legs, but massive chunks of metal anchoring him to the earth. On his back is a massive tank turret, with a large bore gun. His head, separated from the body by a thick neck, is monolithic, with red glowing eyes. To further add to his menace, he has a deep black hull splashed with blood red jagged stripes. He is, strangely enough, a nice guy personality wise, but he was built to intimidate the enemy. Now, to see if the graphic guys can get this to work. My teacher has access to a game company, and I hope they get the picture. I'll post what they come up with.

The game is by no means advance, t is using a sprite based engine, with sde scrolling action for the smaller character, and top down enemy busting with the tank, Freedoms Dawn. Hilariously enough, this is a magical world, my tanks allies are Harold the cat king, mounted on a basset hound and wielding a spear, and A Fairy Warrior woman we decided to call Quig. Do not ask how we came up with this, we just did.

But I finally have a distraction from politics, hooray!

Well, its that day again.

I remember 9/11, I remember thinking that someone would pay for it. Well, they did, we wiped most of Al-Qaeda out. We still don't have Osama, but I question the point. Last video sounded like he'd gone senile anyway. Now, this takes us to Iraq. I know that Saddam didn't do anything related to 9/11, but thats not why we attacked. He had a relationship with al-Qaeda, his forces provided training to Al-Qaeda. But he didn't have the WMDs we thought he did. But he never listened to sanctions and complaints. So all sanctions did was hurt the people, and put money into the pockets of corrupt UN officials.
Revealing the corruption of the UN, and freeing Iraq from Saddam were good enough reasons for me. I just hope we actually help the Iraqis, and not abandon them right when things are getting a little better. I also hope we dont decide to abandon the Afghan people if we abandon the Iraqis. I would hope we can help at least one country be free.

Kill, Capture, or put to flight

Hope:

So a big offensive has started in Iraq, going after Al-Qaeda and Iranian funded militias. I notice with some sadness that in Baqouba, 80% of the senior leaders got out before we got in, but, to be blunt, putting them to flight isn't bad. They claimed Baqouba as their capital, and have been driven from it. Contrary to idiotic beliefs, there isn't much space safe for them anymore. North of Baqouba, their are many battle hardened Iraqi soldiers, back from helping in Baghdad, who have proven themselves good enough for independant operations. Around Baghdad, the surge is in full swing, and the south of Iraq is full of people unfriendly to Al-Qaeda. The terrorists are running out of hiding places. If we keep this up, we win. If we run away, Iraq may be able to survive, but it isn't guaranteed. Iraqi politics are as bad as ours, but if we reduce violence, they are more likely to fix their other problems.

Sad Reality:

But, really, does anyone thing we're not running away? The war has been declared lost in Washington, so we are probably going to lose due to our political climate. I hope not, but I think even if this surge gets results, we'll still leave before the job is done, like Vietnam. Unless America decides to get guts again ( yeah right ).

What the military got wrong in Iraq.

I think that America has gotten many things wrong in Iraq. Now, they are getting a bit better now, but many things happening now could have started years ago. Example: Patrolling with Iraqi police and Army from forward operating bases. Now, casualties are higher, but so is the effectiveness. We should have done this from the beginning. A shorter war means less casualties in the long term. It took a random Marine commander trying this out in Anbar last year for the military to start this. Guess what? even CNN says Anbar has gotten a lot better. Allying with secular tribal leaders is another thing we could have done earlier. Those two strategies made Anbar much safer.

Secondly, they didn't give the Iraqis enough heavy equipment. They claim artillery and strike aircraft aren't useful against an insurgency, so don't get the Iraqis any, but then use them both to destroy enemy strongholds. The fighting in Lebanon has proven that artillery works on terrorists, so the Iraqis might need them. Now, a cynic might say this is because they fear those weapons being used against us. Except we let the Iraqi army have tanks. Heck, were sending them a couple hundred now. Artillery would be useful to the Iraqis, as would attack helicopters and jets. Without those, how the heck are they going to fight their enemies, and how will we be able to leave? Without firepower nearly as good as ours, they can't survive, its that simple. Now, the emergency spending bill gives them tanks and other armored vehicles, and thats good, but theirs no news about a better Air Force or any kind of artillery. After all that fuss in Congress, the Iraqis still don't have enough firepower for us to leave, much less for them to be effective.

The loser jihad

Great, now we know exactly what terrorists are, gansta's with AK's. The fighting in Lebanon is because some fuzz went into the Palestinian ghetto looking for bank robbers. They got shot at, and called in the army. And now the battles started. Car bombs in areas that don't support the Al-Qaeda wannabes, and tanks smashing up a "refugee camp" ( city, named a refugee camp to make people feel sorry for them ).
In Iraq, more sheiks are getting tired of the bullshit al-Qaeda spews, and the Shiite army guys are helping Sunni cops and tribal fighters kick rear with artillery and tanks. More violence, yeah, sure is, but this time, its because the Iraqis are getting tired of the loser Taliban crap. A-Qaeda hates that their fighting back, and uses chlorine bombs on them, while makes the people hate Al-Qaeda more.
In Iran, the thuggish cops cart away women who dont have their ridiculous robes just right. A couple of days, ago, a crowd yanked 3 women away from them and drove them away. I can't wait until they mess with some guys wife and end up dead. Their just pissed because the Iranians don't want to end up poor like North Korea, and are sick of their joke of a president. I hope some spec-ops guys are helping the people get ready to overthrow the thug government.
This point to what the current "jihad" really is, a bunch of losers. Still, losers can kill lots of people before their gotten rid of. Losers aren't stupid, though, they just embrace a stupid way of life. The saddest fact is, Americans are worst losers than they are. We can't even stand up to a low-intensity war. Pitiful, we can even beat the loser jihad.

Bwahaha

Wow Iraq is putting forth a bill to let us leave, with a timetable and everything, and the conservatives are pissed! Why you ask, are they so mad that Iraqis want to take over security? I have no idea. I thought that we wanted victory, and this is it. But many conservatives are too stupid to see it. Now, its not a perfect bill, and it might not even get through discussion. But what is so wrong with them getting us to leave. Maybe they are willing to accept that they cannot end all violence in their country. Maybe its just Sadr's guys trying to get us to leave so they can attempt a takeover ( Hmm... without tanks, aircraft, or commandos? I think the IA can handle them ). Or maybe we won, ever think of that? Instead, they just slam Iraqis for not being grateful or something like that. The response to this should not be "Screw Them", it should be " Lets see where this goes" if it goes to a final bill, and they ask us to leave, then leave. Thats it. If they make this their choice, then we should respect it, not curse it. I mean damn, guys, what are you, liberals?

Whats wrong with America?

I mean, when did we become so obsessed with giving up when things get hard? I don't care if the news media pounds the drum of failure, Americans are still responsible for becoming so darn weak. Why are we saying the wars gone on too long? War is over when someone wins or loses, you don't give up because its taking more time than we hoped. But yet we do, even when the situation on the ground is actually improving. Less civilian deaths in April than March, tribes fighting Al-Qaeda, a Sunni political party whose only current goal is killing Al-Qaeda. But all we see is the car bombs Al-Qaeda is using to influence American politicians hungry for power. Even ABC says that the surge appears to be working so far, so its not the news medias fault. Politicians only respond to the people, so its not their fault.

No, sadly, America is weak, unwilling to fight a long war against evil. We just wanted revenge for 9/11, Bush thought we wanted to fight for a better future. Oops, his mistake. I just hope the next President realizes that American really are too weak to support a real war. Sure, they will go in all gung-ho, but then get mad when everything doesn't happen as planned, and you get polls in the low 30%.