SI
SI
discoversearch

We've detected that you're using an ad content blocking browser plug-in or feature. Ads provide a critical source of revenue to the continued operation of Silicon Investor.  We ask that you disable ad blocking while on Silicon Investor in the best interests of our community.  If you are not using an ad blocker but are still receiving this message, make sure your browser's tracking protection is set to the 'standard' level.
Politics : Foreign Affairs Discussion Group
 Public ReplyPrvt ReplyMark as Last ReadFilePrevious 10Next 10PreviousNext  
To: maceng2 who wrote (90864)4/7/2003 9:16:27 AM
From: Doc Bones  Read Replies (1) of 281500
 
Basra I think was handled well. They could have gone in much earlier with massive force and certainly have taken the city. The danger was that if there was a lot of damage, and civilians killed, it would have raised a ruckus about taking Baghdad, and put a lot of pressure from world opinion on us not to enter Baghdad. Knowing this, the Basra defenders would have been motivated to be destructive: shooting civilians, setting fires, etc.

Since Chemical Ali was operating in Basra it's safe to say that humanitarian considerations would not have been primary. Why give Saddam's forces the chance to play their strong suits: Swaying world opinion and killing civilians?

Instead they kept steady pressure on Basra, and when they hit that meeting of 200 Fedayeen and destroyed it, that probably ended any serious threat to Basra.

Doc@armchairgeneralsRus.org
Report TOU ViolationShare This Post
 Public ReplyPrvt ReplyMark as Last ReadFilePrevious 10Next 10PreviousNext  

HomeMailHotSubjectMarksPeopleMarksKeepersSettings
Terms Of UseContact UsCopyright/IP PolicyPrivacy PolicyAbout UsFAQAdvertise on SI
© 2025 Knight Sac Media.  Data provided by Twelve Data, Alpha Vantage, and CityFALCON News