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: neolib who wrote (151769)11/16/2004 4:00:36 PM
From: michael97123  Read Replies (1) of 281500
 
Maybe base is a bad word but there certainly was a value for falujah being off limits to the US. It was a safe haven.
Now safe havens may exist in other areas but with far less clout and planning ability as before. Afganistan became safer when it became unsafe for the taliban to rule. That is not to say that mulla omar et al didnt find some sanctuary on their way out of power. For individual iraqis to provide terrorists with sanctuary they either have to be:
a. true believers
b. be not fearful of US or Iraqi retaliation from govt or neighbors for that matter
c. or be so cowed by the terrorists that they have no choice.
The end of falujah has made b & c less likely and less coherent for a national insurgency. There are no jungles in iraq so if they cant find sanctuary in a way that allows them to plan, how successful will they be in the future?
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