Ask Michael Burke Message Board

STOCKTALK

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 : Ask Michael Burke

Public Reply Prvt Reply Mark as Last Read File

Previous 10 Next 10 Previous Next

To: Freedom Fighter who wrote (118074)	5/6/2009 7:43:01 PM
From: Thomas M.	Read Replies (2) of 132070

Isn't the bottom line that the US sent more troops into Iraq That's a horrible misapplication of an accounting analogy. The bottom line is the number of coalition troops. The American component is some line above that. There was no surge!!! and used them to implement an entirely different strategy for flipping the locals to our side and against the various foreign fighters. It was successful and that's going to make things easier going forward. If that truly was what mattered, than they would have said that, right? They would have lied about sending in more troops. That strategy was employed AFTER our larger strategy had begun to reduce violence. That larger strategy was ethnic cleansing. The same crime that Saddam was guilty of () and one of our justifications for killing him and destroying Iraq. Ironic, huh? Tom Saddam's ethnic cleansing was done in a harsher manner than ours, but also on a smaller scale. He was just trying to get his border right and secure his country's valuable oil. In the majority of Iraq (e.g. Baghdad), Sunnis and Shiites got along great.

Report TOU Violation

Share This Post

Public Reply Prvt Reply Mark as Last Read File

Previous 10 Next 10 Previous Next