Silicon Investor (SI) -- The First Internet Community

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.

Strategies & Market Trends : Classic TA Workplace -- Ignore unavailable to you. Want to Upgrade?

To: marginmike who wrote (13387)	9/13/2001 12:40:48 PM
From: The Freep	Respond to of 209892

mm -- I think the Thomas Friedman piece (http://www.theage.com.au/news/state/2001/09/14/FFXDMNZFJRC.html) is important here, too. As he says, you cannot fight this war as you've fought others. Occupying Iraq or Afghanistan doesn't seem to be a solution per what I've read. A part of it? Perhaps, but even there I'm hard pressed to find an opinion that backs that up. I simply hope that those with access to the intelligence reports and with the knowledge of who and what we're dealing with can find a solution to the problem. . . and then put it into effect. I hope you're not right that we'll need to become a wartime economy, but agree fully that our ability to do so post-haste, an ability I'm sure we have NOT lost, makes us a most formidable foe. the freep

To: marginmike who wrote (13387)	9/13/2001 12:45:02 PM
From: AllansAlias	Read Replies (3) \| Respond to of 209892

I am not convinced that American can win a ground war on foreign soil if the opposition does not choose to fight according to the rules of the invader. Iraq is not so bad since much of the country is flat and supply lines are relatively obvious, but Afghanistan is a nightmare. How long would you stay? How many years of body bags would you tolerate?