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.

Politics : America Under Siege: The End of Innocence -- Ignore unavailable to you. Want to Upgrade?

To: faqsnlojiks who wrote (4520)	9/20/2001 11:20:04 PM
From: Carolyn	Respond to of 27666

Good point, Joe. It really does lift a burden.

To: faqsnlojiks who wrote (4520)	9/21/2001 8:45:30 PM
From: PJ Strifas	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 27666

I believe Iraq IS involved and one way or another, they are itching to draw the US military close so they can "deal them a blow" - I suspect that would be a weapon of mass destruction. This is my opinion from reading various sources of information (much of it posted on this thread too). We'll have to go in and finish the job we left behind IMO. As for holding acreage - the last thing you want to do is to defend from all sides unknown enemies. I understand that our technology and capabilities are great and being so great doesn't lessen the fact that holding an isolated position is not the optimum place to be. It is possible to do it but I wouldn't want to be looking over my shoulder all the time. Now I don't believe we'll see anything of the likes of Desert Storm. I've been in lands that resemble the Afghan landscape and the best forces to deploy would be Air Cavalry with Special Ops/Marines/Rangers teams. We can transport a highly potent force into a small, isolated area, devastate that area and the "bad guys" within, then get out of Dodge. The key for that tactic to work is air superiority so we'll need forward airbases (Afghanistan is too far inland for sustain air ops without tankers - lose one tanker and we'd be sacrificing a squadron of planes)....that means troops on the ground to defend the planes& maintenance/support crews. I hear India might provide the best place for this.....how safe will that be...I don't know. Of course, this is just one possible scenario the military might follow.....