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 : Idea Of The Day -- Ignore unavailable to you. Want to Upgrade?

To: vampire who wrote (41052)	10/15/2001 4:59:35 PM
From: Ira Player	Respond to of 50167

Metsin6, I think the deciding difference is the attempt to stay... A "guerrilla" force needs an opponent that has a defended perimeter. The Soviets were trying to control territory, which leaves a large perimeter to defend. A guerrilla methodology is simply: Watch your opponents defenses carefully, determine a weak point, develop a plan to cause maximum damage on that weak point with minimum losses and then execute the attack and disappear again until another opportunity is found. The guerrilla advantage is simple: The defender must protect the entire perimeter. The guerrilla chooses the time, place and nature of the attack and then vanishes. They have the element of surprise and, at least initially, have a choreographed agenda. I believe we should provide as small a footprint as possible in the country. We should be the guerrilla's. Other than destruction of the infrastructure with bombs and missiles, we should not engage unless there is a clear target and then we should hit it hard, execute the mission ("e" word specifically selected) and extract our team. We should have a minimum of people and equipment in the country. Only assets required to gather information should be considered for a long term presence. Ira