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 : Foreign Affairs Discussion Group -- Ignore unavailable to you. Want to Upgrade?

To: LindyBill who wrote (32158)	6/12/2002 1:29:13 AM
From: Bilow	Read Replies (3) \| Respond to of 281500

Hi LindyBill; Re: "The Israelis seem smarter than that. They will raid and pull out terrorists, but not run the place. It is messy, I know, but it is working at the moment, and will continue, I think until we settle some hash in Iraq/Iran, if we ever do." The Israeli problem is that as time has gone by, the terrorists (Palestinian freedom fighters) have become better at terror (freedom fighting). In other words, time has not been kind to the Israeli situation. The suicide bombings themselves were an improvement on previous bombing techniques. This year the suicide bombers became more deadly by improving the explosives mixture. And it has only been the last 6 months or so that Israel has begun to lose armored vehicles to Palestinians. Part of the reason for this slow change in Palestinian effectiveness is that humans learn, and violent conflict is the best teacher of all. To avoid having an enemy learn during a war, you have to defeat him so quickly that it is over before he's figured anything out. This principle is a fundamental one of US military doctrine, and for a damned good reason. There are plenty of classic examples of the use of this doctrine, but even more examples of failures to use it, especially in long wars. For example, the effect of "tanks" on the Western front in WW1 was largely dissipated by the fact that the Allies introduced them slowly instead of all at once. During peacetime, a country can sometimes retain a military edge indefinitely. But even countries with horribly inefficient militaries improve them quickly under the pressure of even small amounts of combat. Because of this general human tendency, it is US military doctrine to prosecute wars quickly, thereby preventing the other side from adapting. During the Gulf War, for instance, the US, when bombing Iraqi military targets in and near Kuwait, followed a policy of attacking units in sequence, rather than with less force but all at once. A great example of failing to follow this doctrine would be the US experience in Mogadishu where the Somalians, after a few months experience, figured out how to shoot down helicopters and drove the US out of the country. What the Israelis are doing is slowly training the Palestinian Authority to become a 1st class guerilla force. (Fortunately for Israel, the Palestinians have a long, long way to go.) At the same time, the Palestinians are, of course, training the Israelis to become a 1st class anti-guerilla force. The problem is that the initial conditions were that Israel already was a world class fighting force. So there's a lot more room for improving the Palestinians than the Israelis. Consequently, as time goes on, the balance of force slowly swings towards the Palestinians. In a war between a small technologically advanced country and a large technologically backwards one, time usually is on the side of the backwards country. -- Carl

To: LindyBill who wrote (32158)	6/12/2002 9:09:14 AM
From: JohnM	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 281500

Bill, You are definitely among the hardliners now on the ME issues. I simply don't see it resolved in that fashion. Perhaps I should stop but I'll make one more comment. If the Israelis are "smart" enough to back off occupying the West Bank and/or Gaza, it seems to me they would have been "smart" enough to not put the settlements in place. It's the settlements which lie at the root of this and it's the settlements that will push the Israelis toward occupying the West Bank and/or Gaza. I genuinely hope I'm wrong though I don't hope you are right. If you get my point. But, as you say, TWT.

To: LindyBill who wrote (32158)	6/12/2002 10:02:06 AM
From: paul_philp	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 281500

Bill, They will raid and pull out terrorists, but not run the place. It is messy, I know, but it is working at the moment, and will continue, The status quo seems to be in everybody's interests right now. Except if you are a Palestinian in a refuge camp or an Israeli on a bus. realize that we cannot settle the "Palestine" issue, From your lips to God's ears. and let us get on with taking out the terrorist network over there This seems to me to mean taking on Saudi Arabia in a real way. Is there the political will in the US for this? It looks to me like Saudi Arabia is more of a problem than Iraq. I don't agree with those who say, "we will only breed more terrorists." If we kill enough of them and keep it up, they will be disorganized to accomplish anything. Before the final outcome we will take civilian casualties. Perhaps on the scale of 9/11. This is not the Gulf or Bosnia. Does this screw up our courage or make us run? I think the Arabs are counting on us to not have the will to finish this. Including ANWR. Feeding Arabs countries oil money which we know is funding terrorism is counterproductive when we have some alternatives. Can we "screw our courage to the sticking point?" Not until GB2.0 starts being the leader he was during the months after 9/11. Paul