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: Bilow who wrote (37249)	8/12/2002 11:40:27 AM
From: BigBull	Read Replies (2) \| Respond to of 281500

Then how do you explain that 3/4 of the country rose in open revolt against Saddam in '91. Does not bode well for his "War in the Cities" or anything remotely as effective as the campaigns waged by Ho and Giap. Of course you could argue that during the last 11 years that Saddam has endeared himself to his people. I expect Saddams "War in the Cities" is far more about repressing his own people than it is about giving the US another Vietnam.

To: Bilow who wrote (37249)	8/12/2002 11:52:45 AM
From: Ilaine	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 281500

Instead, what the Iranians discovered is that the Iraqis fought a hell of a lot harder when they were defending their own territory in Iraq than they had when they were operating in territory they took from Iran. Personally, if I were Iraqi, I'd fight like hell to keep the Ayatolla Khomeini out, but would welcome the US with open arms. Not that I actually expect that to be a universal sentiment, but more common that you do, probably. Parsing "The entire population of Iraq will not fight for or defend Saddam Hussein" it doesn't mean that no Iraqi would do same but that not all Iraqis will not do same. No?