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: Win Smith who wrote (43719)	9/13/2002 12:12:22 PM
From: LindyBill	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 281500

I would be a lot less worried about this operation if either the neocons or the "realists" had much of a plan for after the war. You are a "Piece of Work", Win. You call my Foreign Affair split "Bogus," and then you use that split to discuss the issue! Plan one: "Get the Bastard!" Plan two: Let them install a Government when they get though waving flowers and dancing for joy in the streets of Baghdad, Given that things haven't exactly stabilized in Afghanistan after the last war Lets see. We kicked the Taliban out in December, about 9 months ago, It took us six weeks, using our Air Force and 200 troops on the ground. Afghanistan is one of the worst Sh*t holes in the world, this side of Africa, and you are whining that we haven't got their ACLU up and running yet. I bet there is "No Mint on the Pillow" at the Kabul Hilton, either. Well, Bush will get on with it in Iraq, and drag you, "kicking and screaming," along.

To: Win Smith who wrote (43719)	9/13/2002 12:53:29 PM
From: Neocon	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 281500

I may be mistaken about this, but my guess is that the Administration does not intend a major war or occupation of the country, but instead hopes to have a swift incursion that neutralizes retaliatory capacity, encircles loyalist elements (ie, the Revolutionary Guard), and terminates or incarcerates Saddam and his entourage. Then, we will install a transitional regime from among Iraqi dissidents resident in the West, and stay long enough for them to become entrenched, and for us to seek and destroy the WMD infrastructure. The presumption is that the populace is hungry for normalization, that there is a high degree of professionalism in national administration, and that Saddam does not have a large, ideologically committed following, but mostly survives through the use of carrots and sticks. Iraq is a far more advanced country than Afghanistan, materially and culturally, so there is little fear of warlordism or suicidal fanaticism. The biggest test would be whether the Kurds and Shi'ites took advantage of the situation to partition the country, how brutally the new regime reacted, and whether Turkey and Iran were sucked into the hostilities. My guess is that the Administration is trying to work out an autonomy deal for the Kurds, short of independence, and reviewing pacification measures for the southern Shi'ites, along the lines of substantial aid.......

To: Win Smith who wrote (43719)	9/13/2002 1:57:54 PM
From: bela_ghoulashi	Respond to of 281500

That's it, Win, fight those bogus generalizations with your own bogus generalizations. This whole muslim headcount bit is bogus from the get go. No matter how many of them there are, they are either living in countries where they are minorities, or if they're not, they're either extraordinarily weak politically, economically, militarily...by any measure...or else living like sheep under despots where they have no individual power of their own in the first place. If they are no threat or danger to those who daily and directly oppress them, I doubt the majority of them are a serious threat or danger to us either.