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 : Stockman Scott's Political Debate Porch -- Ignore unavailable to you. Want to Upgrade?

To: Jim Willie CB who wrote (15631)	3/26/2003 3:01:01 PM
From: Sully-	Read Replies (2) \| Respond to of 89467

I'm not sure what you are saying Jim. This is a war. We are there to win as quickly as possible & in the process protect our troops from undue risk, even though we accepted more risk to them with our hyper sensitivity to civilian casualties. There were several nights of bombing of Saddam's HQ's, palaces & bunkers. We made it clear for all to see that Iraqi military & it's leadership were doomed if they fought back. They had plenty of time to lay down their arms & live to be liberated. Iraqi military who remain are dug in & those who continue to engage us are legitimate targets. Our objective now is to kill their military into submission. It was their choice to stay & fight. So, are you saying we should degrade our troops capability to match our enemy? Does that mean that we can also disregard any concern for massive civilian casualties too? Should we also match their other dirty, inhuman & illegal tactics? Things like dressing as civilians & attacking them when their guard is down....... using civilians & civilian/religious areas to protect our military & equipment....... hide & fight from hospitals, schools & Mosques, etc., etc. "shall I offer up chapter two ?" I'm still not sure I understand chapter one.