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: Sajjad who wrote (88023)	3/30/2003 4:32:04 PM
From: Sajjad	Read Replies (3) \| Respond to of 281500

To ALL: Just thinking about the end game. I wonder if any of you have an answer to this potential situation. Iraqi forces unlike the Allied forces have two objectives that are not necessarily winning objectives from our standards, but they provide them victory if they are able to achieve that. How can we protect ourselves into getting stalemated in such a scenario as can potentially happen in a chess game, where the victory is defined by a stalemate. As or example the following objectives provide them a symbol of victory. Especially for minds that have been “Stalinized”. 1) Prolong war and simply stay put inside the center until the allied forces cannot handle the carnage of casualties 2) Drag the war into Baghdad and increase the price of war for US and for the world to see. 3) Eliminate the tremendous difference between the firepower of Allied forces and Iraq They can accomplish all three by enticing the forces to place a siege around Baghdad. The moment the allied forces come in within the 15-20 miles radius around the center, (that will still be very populated (4.5 million people) and very intricate (lots of streets and alleys) 500 square miles) they will be forced to deal with the above three possibilities We will not be able to use air-force as several experts have pointed out that close combat air support is virtually impossible in urban setting, Secondly literally all the Iraqi artillery (most of which they have not used until now, in my view for the same reason), hiding in major city centers, will open up big time on the army encircling them outside township and cities. Iraqi forces will be able to shoot from inside out, without worrying about collateral damage of civilian but the returning fire will have to be accompanied by heavy civilian loss of life. They can prolong this cat and mouse, until the circle becomes smaller and smaller from the 15 miles radius to a smaller and smaller number. However, we can’t deny that the circle by definition can’t become smaller without a tremendous loss of civilian life. In the end, at a tremendous cost let’s say we reach the inner circle, the final bunker. At that stage we would still not know whether the last 100, 1000 or 5000 people left in his regime have the option of pulling the last trick in the bag or not. THE WMD. Here is the question, just for discussion sake to the readers that needs some objective analysis. Given the above scenario, will there be such a point, other then the out-right assasination of Saddam and his cronies(best outcome), where we the people of civilized world, given the limitations of our democracies,could be driven into asking whether the Liberation of Iraq will be worth the cost to the people of Iraq. Sajjad