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 (88033)	3/30/2003 4:47:50 PM
From: paul_philp	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 281500

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. Don't you think that this question is being actively debated now? Don't the tactics of the US military show that public debate is impacting the conduct of the war? I think that the answer is yes, there are limits to how much damage to the Iraqi population the political system in the US can tolerate. However, the very worst case scenario would be a long term siege of Badhdad with the rest of Iraq under coalition control. The coalition would have some limited means to minimize the civilian cost of such a seige. There is no scenario where America would withdraw leaving Saddam in power. I think the calculation changes everytime Iraq executes POW's on film, shoots missiles at their own people, use Iraq citizen's as shields. If Iraq were to use chemical weapons against American soldiers, all bets would be off.

To: Sajjad who wrote (88033)	3/30/2003 5:03:37 PM
From: HH	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 281500

I think the Kurds will play an important role in the fall of Baghdad. Not only will they be less accountable towards the unintended killing of human shields, they will also be a factor in the political victory as well. HH

To: Sajjad who wrote (88033)	3/30/2003 5:25:05 PM
From: Sig	Respond to of 281500

And the answers are: <<<As for 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 >>>>> The War is being run on General Franks schedule, attemps by Iraq to delay things have been to date, futile. Within the first 10 days, attrition of the Republican Guard divisions outside Baghdad is nearing 50% and is accelerating because of increased firepower to the area. A two week delay without a change and there will be no equipment left to drag back into the city <<< 2) Drag the war into Baghdad and increase the price of war for US and for the world to see.<<< Nobody drags General Franks or his armies anywhere. If all of Saddams troops retreat into the city, the action could will be far different than anything seen to date. The type of defenses outside the city and the method with which Iraq plans to use them is now very clear from the information known to date Many thousands of our war planners involved can go on to selecting the best actions to take if Saddams troops retreat to inside the city. Their is no way Mr Rumsfeld or any other knowing person is going to tell the Press what those actions, a considerable portions of which will be non-military ,will consist of But It will certainly be to minimize casualties on both sides with the fastest conclusion that can be attempted and again there will be no timetable given to permit the nay-sayers to falsely imply a stalemate. * Note "Action" The most visible actions on TV are the big bombs exploding or airplanes flying around but there is much more action of the invisible kind like infiltration, discussions with Iraqi leaders or the Kurds. For example suppose we just armed the Kurds with night-vision goggles, sniper rifles, and grenades and sent them into Baghdad to clean up. They have a much greater personal hatred of Saddam and his troops and are yearning for the job. They might even pay us for the opportunity <<< 3) Eliminate the tremendous difference between the firepower of Allied forces and Iraq >>> Good luck , we could round up or maybe ten more Carrier task forces, 15 more B-2's. Just a rough guess, I haven't looked up the present inventory which should be available on the Web Sig How to take the city with minimize casualties ? Let your imagination run free. We have lots of earthmovers. Lets dam the Tigris and flood the city with 4 feet of water, fairly harmless to civilians short term, but imagine the havoc in those underground tunnels were the villians are holed up , and possible with their air vents sealed. Short out the ingnition on their tanks.