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 : Idea Of The Day -- Ignore unavailable to you. Want to Upgrade?

To: IQBAL LATIF who wrote (43917)	3/31/2003 12:12:29 PM
From: JD	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 50167

"if Saddam produces a Stalin like popular resistance without taking the population of Baghdad as hostage we will be wrong and we will be ashamed of our projections." Ike, as you know, a 'Stalin like popular resistance' is as much myth as reality...resistance yes, 'popular' no. Saddam is following Stalin's lead in the creation and inforcement of resistance...using the Fedayeen Saddam just as Stalin used the NKVD: "...NKVD activities in the World War II-guerrilla operations, behind-the enemy-lines terror squads, blocking detachments that executed on spot the retreating regular troops and so on...the construction of deep Soviet defensive lines initiated in autumn 1941 required massive human resources, the exploitation of which was impossible without forced labour management...the erection of gigantic defence lines in the vicinity of major Soviet cities with a 12-hour working day and meagre food rations...The darkest page of the bloody list of NKVD massacres and executions of civilians includes the ethnic purges in the Kabarda-Balkaria..." 1jma.dk "...The Fedayeen, with a total strength reportedly between 30,000 and 40,000 troops, is composed of young soldiers recruited from regions loyal to Saddam. The unit reports directly to the Presidential Palace, rather than through the army command, and is responsible for patrol and anti-smuggling duties. Though at times improperly termed an "elite" unit, the Fedayeen is a politically reliable force that can be counted on to support Saddam against domestic opponents..." fas.org And as you also know, the population of Baghdad has been held hostage to the whims of their narcissistic leader from day one. I only hope the fall of Baghdad is not accompanied with a huge loss of civilians. Saddam's personality can very easily lead him to the conclusion that if he can't 'lead' the Iraqi people, then he will attempt to kill them so no one else could 'lead' them either. Being an optimist, I think support for Saddam will erode and then collapse within a matter of a few weeks. Jerry

To: IQBAL LATIF who wrote (43917)	3/31/2003 11:59:31 PM
From: Sajjad	Respond to of 50167

Also, nice to hear from you Iqbal. Yes I used to visit SI often when I had more time available and was primarily not traveling much. However I have been traveling very extensively the past few years, plus involved in other personal ventures, that provides very little time for other activities. I agree this markets is not going nowhere in the near future. It is going to stay in the trading range for a while unless the fundamental framework changes. I made my previous comments, just to point out the fact, bitter realities will occur (as it happened just today when the 7 member of a family got killed in the shooting incident on the border), where we will not be in a position to make the case for “he did or we did it”. We will be responsible for civilian casualties (though unintentional they will be) as the war proceeds. That argument will become meaningless after a certain point. It is more tragic what will follow as a consequence of that what worries me the most. Unfortunately this war has major non-linearity in that context, as I described in one of my posts on another thread, that the burden of certain collateral damage falls with greater weight on our shoulders as civilized and democratic western societies then the brutal killers on the other side. This lowers our breakeven point for the war in a definite way. The world as a global village being envisioned only a few years ago is being split apart by various forces in the opposite direction. This war if it goes for any longer period of time will start helping those negative forces that nurture themselves through the clash of civilization. The true forces of evil I have been standing against all my life. I don’t want to do a complex strategic analysis for the pros and cons of this war, there is plenty of stuff available on the internet, but will simply say that a long term conflict does more harm than good to the “death of distance” phenomenon you referred to. In that sense it just provides more fodder to the aims of the evil murderers of 9/11 crime. I am afraid this war might exacerbate the collateral damage that resulted from that tragedy, instead of neutralizing it. The tragedy of wars is that it makes the vast majority of rational bystanders who are neutral spectators as victims in many a creative ways. If god forbid the situation further escalates and leads to a situation that terrorism comes to our shores here in US, even on a smaller scale, I have no doubt that we will have a public opinion that will be willing to forego civil liberties under the name of patriotism in a heart beat. I don’t know if you have heard about the Patriot II, which is a DOJ document draft leaked by the CPI that totally redefines civil liberty in America. These are things I could not have envisioned happening here only a few years ago, but then there wasn’t a 9/11 either. The point is how do we deal with this POST 9/11 world and if the events of today will escalate towards uniting this world or dividing it further. Looking at the microcosm of these smaller events, like the daily collateral damages the number of daily incidents, Basra fallen or not, isolated bombing suicide or other wise, the number of days it takes to reach Baghdad (whether 5 days of 50) are all small stochastic steps leading to an end state that could be totally unrelated in its isolated setting. Yes we can justify the war in a broader context of the greater-good always. However as we all know familiar with project economics, without the clear definition of a time frame and stated risk appetite, I will not be able to define the true costs associated with the undertaking and therefore a definite yes on its feasibility. I would be better of venturing into a guessing game of playing a high stakes Texas Hold’em. Sajjad