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.

Gold/Mining/Energy : Big Dog's Boom Boom Room -- Ignore unavailable to you. Want to Upgrade?

To: kodiak_bull who wrote (21448)	4/9/2003 3:39:57 PM
From: Winkman777	Respond to of 206096

KB, your comments are right on. America the "just and courageous". We must now take care of,to quote CCricket the "other middle east problem". As the only supporter of the present belligerent "regime" in Israel, it is up to the USA to "settle" the Israeli Palestinian/Muslim conundrum. I am tired of American dollars going to support Israel's illegal (UN resolution 242 - 35+ years old) occupation of and settlements in Palestine. Winkman

To: kodiak_bull who wrote (21448)	4/9/2003 3:43:28 PM
From: Ed Ajootian	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 206096

Hold on bro's, how can we be sure this wasn't all just some staged event on a Hollywood film set? Damn, I wish I can find our buddy the Iraqi Info Minister to set us all straight on what's _really happening! I wonder if that Info Minister knows how much money he can make by offering to appear on David Letterman? <GGGGGGGGGGGGGGGGGGGGGGGGGG> Seriously, its great to see this thing come to such a rapid conclusion, and best of all, without any terrorism on our shores. I was too much of a worry-wart about this previously.

To: kodiak_bull who wrote (21448)	4/9/2003 4:12:04 PM
From: cnyndwllr	Read Replies (2) \| Respond to of 206096

Kodiak, I suspect you're a little too close to this emotionally to allow for a discussion with anyone but a true believer. I say that because no one, not even Fox news, denies that many Iraqi men have died in fruitless and impossible attacks against American and British forces. That kind of sacrifice is based upon thinking and beliefs that we should be careful to consider. If you wish to ignore it or diminish those action, so be it. We all make choices with respect to what we will allow ourselves to consider. As for the hitting of the statue of Saddam with their shoes, that does have meaning. Its meaning at this point tells us only that two hundred or so people out of a huge city came out and demonstrated their revulsion toward Hussein. They may be representative of the majority, or even a huge majority, of the people of Baghdad, or they may not. That may reveal that the Iraqis will give us a warm reception post-Hussein, or it may not. You seemed to be declaring that the images proved the mood of the nation of Iraq, I disagreed. That was my point, what was yours? My point on the economic status of most Iraqis was valid. You can say that the U.N.-U.S. imposed sanctions caused havoc with economic stability and that there were shortages, but you cannot compare their plight with that of the N. Koreans or the people of many third world countries whose everyday goal is to avoid dying from disease and starvation. My point was that people who are hopeless will likely welcome liberation more readily than people that live like the majority of the Iraqis lived. Once again, this is a factor that may be important when we evaluate the likely reception we will have post-Hussein. As far as the "greatest victory" issue, call it what you want. It was a great "battle plan" and may rank high strategically but I thought you called it "the greatest military victory in a century." If that's true then we'd have to look back in history at other instances where overwhelmingly superior forces crushed their opposition and evaluate how they ranked. War is never easy but I always considered great victories as those where an inferior force used strategy to overwhelm a superior force or at least overmatched an evenly matched force. How about the wars for survival that the Israelis fought against technologically similair and numerically overwhelming forces? Don't those rank higher as "great victories?" As far as the "baby elephant," "Marty" and "back to the future" aspersions, you should realize that what I AM DOING is trying to pierce the fog of snap photos and the "trying too hard" press conferences to see what is really going on and where it leads us. If you believe that the cards have been put on the table for all of us to see by either the administration, the Arabs or the other factions of the world, then you've been watching too many movies. This may be a great day for the world, for America, for Arabs, for Iraqis and it may lead to a great new era of peace and prosperity for us all. Hope and unquestioning acceptance of all you're told will not, however, make it so. I counsel vigilance, critical thinking and debate. What is it you counsel? Unblinking adherence to the party line? Calling each snapshot from the middle east that supports the party line a defining moment that represents the view of Iraqis? Refusing to look back in history to learn from all of the times that we've manipulated and misjudged the Arab culture? Everything we discuss when we look to the future is speculative but my questions raise no more speculation than your pronouncements of permanent and benevolent success. With respect to your insinuation, or was it a statement of fact, that I'm saddened by the potential for a quick victory in Iraq and a better world to follow, I think you know me better than that. I wish the war had been over in one day without the loss of one American life. I hope that your predictions of a better world prove to be true. I also, however, question authority and particularly an administration that has wreaked havoc on individual rights and made contradictory statements whenever it suited their current purposes. In another time and in another place I recall you as a man who had a deep distrust of power in government, as did I. It seems that you only distrusted power in the hands of the Democrats. That's fine but some of us will continue to take a critical look at what we're told by those who wield the awesome power of America. It's an American tradition, don't you know?

To: kodiak_bull who wrote (21448)	4/9/2003 5:13:43 PM
From: CpsOmis	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 206096

KB: I love ya, man....really. And I do enjoy your enthusiasm and intellect in your writings. However, the second shoe has yet to drop. In yesterday's world you are absolutely 100% on the money. In today's world enough poison to kill and injure thousand upon thousands can be carried in a briefcase. We just 'k'issed off a huge amount of people that come from a culture that lives for revenge. Indeed, and I hope I am wrong, this will soon be considered a solemn and painful moment in world history. I recognize the source of your passion and joy. I would share it if it were not for the other shoe. Cosmo

To: kodiak_bull who wrote (21448)	4/10/2003 3:48:02 AM
From: Bruce L	Read Replies (2) \| Respond to of 206096

Re: Historic Military Victory? KB: Your exuberance and joy and American pride at the events in Bagdad today were well expressed and I share those emotions and most of the opinions. But I can't agree that in the strictly military sense that this campaign has any historical significance. The disparities were only too obvious: wealth, population, military technology, air forces, lack of air defense, etc. No rational observer on either side ever doubted the outcome and that brought into play a morale advantage before the first shot was fired. Every war has a few romantics who believe that faith, elan, religion or magic will pull them through, but these always die in the initial clashes. The Israelis faced and defeated large Arab armies in 1956, 1967 and 1972 and did so in less time with less of a technological and aerial advantage. But then I don't rate these three wars as militarily significant either: they were fought against conscript "slave" armies of despotic regimes and like Herodotus' view of the Persians I don't believe these can ever produce "real" warriors. About the best modern comparison I can think of to this war is the German invasion of Yugoslavia in April 1941. Yugoslavia had a million man army and was about the same size as Iraq though with more defensible mountains and rivers. Its army's core of Serbians had a credible reputation having bloodied the Austrians in 1914 and defeated the Turks and Bulgarians in 1912. Hitler ordered the attack within days of an English-engineered coup that produced an anti-German government. Using blitzkreig ("shock and awe"?) tactics with modern armor and total air supremacy, the Germans overran the country in 7 days with something like 55 fatalities. The German General Staff considered the operation as all in a day's work; nothing special. I don't want American generals - or, more importantly, the American public - to develop a swelled head with respect to their military prowess. American soldiers are superbly trained and their precision weapons are awesome. But it may not be long before these same weapons spread to many other nations, some of whom may someday have warriors who would be capable of giving us a real contest. Bruce