SI
SI
discoversearch

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 : Stop the War! -- Ignore unavailable to you. Want to Upgrade?


To: MulhollandDrive who wrote (12813)4/12/2003 10:28:20 PM
From: 49thMIMOMander  Read Replies (2) | Respond to of 21614
 
Do you have a great need for not understand anything of anything, these days??

(hint: the illegal war is almost over.....the illegal coalition has almost "won")



To: MulhollandDrive who wrote (12813)4/14/2003 7:37:33 AM
From: zonder  Respond to of 21614
 
i am amused at your persistance at flailing at who best interprets the coalition's "proper" way of fighting

It is you who took to quoting Sun Tzu and his teachings of the "Art of War". According to the passage you quoted, for US/UK forces whose military might more than 10 times surpasses that of Iraq's, the better way to win would have been to "surround" Iraq, rather than to "attack" it.

sun tzu should take a lesson from bush?

Pray tell why you keep quoting him on the "Art of War", if you have such a opinion on his teachings?

res ipsa loquitur

Not sure what you mean to say by that re US/UK military victory in Iraq, since nobody argued that Iraq would win.

One question: When Sun Tzu says:

"The art of using troops is this:
......When ten to the enemy's one, surround him;
......When five times his strength, attack him;

Message 18830207

...do you think he says "attack" when you are five times as strong as the enemy and "surround" when you are ten times as strong, because, uh, your victory is less sure?

So, how does the US/UK military victory in Iraq disprove Sun Tzu?

Did you even read Art of War?