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: Nadine Carroll who wrote (107228)	7/22/2003 7:43:12 PM
From: RealMuLan	Respond to of 281500

I guess the market and the foreign exchange with the US dollar rally agree with you. But if someone think the death of 2 sons will solve the US problem in Iraq, they may be disappointed.

To: Nadine Carroll who wrote (107228)	7/22/2003 8:52:27 PM
From: Ilaine	Read Replies (2) \| Respond to of 281500

>>Some of the resistance comes from Ba'athist "bitter-enders" who can be eliminated.<< And some from Shi'a who want to seize power. We seem to have established a more-or-less positive relationship with the Kurds. Hope it lasts. Someone explain to me why splitting the country into Kurdistan, Sunnistan and Shiastan isn't a good idea?

To: Nadine Carroll who wrote (107228)	7/22/2003 9:54:18 PM
From: Dayuhan	Respond to of 281500

What's most important is that the vast majority of Iraqis who hate Saddam but are conditioned by thirty years of his terror, know well and truly that he is dead and gone and not coming back. I suspect that if Saddam were confirmed dead, we might see increased public pressure for American withdrawal, particularly among Shiites. People who are not happy with an American presence may be willing to tolerate it if they think the alternative would be a resurgent Saddam. Without that threat, one visible advantage to the American presence would be removed.

To: Nadine Carroll who wrote (107228)	7/23/2003 2:06:09 PM
From: Bilow	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 281500

Hi Nadine Carroll; Re: "I'm sure you're mostly right." [that "guerilla resistance has less to do with Saddam per se, but more to do with the US presence in the country"] This is quite the switch from how certain you were that there would be no guerilla war back before it actually happened. For example: Bilow, October 4, 2002 As soon as we attack Iraq, the Iraqis will rally around Saddam just like the Palestinians rally around Arafat, the Americans rallied around Bush, etc. This is a fact of human nature and (home brew as opposed to foreign installed) authoritarian regimes. Iraq's army shouldn't be too much trouble, though we will have to kill a lot of people to get them out of Baghdad. And that's the rub. Killing more people in Iraq is going to make the locals like us even less. So, like Israel, we end up with a "difficult" occupation, but in a nation with much more people, much longer borders, much better armed, and probably less afraid of us than the Palestinians are of the Israelis. It's not like the Islamic Fundamentalists don't have operations in Iraq already. It's fairly obvious that the Iraqi people would flock to those groups to organize guerilla operations against us. Body bags. #reply-18076184 Nadine Carroll, October 4, 2002 You really think that Saddam has guerilla armies he doesn't approve of running around in Iraq? If so, we should be happy, his power is crumbling already. The reports I hear say that he still has a brutal police state that makes short work of opponents and wildcats. Give Saddam his due credit -- he doesn't put up with any such thing, unless it serves his interests. The comparison to Israel is ridiculous. Israel has such a problem because it relinquished territory to the PA, who was supposed to keep order. Instead, the PA spent nine years coddling the Islamists. #reply-18076317 -- Carl P.S. Also see: Nadine, September 16, 2002 Oh no, Carl, I was referring to the current guerilla war in France...I'm sure there must be one, you keep telling me how a certain percentage of people in every country just love to fight...LOL #reply-17998369 Nadine, October 4, 2002 Weird conclusion. If they fight our invasion, then they're fighting for Saddam, and he's said they won't do that. I mean, who wants to die for Saddam? So the natural conclusion is, they will passively support the invasion, but look for ways to give trouble later if we don't pull out or put an acceptable government in place. I dunno, Kristof's columns always seem to have these strange conclusions. I can't figure out where he's coming from. #reply-18075732 Bilow, November 18, 2002 As I've said before, the weakness in western militaries is in the control of civilians. There is no problem with defeating 3rd world air forces or armoured forces, though that is something that could change with changes in technology. Where problems arise is in 3rd world civilian and guerilla forces. #reply-18248514