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: GST who wrote (111208)	8/13/2003 1:30:17 AM
From: Maurice Winn	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 281500

GST, I recall a LOT of people being against invading Afghanistan. They warned about the 10,000 British soldiers killed in the 19th century and all the lack of success of foreigners in Afghanistan. I thought it would be a pushover, which it was. The airborne USA military is totally different from 19th century British military. Same for Iraq. I didn't agree that the Iraqis would all come out cheering for the USA - they are a Stockholm Syndrome people after decades with Saddam and being demonstrative can be fatal. Fear was endemic. I thought the biggest problem would be driving around Baghdad in a tank looking for somebody to shoot at and so it turned out to be. As you say, there was indeed an international governmental consensus that the USA was on the right track in defeating the Taleban and catching Osama's gang, but there was lots of opposition too. New Zealand soldiers were high in the hills of Afghanistan, helping hunt Osama's lot. But NZ didn't support the invasion of Iraq without UN agreement. Mqurice