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 : PRESIDENT GEORGE W. BUSH -- Ignore unavailable to you. Want to Upgrade?

To: steve dietrich who wrote (461508)	9/19/2003 1:48:59 PM
From: Orcastraiter	Respond to of 769670

Don't know about that particular incident. The killing of women and children is terrible. If there are 200,000 loyalists hidden in and about Baghdad and Tikrit, then it's going to be a long guerilla war ahead. This is the definition of a quagmire. The North Vietnamese were able to hold off the US forces in this way. By the use of guerilla warfare. By hiding, moving under the cover of darkness, or through an extensive tunnel network, then striking with surprise and disappearing. The Mujahadeen were able to use the same tactics against the Russians, using the mountainous terrain for cover. Contrary to popular belief, there is no armed force in the world that can defend against such tactics. Just as there is no armed force in the world that can dissuade suicide bombers and suicide hijackers. The urban guerilla warfare in Iraq may prove to be another quagmire. The Achilles heel of the US is manifold. It includes incoming supply lines for the troops and the outgoing oil pipelines. Also the infrastructure including water and electricity are targets. These pipelines and power grids are tough to defend against from sabotage, simply because they stretch around the country. You need enough troops to guard these facilities while you continue the house to house and street to street guerilla war. The enemy will be hiding and waiting for the opportune moment. The US needs to expand the current forces. This will be a very unpopular move politically. Instead of doing what is needed, Bush will likely let the body count stack up, as Americans are picked off one by one in a shooting gallery. There is not consensus on the level of troop strength needed in the Pentagon. Rummy is bent on lite and fast, but this leaves troops vulnerable, especially from guerilla tactics. Apparently part of the 87 billion will be for armored hummers. Gee nobody thought to send our troops light armor for the post combat ops? This war is quite different from Desert Storm, where Saddams troops were spread out across the desert from Baghdad to Kuwait. There, all we had to do was cut them off from their supply lines, surround and conquer the invading army. There is only one way to win this war, and that is to transfer power to an interim government, and get the UN peacekeepers in there for security. Even then it could be a long and drawn out power struggle amongst the many factions in Iraq. I don't think that a power sharing arrangement would last very long. The best thing the US can do is get out of Iraq, and begin to turn that river of money we're pissing away in Iraq, into programs that will guarantee energy independence from the middle east. That will surely shrink the power of the tyrants who wish to tap into the flow of oil dollars. This war in Iraq is fast becoming a classic quagmire. The blame falls squarely on the Bush administration for taking this country down an ill-defined path. Orca