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 : Politics for Pros- moderated -- Ignore unavailable to you. Want to Upgrade?

To: Brian Sullivan who wrote (41417)	4/29/2004 2:35:05 PM
From: michael97123	Respond to of 793883

The outcome in iraq is not going to be as originally planned by the defense dept. What will come will have a very iraqi face on it. And we may not like it but if it works the outcome is better than saddam and if doesnt its likely to lead to a civil war and at least americans will be out of the crossfire. Fallujah is the first step to bringing our kids home for better or for worse. Mike

To: Brian Sullivan who wrote (41417)	4/29/2004 3:45:40 PM
From: carranza2	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 793883

I don't think "leveling" Falluja would have been required. Simply the application of sufficient force against the insurgents in a very focused manner, which we can do, that would have averted a lot of civilian casualties. Mark my word: the new "Falluja Army" will be a joke, and we will have to go into finish the job. The Falluja business is not over by a long shot because the insurgents will be emoboldened by our retreat. The new "Army" will be worthless, and we will have to go in to finish what we started. After all, what chance do you think this new "Army" has against a force that put a credible fight against the Marines? The insurgents are going to make mincemeat out of the "Falluja Army"; we'll have their blood on our hands, too--if they actually go in, which I doubt they'll do in earnest.