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: cnyndwllr who wrote (131791)	5/6/2004 1:47:22 PM
From: Hawkmoon	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 281500

Did you just do a "border shift?" I'd of sworn that you had that pistol in your right hand and now it's in your left. Nope... just seeing if I could get you to clarify your position a bit more so I could understand where your truly coming from.. The short answer, however, is that "no," I never said that. I never said anything like that. Good.. We weren't talking about that. It seems the subject has changed. Funny, I thought we were.. My POV was that the tactics we used in Vietnam failed miserably.. I believe that our conventional strategy was severely flawed because we permitted the enemies conventional forces to have safe haven and relatively non-interdicted supply lines. I also believe that our unconventional strategies were limited in scope, to merely defending the south rather than attempting than trying to take the battle to the enemies homeland (other than merely air raids).. History is replete with examples of workable techniques. Should we line up the innocent with the guilty and shoot every 3rd one? Should we take hostages and kill them on the day following the next attack? Should we starve the population into submission? What would be your first choice? Are the benefits worth the cost? So what you're telling me is that we'll never be able to properly defend against an enemy that is willing and able to be more brutal than we are? That tells me that we're in one hell of a lot of trouble in the current struggle against Islamic Militants. Because they TRULY know no limits to brutality they are willing to inflict upon us... If you cannot secure the cooperation of the general population to aid in the destruction of the insurgency, and if you're not willing to take such drastic measures, then either go home or accept continuous losses in a losing battle. So which solution should we adopt in Iraq (and throughout the region) against Islamic militants sworn to attack and destroy us? Which solution do you recommend?? I'm not well versed in events in Malaysia nor Peru. In both cases marxist insurgencies were suppressed and defeated. And both of them have jungle environments that would definitely compare to Vietnam and Laos. Hawk