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: Nadine Carroll who wrote (51445)	6/24/2004 1:37:59 AM
From: Dayuhan	Read Replies (2) \| Respond to of 793771

al Sadr wasn't trying to offer a conventional battle, he was trying to raise the southern provinces in a guerilla warfare He seized and held territory. That is a conventional battle, not a guerilla war. If he was trying to stage a guerilla war, he was doing a pretty poor job of it. They never had a chance of "winning", and I never suggested that they might. If he tries again he will be an outlaw. Isn't he an outlaw already? What happened to the arrest warrants? For that matter, what happened to those people in Fallujah who desecrated American corpses? We went there to get them, and we didn't. We were supposed to arrest al Sadr, and we didn't. We had to kiss Sistani's ass and make substantial concessions to make sure he stayed on our side of the fence. If that's victory, we'd better make sure we don't have too many more similar victories. The fight here is political, not military. The battles are sideshows, and if we delude ourselves into thinking that all we have to do to win the war is to win the fights, we will be in trouble. When I said we will have to fight them again, I didn't mean that we will have to fight them as the al Sadr militia. Do you really think those angry and demoralized young men are going to go home and sit on their butts? Who do you figure is cozying up to them right now and offering a better program? you are so convinced that Iraq is sliding into chaos that you cannot even admit steps towards order. I wouldn't say Iraq is sliding into chaos - yet. This is still the two steps forward, two steps back stage. I'd actually say this is still the honeymoon, though it's been a fairly rocky one. The "insurgency" is not ultimately the major issue - the real problems start when the prospect of an election becomes imminent, and the maneuvering and backstabbing come out in the open. By that time, of course, it won't be our problem any more, though it could easily become our problem again. you certainly seemed to think he would win. I never said he would - or could - "win", in the sense of defeating American troops in combat. His ability to seize territory and force an extended confrontation, despite inferior numbers and armaments, was not "winning" for him, but it was in no way a victory for us either. The only real winner out of that episode was someone who wasn't fighting - Sistani, who emerged as the most powerful man in Iraq.