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: Bruce L who wrote (147747)	10/13/2004 1:13:46 PM
From: Neocon	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 281500

Thank you, Bruce. I would be curious to have some responses too......

To: Bruce L who wrote (147747)	10/13/2004 2:41:13 PM
From: michael97123	Respond to of 281500

Re: << War is primarily about will, about resolve, about how much one can and will suffer and/or risk to achieve one's goals. >> Hi Bruce, I sent NC a private response that said much the same thing as you did. Yes i certainly agree with it. What we have to take into account is that different folks have different ideas regarding resolve. In my lifetime which unfortunately spans many wars(i guess since i am still standing war is ok for me (g)), I have seen gung hoism carried to extremes in earlier times. Now i see pacifism(a beautiful doctrine) but like socialism not yet ready for prime time as this nations chief threat. World witnessed what would happen when folks didnt have the stomach for war back in WW2. If there are any Star Trek fans out there, there is an episode in which Kirk having travelled back to the past falls in love with a beautiful woman who is a leading pacifist. Spock in trying to get them back to their own time gets a look at alternative histories thru newspaper dependent on whether this women was allowed to die in a auto accident as actually occurred or saved by the interlopers from the future. IF she lived, Hitler wins blah blah blah. A crying Captain allows her to be hit by the car. If a beautiful woman both in body and soul leading a movement whose time has not come could do so much harm, imagine my friend Kerry as president. My son watched a PBS show yesterday which showed kerry and bush thru the decades. My son said listening to kerrys opposition before the senate to the gulf war proved to him what i had always said which is kerry is a tortured individual from his vietnam days. I am not drawing conclusions here about all vets. I imagine thought that there are more anti-war kerrys out there. His heart may be in the right place but we are fighting sand nazis in this go-round and its no time to let that lady cross the street safely. Mike

To: Bruce L who wrote (147747)	10/13/2004 4:14:05 PM
From: cnyndwllr	Read Replies (2) \| Respond to of 281500

Bruce, regarding Neo's writing that; War is primarily about will, about resolve, about how much one can and will suffer and/or risk to achieve one's goals. That's hubris. It's a horribly dangerous assumption. It's the reason that people make serious mistakes and, even worse, never recongnize them for years. It's like the claim that "anyone can make anything of themselves in this great country," when most of us can't be rocket scientists, heads of corporations, pro sports players, models or whatever. Our goals have to be consistent with our abilities. The fact is that success in war is not "primarily" about will and resolve; success in war is primarily about never going to war unless, and until, you have the ability to win it. That means you must define a mission that is within your power to achieve. True, you must also have the support of those who will have to sacrifice lives, time and blood to win it, but that alone will not win a war whose mission is simply not achievable. Vietnam and Iraq are prime examples of wars that we quit, or will quit, for what some will call a lack of will. The fact is, however, that long before we lost, or lose, our "will," there will have been a recognition that we are trying to push a string. When lives and treasure are being squandered in trying to push a string, will soon wanes. The lesson; never enter a war where you do not have the capacity to close the deal. In Vietnam we did not have the capacity to force the Vietnamese to fight and die for the principles we established as exemplified in the form of the puppet government we propped up. In Iraq we do not have the capacity to force the Iraqis to fight and die for a secular, woman's rights, minority rights and Israeli/Western Civilization-friendly puppet government we are trying to establish. Eventually they will end up wherever it is their history, culture, and religion will take them. We will not "win" a war that requires that we use our military to force them to become like us, unless, of course, we wipe most of them out. (Kill them for their salvation?)