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: neolib who wrote (151769)	11/16/2004 4:00:36 PM
From: michael97123	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 281500

Maybe base is a bad word but there certainly was a value for falujah being off limits to the US. It was a safe haven. Now safe havens may exist in other areas but with far less clout and planning ability as before. Afganistan became safer when it became unsafe for the taliban to rule. That is not to say that mulla omar et al didnt find some sanctuary on their way out of power. For individual iraqis to provide terrorists with sanctuary they either have to be: a. true believers b. be not fearful of US or Iraqi retaliation from govt or neighbors for that matter c. or be so cowed by the terrorists that they have no choice. The end of falujah has made b & c less likely and less coherent for a national insurgency. There are no jungles in iraq so if they cant find sanctuary in a way that allows them to plan, how successful will they be in the future?

To: neolib who wrote (151769)	11/17/2004 12:40:45 PM
From: TimF	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 281500

I'm still trying to figure out what you think "base" has to do with an insurgency. For an insurgent, a house, is a base. An organized insurgency can organize a lot better if it has a place to plan, train, rest, make bombs, hold hostages ect. For small groups this can be a house, but for an insurgency that hopes to achieve anything other than occasionally blowing something up you need organization and cooperation on a larger scale. If your whole base is someone's house than you operate more like a criminal gang than a large scale insurgency. Also the "bragging rights" of being able to say that they actually control an area helps recruitment. And if the insurgents are allowed to control an area, those that don't really support either the insurgents or the government will come to decide that they have to make an accommodation with the insurgents. Winning "hearts and minds" is more about winning respect than love, and its about winning over the people in the middle. The Jihadis and the Baathists aren't going to support the new government no matter what we do and say, but they can be isolated over time and marginalized. If you allow them to control cities and areas of the country they can't be marginalized in those areas. Tim