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 (151779)	11/17/2004 4:49:33 AM
From: Neocon	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 281500

Or maybe they are not stupid, maybe you are mistaken as to their strategy.

To: neolib who wrote (151779)	11/17/2004 12:07:06 PM
From: one_less	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 281500

Unfortunately, the anti- rhetoric likes to find some doltish soldier who talks or behaves out of line and bolster that image as though it is representative.

To: neolib who wrote (151779)	11/17/2004 4:52:43 PM
From: cnyndwllr	Respond to of 281500

Hi Neolib. I read your series of posts on this topic with interest and admiration. Those in the "teach them a lesson-deny them sanctuary-remove their safe haven" mindset seem unable to comprehend that we are fighting powerful ideas. Such ideas don't live in armies, they live in individual minds and hearts. Killing some of the men who hold such ideas does not kill the ideas; sometimes it strengthens them. Destroying the "havens" of those who hold such ideas does not kill the ideas; it simply shifts those holding such ideas to other locations. Ideas that compel men to kill and die are powerful things. They will not disappear in the face of brute force, although they might go "underground" and ankle bite for a while. The only way to "kill" such a movement is to destroy or undercut the realities that lie at it's core. In Iraq we've done nothing concrete in the way of attacking those underpinnings, preferring instead to assign silly motives to, and unrealistic assessments of, those who are fighting against bombs, missiles, tanks and artillery with whatever means available. That's no formula for success. But still we have the hopeful, the naively inexperienced and the willfully blind saying that "we're taking away their sanctuaries and teaching them a lesson." In the end our lessons learned will be the ones we should have learned a long time ago; you cannot use military force in a faraway land to overcome a local population of people that don't want and won't accept your view of how they should live. Or at least you cannot proceed on that path without suffering continued painful losses and an insurgency that grows stronger over time while you increasingly bring your young home in boxes. What is it that we can realistically hope to accomplish in Iraq that's worth that price? Ed