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 (153697)	12/8/2004 4:58:30 PM
From: michael97123	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 281500

Taking out Falujah was never going to just end the insurgency in and of itself Ed. I never said that. I said it would weaken it but in the short term would increase the violence country wide. I must admit that although the jury is not out, things are going less well than i would like to see. mike

To: cnyndwllr who wrote (153697)	12/8/2004 6:02:53 PM
From: neolib	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 281500

Regarding Fallujah: The only success there was the large number we killed, for relatively few of our own. Their kill ratio this last week has been way better than they did by staying and fighting in Fallujah, which is exactly what I tried to point out some time ago. They are better off without "bases" and territory. From a tactical standpoint, we should have backed off from Fallujah right near the end (after killing most of them) let it be known that we were pulling out, and they would have flocked back in over the next few weeks, at which point the exercise could be repeated with a similar kill ratio. Instead, we control the territory, and they get us by ones and twos, and die in similarly small numbers in a wider area. That is a big step backwards.