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: JDN who wrote (90871)	12/16/2004 11:57:31 AM
From: haqihana	Respond to of 793790

JDN, I agree about the time table on equipment, and improvements, needed in Iraq. I think that the attack on Iraq was begun when it seemed that Hussein was getting himself into a position to be a real threat to the ME, and I believe that he would not have stopped there. He was crazy enough to want to rule the whole world, and we had to step in to stop him. That may have happened earlier than we originally intended, so there is a natural "catch up" time to be fully equipped, but if we had waited any longer, the war would have been even more costly in lives, and weapons. I read, somewhere, that there have been a few attempts to design more armor for the humvees, but they resulted in too much weight on the vehicles, which would have hindered their affect in the use they were intended for. As you said, the humvee was intended to be a souped up Jeep, with mounted machine guns, and serve kind of like in "The Rat Patrol". Hit 'em fast, do as much damage as possible, and get the hell out of there, and I totally agree that our troops were faced by a style of warfare that was unexpected, and the troops had to improvise their way of counter attacking. One of the major problems, IMO, is that our people are not allowed to make enough preemptive attacks on known terrorist sites, and have to wait to fire until fired upon. That is no way to have to wage a war.