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: TimF who wrote (159437)	3/22/2005 6:53:37 PM
From: GST	Read Replies (2) \| Respond to of 281500

<they can hold a position and not be overwhelmed or if they can overwhelm us than we don't have overwhelming force.> Honestly, when you saw from day one that we could not stop the brazen, total, rampant looting of the capital of Iraq -- much less secure control elsewhere, what on earth would lead you to the conclusion that we had "overwhelming force"? We had a force size and structure to destroy a regime -- mission accomplished -- but not a force size or structure to establish ourselves as "in control". We are not in control of Iraq today and have not been in control since we invaded. To actually gain control would have taken "overwhelming force" -- we chose to destroy a regime with a light force and to forego the option of a force large enough to establish control for ourselves and those with whom we cooperate in Iraq. This idea of "controlling" something is nonsense -- the fact is WE don't control Iraq -- nobody does. We station our forces in the midst of violent anarchy.