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 : Formerly About Advanced Micro Devices -- Ignore unavailable to you. Want to Upgrade?

To: TimF who wrote (236595)	6/10/2005 7:04:49 AM
From: Road Walker	Read Replies (2) \| Respond to of 1577833

re: Occasional hit and run attacks aren't an offensive, let alone a sustained one. ~50 attacks a day is sustained. Taking land (although they do control parts of Iraq) is not a prerequisite to being offensive. It's sustained. It's offensive. We can argue semantics forever but you are just wrong. re: In any case the battle here, esp. in the long term, isn't between the insurgents and the US but rather between the insurgents and the Iraqi government. Right now the battle is with our troops. It's yet to be seen if Iraq can build an army/police force that is capable. South Vietnam never could, and we had a lot more years. John

To: TimF who wrote (236595)	6/10/2005 1:25:09 PM
From: tejek	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 1577833

tell me when it hasn't been an offensive It hasn't. Occasional hit and run attacks aren't an offensive, let alone a sustained one. I can't believe you are still arguing this point. The attacks are constant......24/7. No army in a sustained battle fights every minute of every day which it seems is the kind of action you seem to think is needed to qualify as sustained. There is a sustained effort by the insurgents to undermine the stability of Iraq.......period.