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: Road Walker who wrote (236642)	6/10/2005 4:00:49 PM
From: tejek	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 1576912

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. I just can't believe Tim is still arguing this point. Talk about theater of the absurd. ted

To: Road Walker who wrote (236642)	6/10/2005 10:06:32 PM
From: TimF	Read Replies (2) \| Respond to of 1576912

50 mine explosions, small scale and short mortar attacks, sniper attacks, or attacks with at most a handful of gunmen (with rare exceptions of attacks by scores or even over a 100 but probably not 50 in the whole insurgency, let alone per day), isn't a sustained offensive. Sustained offensives take ground, or at least threaten to do so. Any number of guerrilla attacks are a sustained offensive, the very nature of guerilla warfare is that you don't sustain an offensive. It would be better if they did try to sustain an offensive because then they could and would be defeated. 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. South Vietnam eventually had a moderately effective army. Working together with the US they did greatly reduce the effectiveness of the Viet Cong, and with only a small US force on the ground (after most of our soldiers had pulled out of the country) they defeated a massive invasion from the North. But then when the north invaded again there was no US soldiers on the ground, no air support, and even no more financial support or re-supply. And it turns out that when they where completely cut off they didn't have the ability to defeat the NVA. Tim