SI
SI
discoversearch

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: unclewest who wrote (120222)6/15/2005 10:53:53 AM
From: Nadine Carroll  Read Replies (3) | Respond to of 793955
 
I know this is pure speculation, uw, but do you think it would have even made much difference had we gone into Iraq with 500,000 men instead of 150,000? After all, the problem would have been the same, as far as I can see. We failed to prevent the looting not because we didn't have any men on the scene, but because there was no will to use the one technique that would have worked - shoot the looters. We wanted to be liberators, not occupiers.



To: unclewest who wrote (120222)6/15/2005 2:19:39 PM
From: Neeka  Respond to of 793955
 
Friedman hob nobs with the minority that still live their lives as if this were the late VN 60s and really believe, imo, that no matter what we do we can't win this war.

He certainly lacks in the new idea arena.

Suggesting that we need more troops is exactly how the dems ran their campaigns..........well, all but Dean the Scream.........during the run up to the presidential election.

Suggesting it is nothing new, and Bush is going to ignore it.


HomeMailHotSubjectMarksPeopleMarksKeepersSettings
Terms Of UseContact UsCopyright/IP PolicyPrivacy PolicyAbout UsFAQAdvertise on SI
© 2025 Knight Sac Media.  Data provided by Twelve Data, Alpha Vantage, and CityFALCON News