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: stockman_scott who wrote (168954)	8/14/2005 9:54:17 AM
From: jttmab	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 281500

"We've said we won't leave [Iraq] a day before it's necessary. But necessary is the key word -- necessary for them or for us? When we finally depart, it will probably be for us," a U.S. official said. washingtonpost.com Lot's of boldable text in that link. jttmab

To: stockman_scott who wrote (168954)	8/14/2005 7:06:18 PM
From: geode00	Read Replies (2) \| Respond to of 281500

Well it would seem that if Bush is unwilling to send in 200-300K troops to 'finish' the job and restore order to Iraq, Bush is unwilling to 'win' the war. Everything else is simply window dressing for the voting public. He's already given up on a military solution for the insurgents and terrorists and that's in public. I wonder what they're saying in private about the prospects. All in all this is a very bad year for the US Military. The world's last remaining superpower (yeah, right) can't defeat a handful of insurgents and terrorists in a third world country less than 1/10th its size. This is very bad for us, regardless of how anyone feels about the idiot in chief Bush.