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 (175240)	11/18/2005 5:00:26 PM
From: geode00	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 281500

Murtha's rational argument plus some: 1. Either leave or send in 500,000 troops. We won't have 500,000 troops without a draft. Anyone for a draft? No? Okay, then leave. Don't want to leave? Okay, then let's have a draft. 2. What's wrong with pulling back to, say, Kuwait and training Iraqis there and keeping a fast strike force there in case of IMMINENT THREAT TO THE US OF A from inside Iraq? 3. Iraq is beating up our military. It takes years to build up our forces. What happens if we're too weak to take on someone really important in the future? ======== A prof on the NewsHour said, if I remember correctly, this about terrorists: 1. He studied about 400 successful suiciders over a 25 year period in different parts of the world. 2. Many, if not most, are secular. 3. Suiciders are used in order to get rid of COMBAT TROOPS IN A GEOGRAPHIC AREA OF INTEREST. 4. They are successful about 50% of the time. In other words, no combat troops, no suiciders. In other words, this can be seen as a pretty cheap and pretty effective military strategy against a larger, better equipped and more organized enemy. This is an interesting analysis and it makes a great deal more sense than the general purpose crazy jihadist idea.