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: cnyndwllr who wrote (183352)	3/11/2006 11:34:22 AM
From: Hawkmoon	Read Replies (2) \| Respond to of 281500

I wrote, "in a war we can't win." It would be more logical for you to define winning instead of asking me to prove a negative? If we can't win "it", then who can? Did we ever really win WWI or WWII??... Did the North ever really win the Civil War?? Did we really ever win the Revolutionary War? Did N. Vietnam ever really win the Vietnam War? Someone must be winning some wars around the world... If we "lose" in Iraq, then who wins? Which, of course, begs the question.. How to prevent our opponent in Iraq from winning?? Hmmm.... Hawk

To: cnyndwllr who wrote (183352)	3/11/2006 11:42:33 AM
From: Hawkmoon	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 281500

After we've left it will be "won" by some faction in Iraq, or maybe by the division of Iraq into enclaves of sects and religions, and it will probably be a bloody "win." That's the reality. I see... so it has to come down to civil war, with one faction dominating another forever. No room for fostering compromise and emphasizing the things that unite them (blood and soil), rather than that which divides them (religion and ethnicity)?? No merit is maintaining a presence there in order to thwart the agenda of those who DESIRE a civil war in which the most vicious and violent will dominate the others?? And do you really believe that permitting a civil war in Iraq to develop won't eventually draw in supporting factions from neighboring countries?? I don't call that "winning"... I believe your idea of "winning" is to encourage a regional war that will result in the "last man standing" end. But what do you do when we have that "last man" (either shi'a or sunni)... Either one will likely not be someone of democratic leanings, so we're back to square one, except the survivor will likely have a larger and more organized military force that has to be dealt with.. I don't see that as winning.. Hawk