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 : Politics for Pros- moderated -- Ignore unavailable to you. Want to Upgrade?

To: LindyBill who wrote (161306)	3/21/2006 11:36:05 AM
From: D. Long	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 793838

These books prove we have. And it has been even worse than I assumed Problem is that Iraq has proved that reaction correct. There is a large segment of the population that recoils at the smallest number of casualties. With the MSM chanting about "Afghan winters" and "graveyard of empires" in Afghanistan, I shudder to think what 50 dead Rangers would have elicited. Derek

To: LindyBill who wrote (161306)	3/21/2006 2:11:04 PM
From: KLP	Respond to of 793838

Great review, Bill! One really has to wonder exactly what the media as a group can gain, by having the news they would like us to believe, to be found not attuned to truth. We held back on putting A-Teams with the Northern Alliance because we afraid of the casualties we would inflict on civilians. We wasted a month bombing empty buildings in Southern Afghanistan for the same reason. The CIA agents were getting midnight calls from DC asking for confirmation that there were no civilians in a building they were planning to bomb. We would not put 800 Rangers into Tora Bora to stop Bin Ladin because Centcom was afraid we would take too many casualties. We wouldn't allow the Army to bring enough firepower with them for the Anaconda campaign. And it was all due to fear of what the media would say.