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 : PRESIDENT GEORGE W. BUSH -- Ignore unavailable to you. Want to Upgrade?

To: pompsander who wrote (752968)	11/2/2006 4:41:47 AM
From: JDN	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 769670

I have posted MY solutions, perhaps you didnt see them. I have TWO alternatives, dont know exactly which is best but either would cut down our supply lines and resultant deaths from roadside bombs. 1. Withdraw all troops to the Kurdish territory, from there send out assistance as needed when requested by the Iraqi forces. a. Kurds love us, their territory is completely safe, our troops would not be harmed there and being there would keep the Kurds and Turks apart. 2. Withdraw all troops to the areas of Iraq currently labeled as secured or under control, turn areas requiring further troop security over to the Iraqi forces, provide assistance as needed and possibly use merely special forces to assist in any fighting. a. This would shorten our supply lines as I presume the safest areas today are the far south and far north of Iraq with the center being the hot spot. It would focus the Iraqi effort exactly on the problem areas while we handled the less problem areas. In either of the above cases we would still be in Iraq and still able to freely move as we determined along with the Iraqi govt. jdn