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 Policy Discussion Thread -- Ignore unavailable to you. Want to Upgrade?

To: Chas. who wrote (8132)	2/27/2007 10:24:00 PM
From: Hawkmoon	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 15987

Hawk, Thank you for your service... Well Chas.. I appreciate your words.. but frankly, I wish I had not had to see so many young men and women having to serve in Iraq. But given the philosphical civil war that is being waged there, it is necessary, if only to insure that the Jihadists are confronted and defeated and some form of moderate (and likely Islamic "inflected") government succeeds there. This was on terror is, foremost, a civil war between moderates and militants. It is in our interest to insure that moderates have the "motivation" to remain that way, and to prevent more moderates from falling into the Jihadist camp (either by economic and humanitarian aid, or by force). Unfortunately, that means more fine young American men and women are going to be killed or maimed in the Mid-East. But the last thing we want to do is make this into a full-fledged total war of conquest in the Islamic world. Sure, we can likely conquer them, but we're not going to get much help from the rest of the world to do so, and holding and occupying the Mid-East would necessitate a mobilization of manpower and treasure far in excess required during WWII, IMO. Hawk