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 : New FADG. -- Ignore unavailable to you. Want to Upgrade?

To: cnyndwllr who wrote (853)	5/24/2007 12:32:39 PM
From: neolib	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 4152

One wonders whether AQ as made the obvious observation that US soldiers MIA has a significantly different tactical effect than US soldiers KIA. I recall an old S. African army vet complaining to me about the war in Angola, that traditional western military doctrine suggests wounding rather than killing the enemy, since a wounded soldier requires more resources from the enemy. But in asymmetric fights against "terrorists", they don't care for their wounded anyway, so you might as well shoot to kill. It is pretty obvious that MIA is a raw nerve for America, and that we will divert resources and bodies from other tasks to resolve the issue.

To: cnyndwllr who wrote (853)	5/24/2007 3:16:50 PM
From: Hawkmoon	Read Replies (3) \| Respond to of 4152

As a nation fighting the war in Iraq we're like a family watching the house burn. We want to do something but there's nothing we can do but watch. And we ought to have enough sense to stay away from the conflagration. Yeah.. we did the same thing for 2 1/2 years from Sept, 1939 until we were attacked on Dec 7th, 1941. And before that, we did the very same thing from 1914 to 1917. Years of watching the "house" burn down in Europe. And now the very same kinds of totalitarian inspired forces, PUBLICLY SWORN TO WAGE WAR UPON US FOREVER, are burning down the house in the Middle East in order to establish a "home turf" from which to reach out and wage that war against us. Ed.. you can sit back and watch that house burn, but eventually you're going to need to grab a firehose (to borrow FDR's analogy) and risk your life trying to put that fire out before your own house catches fire. That's the nature of fire.. it needs to find additional fuel to keep it burning. It was an apt analogy then, from the mouth of a Democratic president, and it's still applicable today... And it will be applicable in a couple of years when a new president is chosen to sit in the Oval office. And the fire in the heart of the Jihadist movement MUST have a perpetual sworn enemy for it to exist. This isn't just about dominating a particular Muslim country and being satisfied with that. It's about waging global Jihad and bringing about a global Caliphate. It doesn't matter whether or not we want to fight them, or not.. we don't have a choice. The only choice we have is that of choosing the battlefield on which to confront them. Hawk

To: cnyndwllr who wrote (853)	5/29/2007 1:48:18 AM
From: Hawkmoon	Respond to of 4152

Going back to the subject of watching "houses burn", what do you think of SefDef Gate's recent comments about the US possibly preparing to take direct action in Pakistan's Waziristan province against the Taliban and Al Qai'da? In this regard, Gates suggested the United States may have to take more of a role in Waziristan, the Pakistani province where the first truce agreement was made and where most of the new al-Qaida training takes place. In fact, Gates shocked some when, in a hearing in the which he was asked by senators what the U.S. military is going to do to kill or capture al-Qaida leadership, he responded with the announcement that, “We have plans to go after al-Qaida leadership in Waziristan Province.” The surprise is that Gates would admit this, knowing how sensitive the Pakistani government is regarding the presence of U.S. troops on its soil. msnbc.msn.com It will be interesting to see your comments should the US find itself becoming directly involved in Pakistan's Western provinces. Talk about potentially stirring up a beehive of tribal backlash... I hope we do some serious IPB and covert diplomatic discussions with the local tribal chieftains who apparently lack the ability to get rid of the Taliban as the Sunnis are endeavoring to do in Iraq's Al Anbar province. Hawk