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: Nadine Carroll who wrote (2124)	7/9/2007 1:24:24 PM
From: michael97123	Respond to of 4152

"Haven't you learned yet how to read NYT reports on the Bush administration." I learned how to read your posts for sure. Pure propaganda for the most part to give weight to your argments and to whatever this admin says.

To: Nadine Carroll who wrote (2124)	7/9/2007 4:52:30 PM
From: Hawkmoon	Read Replies (2) \| Respond to of 4152

Well of course they are, they have to. But they are really discussing strategies to hang on, while the NYT is trying to make it sound like they are ready to throw in the towel. One thing it broadcasts loudly and clearly to the Iraqis is that, unless they step up and defend their existence as a nation, we're leaving. I can't remember where I read it (I think it was one of Michael Yon's excellent reports), but it was reported that Iraqis (especially Sunnis) are coming to the realization that the US is not there to take their oil and, in fact, realizes that their best best for security is to work with the US forces and Iraqi government. And this has caused many of them to come around to a different perspective of the US presence in their country and recognition that they need our assistance. But one of the lessons of Vietnam THAT DOES APPLY TO IRAQ is that we cannot bear the burden of defending a nation by ourselves. The government of that nation must CONSTANTLY feel the pressure of knowing that if they don't perform, we'll leave them to their own devices and pick up the pieces. Of course, Iraq is far too critical to the security of the region for us to just "cut and run". Our departure would create far more problems than it solves. But in the "gamesmanship" that is going on between the Iraqi government and the US, there must always be the implicit "threat" that if this is a two-way street and if they don't hold up their end of the bargain, we'll arrange for a new contract to be written with someone who will. Hawk