SI
SI
discoversearch

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 : Formerly About Advanced Micro Devices -- Ignore unavailable to you. Want to Upgrade?

To: Alighieri who wrote (382177)5/2/2008 10:41:27 AM
From: i-node  Read Replies (3) | Respond to of 1572775
 
I agree with you.

IN the future, we should only fight wars that present no real challenges. If we can flatten the region from the air in Clintonesque manner that's okay. But in areas that are more challenging, stay away.

This is why I'm so attracted to knocking out Iran right away. We can sit in the Gulf an lob one cruise missile after another without stepping foot in the country.

I think in the future, no war should be prosecuted that requires ground troops or presents difficult challenges. If you can slam them from the air, though, it is no problem.



To: Alighieri who wrote (382177)5/2/2008 11:31:32 AM
From: michael97123  Read Replies (1) | Respond to of 1572775
 
absolutely and we were already talking federalism or even confederalism to address these issue. Did you know india has the largest moslem population in the world and hindus and moslems get along for the most part. Shiaa/sunni differences in iraq were/are not insoluble. But if it was, you would end up with a three state solution which if done professionally wouldnt have been a disaster and would certainly be better than saddam.


HomeMailHotSubjectMarksPeopleMarksKeepersSettings
Terms Of UseContact UsCopyright/IP PolicyPrivacy PolicyAbout UsFAQAdvertise on SI
© 2025 Knight Sac Media.  Data provided by Twelve Data, Alpha Vantage, and CityFALCON News