Subject:
|
Re: Gulf of understanding is mutual
|
Newsgroups:
|
lugnet.off-topic.debate
|
Date:
|
Wed, 19 Mar 2003 20:06:00 GMT
|
Viewed:
|
207 times
|
| |
|
|
In lugnet.off-topic.debate, Bruce Schlickbernd writes:
> In lugnet.off-topic.debate, Larry Pieniazek writes:
>
> > Just so you know, while Derbyshire is for it, I'm against the war that will
> > apparently be underway in 9.5 hours, but if it starts, I want it won, and
> > won quickly.
>
> The difference between Dubya-Dubya III and Desert Storm may well be that in
> the latter, the Iraqi soldiers knew they were in the wrong in the first
> place and didn't have any heart in holding Kuwait. This time it is about
> defending Iraq and we may see a more determined defense: Whacking a
> retreating army and prying one out of a city is vastly different. Much
> swings on the perception and morale of the Iraqi troops - we could just roll
> over them if they have no will to fight, but I'm not convinced of that.
Why would they risk their lives to save Saddam's ass?
> Expect the usuals for desert warfare: blinding fast movement until you run
> into some form of big obstacle such as a city or large natural formation.
Or like an unleashing of a chemical/biological agent.
>
> Regardless of that, the war will be a diplomatic failure of the first
> magnitude. Good luck getting anyone to cooperate on Al Qaeda now. The
> alliance with France has been done great harm (and Chirac had been trying to
> improve relations with the U.S.). Rightly or wrongly, U.S. intentions are
> viewed with great skepticism: Dubya has managed to destroy all the goodwill
> this country has and make us the Ugly Americans. Saudi Arabia is running
> from this as fast as they can (watch the funds flowing to Al Qaeda through
> Saudi Arabia increase).
This assertion is patently false. The dirty little secret is that Al Qaeda is
the enemy of ALL Muslims. Even if Al Qaeda were to somehow make the US
disappear tomorrow, the next day they would be gunning for non-Wahabi Muslims.
> After finally getting some action out of the UN the
> last decade or so, Dubya has trashed that. Post-war Iraq will satisfy no
> one, even those it ostensibly helps.
>
> What we need to do (and the world would applaud and approve this) is make a
> mutual and emminently fair sacrifice: Iraq exiles Saddam and sons, and the
> US does the same with Bush senior and sons. Who's with me!?! :-)
Okay, I'll bite. With whom would you support replacing Bush?
JOHN
|
|
Message has 1 Reply:
 | | Re: Gulf of understanding is mutual
|
| (...) Look to the Iraq-Iran war for an example. Nationalism can win out over common sense. Happens all the time. Not to mention they hardly trust the motives of the United States (I don't, so why should the Iraqi people?). (...) It's possible, but (...) (22 years ago, 19-Mar-03, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
Message is in Reply To:
| | Re: Gulf of understanding is mutual
|
| (...) The difference between Dubya-Dubya III and Desert Storm may well be that in the latter, the Iraqi soldiers knew they were in the wrong in the first place and didn't have any heart in holding Kuwait. This time it is about defending Iraq and we (...) (22 years ago, 19-Mar-03, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
65 Messages in This Thread:
 
 
- Entire Thread on One Page:
- Nested:
All | Brief | Compact | Dots
Linear:
All | Brief | Compact
This Message and its Replies on One Page:
- Nested:
All | Brief | Compact | Dots
Linear:
All | Brief | Compact
|
|
|
|
