Subject:
|
Re: Gulf of understanding is mutual
|
Newsgroups:
|
lugnet.off-topic.debate
|
Date:
|
Wed, 19 Mar 2003 20:26:42 GMT
|
Viewed:
|
226 times
|
| |
|
|
In lugnet.off-topic.debate, John Neal writes:
> Why would they risk their lives to save Saddam's ass?
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?).
>
> > 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.
It's possible, but that won't change the nature of desert warfare. It would
be foolish in the long run: the moment Saddam does such he'll only be
helping America diplomatically and it won't change the outcome of the
battle. The thing he needs to do is get his people to fight (and thereby
cause as much carnage as possible, which will bring pressure on the U.S.).
> >
> > 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.
The asseration is patently true: what you have to say in no way contradicts
what I said.
>
> > 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?
I'd vote for Dan Quayle at this point if that was the price of dumping Bush.
(a very low blow, indeed, but alas, I'm not joking!)
-->Bruce<--
|
|
Message is in Reply To:
 | | Re: Gulf of understanding is mutual
|
| (...) Why would they risk their lives to save Saddam's ass? (...) Or like an unleashing of a chemical/biological agent. (...) This assertion is patently false. The dirty little secret is that Al Qaeda is the enemy of ALL Muslims. Even if Al Qaeda (...) (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
|
|
|
|
