Browse lit-ideas: This Month's Archive • Main Archive Page • Related posts • Previous by Date • Next by Date
[lit-ideas] Re: Mideast: Ripples of War

From: "Andy Amago" <aamago@xxxxxxxxxxxxx>
To: lit-ideas@xxxxxxxxxxxxx
Date: Tue, 1 Aug 2006 08:11:47 -0400
I love your quoting all the nonsequiturs that I didn't write.  I said Ricks 
said that the worst case scenario would be a pan-Arabic leader who would unite 
the Arab world.  A worst case scenario is a bad thing Lawrence.  

You want them to fight on our terms.  So did the British want the American 
colonists, also largely guerrillas, to fight on their terms.  Give them a few, 
more than a few, jet fighters and maybe they can.  Until they, they will ignore 
your advice and do the best they can with what they have.

I heard another interview this weekend, I don't remember his name and it's not 
worth remembering, that the U.S. won every war it ever fought and that's why 
we'll win Iraq.  He began with the War of 1812 (which in fact we lost) and 
spent literally about 15 minutes of the hour listing all the actors in WWII who 
enlisted.  When you're short on facts, you fill space somehow.  He had a very 
supportive audience, but one person did ask how he felt about our losing the 
Vietnam War, so which he replied that the Vietnam War wasn't really a war.  The 
Cold War was a war and we won that.  Anyone can spin anything.  So tell me 
again my nonsequiturs, Lawrence.  I guess it's your equivalent of listing 
actors who enlisted.



----- Original Message ----- 
From: Lawrence Helm 
To: lit-ideas@xxxxxxxxxxxxx
Sent: 8/1/2006 12:45:33 AM 
Subject: [lit-ideas] Re: Mideast: Ripples of War


Irene, it would be marvelous if a ?pan-Arabic leader like Saladan? emerged to 
unite the Arabian masses.  We have only been looking at the dark side of 
Islamism, that it embraces seventh century social and political standards.  The 
good side is that their ability to fight is centered in the same century.  They 
can?t fight a modern Western army.  Look at the evidence:  What did Arabian 
armies do against Israel?  What did Iraqi armies do against the U.S.?  They 
bluster, they say they are winning, but they are slaughtered.  It is pitiful.  
They can?t fight a modern war.  No, no, Irene, a Saladan arising in the present 
day Middle East, unless he arises with a necklace of atomic weapons, would be a 
disaster for your Militant Muslims.

What the Middle Eastern Militants are good at is blowing themselves up.  They 
should stick to what they know.

And now to forestall a series of non-sequiturs from Irene, I shall attempt to 
anticipate so as not to have to reply to them: 

If you want to advance the non-sequitur that what Hezbolah (not an army facing 
a Western army) is doing, that was discussed after reading Bevin Alexander?s in 
The Future of Warfare:  Invading a nation will not be successful if the invaded 
nation is willing to mount a guerilla offensive to wear down the invaders.  The 
purpose of the guerillas is not to defeat the invaders, they can?t, but they 
can cost them money and make it too expensive for them to stay.  Hezbollah is 
capable of doing that in the midst of Lebanon.  But they may not be able to 
manage that in the regions they fully control.

And lest you go off onto another non-sequitur by saying that is what we (the 
U.S.) have encountered just that in Iraq, that is not what we have encountered 
(Bevin Alexander discusses the difference).  Our present purpose is to train 
the Iraqis so they can deal with their own insurgents.  Guerilla offensives are 
successful because they have the support of a civilian population that is 
hostile toward the alien invaders, but if the Iraqis can be brought up to the 
point where they can deal with this mixture of Sunni insurgents and Al-Quaeda 
volunteers, then America can step aside.  No one will be able to pretend what 
is facing the Iraqi government is an insurgency.  

And lest you go off onto another non-sequitur by saying that the Sunnis, if 
they unified their opposition to the Iraqi government would be insurgents, if 
that were to happen you would not have a mere insurgency but a civil war, which 
is possible, but that is another subject.

Lawrence



From: lit-ideas-bounce@xxxxxxxxxxxxx [mailto:lit-ideas-bounce@xxxxxxxxxxxxx] On 
Behalf Of Andy Amago
Sent: Monday, July 31, 2006 8:59 PM
To: lit-ideas@xxxxxxxxxxxxx
Subject: [lit-ideas] Re: Mideast: Ripples of War

I heard an interview with Tom Ricks who wrote the book called Fiasco, The 
American Military Adventure in Iraq.  His worst case scenario is that a 
pan-Arabic leader like Saladin might emerge to unite the messes that the U.S. 
and its joined at the hip ally Israel created.  That's worst case scenario, 
Stan, but most likely higher than the 1% probabilities that we're defending 
ourselves from in this War on Terror.  Sleep tight, Stan.


----- Original Message ----- 
From: Stan Spiegel 
To: lit-ideas@xxxxxxxxxxxxx;Bonnie Spiegel;David Cowen;Margaret Spiegel
Sent: 7/31/2006 11:48:39 PM 
Subject: [lit-ideas] Mideast: Ripples of War

Christopher Dickey and Rod Nordland's article in this week's Newsweek is a 
frightening assessment of what's happening in the Middle East. Frightening for 
Israel especially. I usually sleep like a log. Now I'm not sleeping very well. 
- S.S. 
Take a look at this:

"No one denies that Hizbullah started the fight, with its unprovoked incursion 
into Israel, and no one doubts that Israel can win it, at least in conventional 
terms. But that's not what matters as much as public perceptions, and the 
impact those perceptions have from Tehran to Cairo. The conflagrations in Gaza, 
Lebanon and Iraq risk converging, if not on the ground, then in that virtual 
realityon satellite television and the Webwhere Al Qaeda and Hizbullah find 
recruits for their global networks. Israel can bomb Lebanon's infrastructure 
all it wants, but Hizbullah, which operates beyond the limits of a state, 
ultimately has no infrastructure. Hizbullah's own rockets and missiles can miss 
nearly all their targets, with comparatively little loss of life, but so long 
as they keep firing, they shatter the myth of Israeli invincibility and win 
friends and admirers in a radicalized Muslim world. "The Zionist enemy has not 
been able to reach a military victo ry," said Hizbullah lead
 er Hassan Nasrallah in a speech Friday on his organization's Al-Manar TV, 
still broadcasting despite Israeli Air Force strikes that obliterated its 
studios and transmission towers. "I'm not saying that. They said that. The 
whole world is saying that."  
To continue, click below:
The message is ready to be sent with the following file or link attachments:
Shortcut to: http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/14100895/site/newsweek/

Note: To protect against computer viruses, e-mail programs may prevent sending 
or receiving certain types of file attachments.  Check your e-mail security 
settings to determine how attachments are handled.
[lit-ideas] Re: Mideast: Ripples of War

Other related posts:
