30-10-2003 12:30									#91
	Support Apolyton, buy GURPS/ Alpha Centauri

quote: Originally posted by lord of the mark Iraq is still only pumping less than 40% of the oil they produced pre-war. Im sure theyre well over that on water. Are youre suggesting that they should not prduce any oil till water is at 100%? Are you aware that they need oil to produce electricity, and electricity to pump and purify water?

Actually, they have a fair amount of gas for power purposes, and you don't burn crude oil for power generation. A lot of their fuel oil is imported and/or running on current inventories, as a good portion of their refinery sector is as ****ed up as the rest of their industry.

	30-10-2003 12:36									#92
	Lose 30 kilos (of popups)

quote: Originally posted by Ned What I am looking for is a new "Vietnamization" policy.

We could always hire Dr. K to give a speech that "Mission Accomplished is at hand" a few weeks before the election.

quote: At least when Nixon ran against the Johnson/Humphrey régime in '68, he had a plan to end the war even know he was not more specific.

My brother and a lot of good men died unnecessarily due to Nixon's bullshit about a non-existent plan. Nixon ****ed around for four years until it again became a potential election issue.

quote: Can you imagine an armed force led by a French general?

As easily as I can imagine one led by a former party boy and GM of a dog-ass mediocre baseball team,

quote: Turning Iraq over to the UN while an active guerrilla war is underway and before a new Iraq government has an army of its own is a formula for disaster.

Yeah - we'd lose control of who gets those "rebuilding" contracts.

	30-10-2003 12:38									#93
	Support Apolyton buy from Amazon

Mike, don't be cruel, don't take all their fairytales away.

	30-10-2003 13:32									#94
	Enter the AD-FREE zone

quote: Originally posted by Q Cubed "It was a Landcruiser car that was speeding toward the police station. The (guards) fired on it four times. It turned right and blew up," said local resident Mohammed Ali". ok, i know it's a common name, but.

He's still the greatest!

	30-10-2003 13:53									#95
	Support Apolyton, buy Call to Power 2

quote: Originally posted by Jac de Molay Obviously, Sharpton and that evil, Serbian leprechaun Kuchinich don't represent the majority of Democratic sentiment regarding Iraq. Hopefully, a Clark/Edwards ticket will rise above this morass.

He said "more ass".

	30-10-2003 16:34									#96
	Lose 30 kilos (of popups)

I'm pretty sure al-Qaeda has little to do with it. It's been made into a bogeyman responsible for everything, but when you get down to it, the occupation authority isn't arresting too many al-Qaeda agents. Ba'athists (including possibly recruits from Syria) or Shia Islamists look like the most likely suspects.

It's probably Ba'athists. Making a major assault at the beginning of Ramadan is not something that Shia Islamists are prone to do; OTOH secular nationalists (Sadat comes to mind) would no doubt do that without batting an eye. The interesting thing is that they're trying to make it look like it's the work of al-Sadr or some other Shia Islamist (or for that matter Sunni Islamist like al-Qaeda), thus fostering violence between the Shia and the Americans (as is probably the case with the Spanish diplomat incident with the assassin dressing in the garb of a Shia cleric).

	30-10-2003 18:55									#97
	Support Apolyton

To clarify the previous post, I'd like to point out that Ramadan is explicitly considered a time of true by Islam. Which makes it quite unlikely that Islamists were involved.

	30-10-2003 19:33									#98
	Support Apolyton, buy Galactic Civilizations

What were they, Christian Scientists?

	30-10-2003 19:42									#99
	Avatar Enlargement: We've got the solution

Southern Baptists obviously.

	30-10-2003 19:49									#100
	Support Apolyton

Whew! We Methodists suspected the Baptists.

	30-10-2003 19:58									#101
	Support Apolyton, buy Civilization: The Boardgame

quote: Originally posted by Ramo I'm pretty sure al-Qaeda has little to do with it. It's been made into a bogeyman responsible for everything, but when you get down to it, the occupation authority isn't arresting too many al-Qaeda agents.

Probably because their intel on AQ is weaker. Theyve been working on penetrating the Baath network since May, and the Baath network is vulnerable in part because they rely on hired foot soldiers - and they have less and less of a "sea" to swim in, as ordinary Iraqis inform on them. AQ/Ansar al islam doesnt seem to have returned in a big way till July or even August. They have traditionally had good tradecraft, they dont use hired thugs, and they may have a more secure network of local supporters then the Baathi.

Also its not clear that AQ and the Baathi are operating seperately. New reports indicate Mohammaed Izzat Ibrahim al Douri is acting as link between Baathi and Ansar.

	30-10-2003 20:00									#102
	Help yourself to an AD-FREE life

quote: Originally posted by Ramo To clarify the previous post, I'd like to point out that Ramadan is explicitly considered a time of true by Islam. Which makes it quite unlikely that Islamists were involved.

"Al-Qaeda has attempted to execute attacks during the Ramadan time period in the past, including the thwarted millennial plots in December 1999 and the aborted attack against the USS Sullivans in January 2000. Disrupted plots to attack U.S. Naval ships and the U.S. Embassy in Singapore in late 2001 also may have been timed for Ramadan. "

	30-10-2003 20:04									#103
	Support Apolyton, buy Civilization III: Complete

Terrorists don't mind blasphemy, as long as they're the blasphemists.

	30-10-2003 20:15									#104
	Get a bigger avatar today!

quote: Probably because their intel on AQ is weaker. Theyve been working on penetrating the Baath network since May, and the Baath network is vulnerable in part because they rely on hired foot soldiers - and they have less and less of a "sea" to swim in, as ordinary Iraqis inform on them. AQ/Ansar al islam doesnt seem to have returned in a big way till July or even August. They have traditionally had good tradecraft, they dont use hired thugs, and they may have a more secure network of local supporters then the Baathi. Also its not clear that AQ and the Baathi are operating seperately. New reports indicate Mohammaed Izzat Ibrahim al Douri is acting as link between Baathi and Ansar.

But AFAIK, the authorities haven't a single proven al-Qaeda agent thus far. Which is in stark contrast to the plethora of Ba'athists they have.

Ansar, I believe, is an organization only loosely connected with al-Qaeda, and doesn't have anywhere close to the resources as al-Qaeda. I don't think they could pull it off.

quote: "Al-Qaeda has attempted to execute attacks during the Ramadan time period in the past, including the thwarted millennial plots in December 1999 and the aborted attack against the USS Sullivans in January 2000. Disrupted plots to attack U.S. Naval ships and the U.S. Embassy in Singapore in late 2001 also may have been timed for Ramadan. "

Fair enough, but I had Shia Islamism specifically in mind. I don't think they have any significant history of attacking on Ramadan.

	30-10-2003 20:19									#105
	Enter the AD-FREE zone

Furthermore, if you consider that a dude from Syria (where Arab nationalism hasn't exactly died out) has been detained for involvement in the bombings, it seems extremely likely to me that the Ba'athists orchestrated this.

	30-10-2003 20:31									#106
	Put an end to popups!

quote: Originally posted by Ramo Furthermore, if you consider that a dude from Syria (where Arab nationalism hasn't exactly died out) has been detained for involvement in the bombings, it seems extremely likely to me that the Ba'athists orchestrated this.

He was a Yemeni, carrying a (fake?) Syrian passport.

	30-10-2003 20:36									#107
	Support Apolyton buy from Amazon

I think they first thought he was a Yemeni, then concluded he was a Syrian. But Yemen is full of Arab nationalists too.

	30-10-2003 20:38									#108
	Get a bigger avatar today!

quote: Originally posted by Ramo But AFAIK, the authorities haven't a single proven al-Qaeda agent thus far. Which is in stark contrast to the plethora of Ba'athists they have. Ansar, I believe, is an organization only loosely connected with al-Qaeda, and doesn't have anywhere close to the resources as al-Qaeda. I don't think they could pull it off.

Ansars links to AQ are based on individuals with membership in both organizations, like Zarqawi. This is no different then the links between the AQ and JI which pulled off the Bali bombing. The actual number of "sworn" AQ memebers seems to be actually rather small, only a few hundred. The vast majority the graduates of Bin Ladens training camps went off to affiliate organizations. Thats the way AQ works - through affiliates, united more by a common ideology and vision than by detailed organizational links. They seem to have moved even further in this direction since their central organization was attacked after 9/11.

Al ansar had limited resources prior to Gulf War 2. Which made sense - there wasnt alot they could do, so AQ directed resources elsewhere - Zarqawi focused more on Saudi and Jordan. Since then two things have happened 1. The overthrow of Hussein, and subsequent instability, have both opened up Iraq as a field of operations, and made it imperative to AQ to see that the US fail in Iraq. 2. The Riyadh bombings of May resulted in a severe crackdown on AQ in Saudi Arabia. Both these would explain the new AQ focus on Iraq, which would result in AQ focusing resources on Ansar.

	30-10-2003 20:45									#109
	Put an end to popups!

quote: Originally posted by Ramo I think they first thought he was a Yemeni, then concluded he was a Syrian. But Yemen is full of Arab nationalists too.

Other way around - he called himself Syrian, then they decided he was Yemeni.

Yemen has lots of Islamists - theres been a virtual civil war between the Islamists and govt. Are the still Arab nationalists who are not pro-govt? Maybe, though i havent heard about them lately. The point is that you stated his nationality as evidence that this is NOT islamism at work. If hes yemeni his nationality is not such evidence.

The choice of targets, the method ofoperations, all point
to AQ. What are the arguments its NOT AQ?

1. The Syrian nationality of the one captured bomber - but it turns out hes Yemeni, not Syrian (and BTW, there are also Islamists in Syria and Lebanon)
2. It happened on Ramadan. But AQ executes operations on Ramadan
3. Ansar doesnt have enough resources. But theres plenty of reason to think AQ is focusing resources on Iraq, and Ansar would be who they would focus them through
4. No AQ captured yet (that we know of) First this requires ignoring captured Ansar. Second, even if we ignore those, its easily explained by Coalition focus on Baathi, and superior AQ tradecraft.

Is it POSSIBLE that its not AQ? certainly. But Id say theres at least a 75% probability that it was AQ and affiliates involved.

	30-10-2003 20:50									#110
	Support Apolyton buy from Amazon

quote: Originally posted by MichaeltheGreat Actually, they have a fair amount of gas for power purposes, and you don't burn crude oil for power generation. A lot of their fuel oil is imported and/or running on current inventories, as a good portion of their refinery sector is as ****ed up as the rest of their industry.

I was responding to someone who implied that the restoration of Iraqi oil production before water restoration was complete was somehow suspicious. IIUC Natural Gas production is usually (and in the mideast virtually always) a byproduct of crude oil production. Surely youre not suggesting that Natural gas production should have been restored, and the oil flared off?? The REASON you burn Gas instead of oil for power generation in an oil producing area, is that Gas is more difficult to transport, so the economics of burning oil for power is unfavorable.

	30-10-2003 20:53									#111
	Support Apolyton, buy Galactic Civilizations

AFP - October 14


'US forces have captured a suspected top leader of Ansar al-Islam in the northern Iraqi city of Mosul in a significant blow to a militant Islamic group believed to be plotting attacks in Iraq. a US defense official said.



"What we had was a very senior AI (Ansar al-Islam) guy got picked up Thursday night into Friday," said the official.


The official was identified as Aso Hawleri, also known as Asad Muhammad Hasan, the official said.


Hawleri was the leader of an Ansar al Islam faction called the Second Soran Unit, which at one point consisted of some 350 armed fighters, according to Michael Rubin, an analyst with the Washington Institute for Near East Policy, in a December 2001 report.


"It's a significant catch in the war on terrorism," the defense official said. '

	30-10-2003 23:07									#112
	Support Apolyton buy from Amazon

quote: Originally posted by MichaeltheGreat Given that the situation they would inherit in January 2005 is a bit different than the one that pertains now, anyone with an announced set of goals now, for what they would do starting in '05, is a fool. Also, there's a little fundamental sticking point (and I'm not 100% sure you're trolling this time, Ned ), and that is the moral/pragmatic issues involved in having "goals" for a foreign country we invaded and conquered for no particular good reason other than it's ruler was an ******* and it sits on a bunch of oil. Colonialism is just soooooo... like, last century.

I hardly believe Clark, et al., are entitled to heavily criticize Bush for having no exit strategy when they themselves have none. That is my point.

On the way home last night, I heard that a prominent Democrat was saying essentially the same thing. She said that the problem the Democrat party was having was that it had no foreign policy vision. Simple criticism of Bush is no substitute for having such a vision.

About Bush, he articulated a very simple plan on Iraq in the beginning. Most Americans supported it. He said we would leave as soon as the new government was up and running, etc. Now he no longer talks about leaving. That is disturbing.

	30-10-2003 23:27									#113
	Support Apolyton, buy Civilization: The Boardgame

quote: Originally posted by Ned Several months ago, Bush said our goal was to defeat Saddam, install Democracy, and then leave. Today, I see no clearly defined goal. Bush seems to have become a victim of mission creep.

Interesting you say that. A number of people are interpreting it not as mission creep, but as backing down - IE not that he would stay in Iraq even AFTER democracy is established, but that he might withdraw BEFORE that happens.

	30-10-2003 23:31									#114
	Get a bigger avatar today!

quote: Originally posted by Ned I hardly believe Clark, et al., are entitled to heavily criticize Bush for having no exit strategy when they themselves have none. That is my point.

Sure they are. Bush made a major campaign point of saying he wouldn't send American troops anwywhere they didn't have an exit strategy. He opened himself up for criticism by opening his mouth.

	31-10-2003 00:47									#115
	Browse Apolyton AD-FREE

quote: Originally posted by chegitz guevara Sure they are. Bush made a major campaign point of saying he wouldn't send American troops anwywhere they didn't have an exit strategy. He opened himself up for criticism by opening his mouth.

Che, I refer to Ann Coulter's article as to why the left are not hypocrites. Having no morals, no goals, no vision, they cannot be accused of hypocrisy.

Still, I believe Bush is falling into a mission creep trap that may cause our Iraq venture to fail. Reagan failed in Lebanon because of it. Clinton failed at Moghadishu for the same reason.

We failed in Vietnam when Kennedy/Johnson took over that war from the Vietnamese. Mission creep. Nixon succeeded because he had an exit strategy and carried it out with single-minded determination.

	31-10-2003 01:05									#116
	Increase the size of your Attachments

quote: Originally posted by Ned Nixon succeeded because he had an exit strategy and carried it out with single-minded determination.

Five years of ****ing around then leaving under essentially the same conditions is not "determination" although it might be "single-minded"

And for all of Nixon's "great" "efforts" (since he was the proto-chicken-hawk, managing to find a billet as a stateside government lawyer in WW2), the ARVN's folded up like a circus tent the moment the NVA hit them hard.

Bush doesn't have "mission creep" yet, because he's never yet had a clear grasp of the original mission, and nobody else who thinks they run that show does either - that's why you can't get 'em to sing from the same hymnal.

	31-10-2003 01:10									#117
	Full PM-box? Change here!

quote: Originally posted by Ned Che, I refer to Ann Coulter's article . . .

Then I need pay you no mind.

	31-10-2003 01:14									#118
	Support Apolyton buy from Amazon

quote: Originally posted by Ned I hardly believe Clark, et al., are entitled to heavily criticize Bush for having no exit strategy when they themselves have none. That is my point. On the way home last night, I heard that a prominent Democrat was saying essentially the same thing. She said that the problem the Democrat party was having was that it had no foreign policy vision. Simple criticism of Bush is no substitute for having such a vision. About Bush, he articulated a very simple plan on Iraq in the beginning. Most Americans supported it. He said we would leave as soon as the new government was up and running, etc. Now he no longer talks about leaving. That is disturbing.

Bush didn't argue a simple plan, he argued a simplistic one. There's a big difference.

He thought that everyone would strew rose petals in our path, and that a new US compliant government would be up and running without real internal opposition, and without any internal backbone, so that they'd automatically rubber stamp our desired goals. Now we can't trust our boys, so Bremer still has to let the contracts, and we can't keep a lid on the *******s.

A simple problem for the Dems (and anyone else) is that talking about "what you'd do in Iraq now" will lead to accusations of sabotaging the mission, being unpatriotic, and the usual "go get a room with Hanoi Jane" sort of thing you can anticipate from the pitbulls on the right - Bush can distance himself from it, while the candidate who would be dumb enough to fall into that trap would be mauled all to hell and back. This early in primary season, there's nothing to gain and everything to lose. The focus for the Dems has to be how to stab those other primary candidates in the back and still be in a position to talk about party unity with a straight face.

Anyone who actually inherits the FUBAR in Iraq won't do so until late January of '05, so talking now about a vastly different and unpredictable situation that will apply then is also pretty pointless.

	31-10-2003 01:48									#119
	Tired of ads?

quote: Originally posted by chegitz guevara Then I need pay you no mind.

Of course, Che, the truth hurts.

	31-10-2003 01:49									#120
	Increase the size of your Attachments

MtG, I must admit, I do not understand you hostility to Vietnamization. I think that that is exactly what we need now in Iraq. What real objection do you have to building up the Iraqi military and withdrawing?