« One Born Every Minute |
Main
| A Warrior For Human Nature »
Monsters
Would this have happened absent the Abu Ghraib scandal?
Who knows? I think they would have found some other excuse. I mean, it's not like they've never done such things before, on far less pretense.
Like many of their vicious acts, I expect that this will have exactly the opposite of the desired effect.
Posted by Rand Simberg at May 11, 2004 11:23 AM
TrackBack URL for this entry:
http://www.transterrestrial.com/mt-diagnostics.cgi/2395
Listed below are links to weblogs that reference
this post from
Transterrestrial Musings.
Comments
Uh oh. . .
al Qaeda executes son. Family blames US government.
Like I said, we are losing the PsyOps war.
http://pennlive.com/newsflash/pa/index.ssf?/base/news-16/108430077760820.xml
Posted by Bill White at May 11, 2004 12:27 PM
"Like I said, we are losing the PsyOps war."
Loosing it where? Here (stateside) or there (Iraq)?
Posted by Brian at May 11, 2004 12:38 PM
Yes, Bill, and what is your brilliant plan to prevent terrorists from murdering our citizens and stopping their grief-stricken parents from having such emotions?
We're in a war. Not everyone understands that, but there's nothing new about murder, or casualties, or unhappy loved ones resulting therefrom. Many people in World War II lost family members, and some of them probably blamed the government. Does that mean we were "losing the psy-ops war"?
Sorry, but this sounds less like analysis than whining.
Posted by Rand Simberg at May 11, 2004 12:42 PM
In Fallujah "they" got exactly what "they" wanted: a game of chicken in which the U.S. had to blink first.
Hopefully the U.S. is smarter now.
Has anyone heard more about why Al Zarqawi survived so long in the northern No-Flight zone prior to the begining of the war?
Posted by Duncan Young at May 11, 2004 01:46 PM
The problem is that it is hard to articulate with specificity who we are at war "with" - - a few bad apples or most of Islam?
Posted by Bill White at May 11, 2004 02:33 PM
Sorry for the double post - but Duncan's comment caused me to look for and find this:
http://news.ft.com/servlet/ContentServer?pagename=FT.com/StoryFT/FullStory&c=StoryFT&cid=1083180429233
Are we about to make a deal with Sadr?
Posted by Bill White at May 11, 2004 02:36 PM
We are at war with radical Islam. It's more than a few bad apples, but it's probaby less than "most."
As for Al-Sadr, the only deal that we're making with him is the one always on offer, for him to surrender to authorities. We're decimating his supporters, and he has no support in the larger Shia community.
Posted by Rand Simberg at May 11, 2004 02:56 PM
Concerning Sadr, the new developing deal seems to be surrender to Iraqi religious authorities after the transfer of power and merge Sadr's militia into official Coalition defense forces.
Just like Fallujah.
http://www.realcities.com/mld/krwashington/8642053.htm
Posted by Bill White at May 11, 2004 04:21 PM
One way to look at that is that we're coopting them. If they're part of the forces, they become subject to discipline. There aren't that many of them.
Posted by Rand Simberg at May 11, 2004 04:29 PM
The problem is that it is hard to articulate with specificity who we are at war "with" - - a few bad apples or most of Islam?
Posted by alena at July 4, 2004 06:47 PM
Post a comment
