I confess, Martin, that my quotations have no probative value. My comment was meant to convey only a warning that it is far too early to declare victory. As I have repeatedly said, a more detailed analysis of our strategic position can be found on my blog. If you want detailed argumentation, you'll certainly find it there.
"Please Europe. Come Help Me In Afghanistan"...OBL, today.
OBL and his minions have lost Iraq and Afghanistan.
The war in Germany was won right after the Battle of The Bulge which, we almost lost. The war wasn't declared "over" for quite some time after that but the war was "won".
Same in Iraq. It isn't over and there WILL be more fighting.
It all depends on what one's definition of "won" "IS".
The war in Germany was won right after the Battle of The Bulge which, we almost lost. The war wasn't declared "over" for quite some time after that but the war was "won".
Jim Dunnigan had a great line on this question. He wrote that the Battle of Stalingrad meant that the Germans would not win the war. The Battle of Kursk meant that they would lose it.
Of course, that was a conventional nation-state conflict, in which winning and losing were pretty clear. Such is not the case in Iraq. Again, talking about winning is pointless. The only valid consideration is the attainment of policy goals.
"Please Europe. Come Help Me In Afghanistan"...OBL, today.
I don't know that that's evidence of loss, exactly. If you're following the strategic situation in Afghanistan [vice the politics over that theatre] you'll note that AQ/Taliban forces are conducting a winter campaign, which is unusual in itself, and control approx. 50% of that country. Its not looking that good there, currently.
Check out this article I came across today. Nothing about direct investment in Iraq, but it offers some names of some asset managers who have launched Middle Eastern Equity Funds. It doesn't appear that they have much (or any) exposure to Iraq, but perhaps in the future?
It's a pretty decent piece on ME investment in any case.
11.30.2007 12:04pm
Commenting on Dean's World is a privilege, not a right. Dean is your host, you are his guest, and you should behave in that fashion. Dean is not your babysitter, nor is he your punching bag. Please remember this. In general, you are free to disagree with anyone on any subject you wish, but abusive behavior will not be tolerated.
Of course we all lose our tempers now and then. Dean freely admits to being imperfect in this regard, which is why regulars to this establishment will generally be cut more slack than people who we don't know very well.
Still: behave like an adult, or go find somewhere else to play. Thanks.
"Aye, Caesar, but not gone."
"Please Europe. Come Help Me In Afghanistan"...OBL, today.
OBL and his minions have lost Iraq and Afghanistan.
The war in Germany was won right after the Battle of The Bulge which, we almost lost. The war wasn't declared "over" for quite some time after that but the war was "won".
Same in Iraq. It isn't over and there WILL be more fighting.
It all depends on what one's definition of "won" "IS".
Jim Dunnigan had a great line on this question. He wrote that the Battle of Stalingrad meant that the Germans would not win the war. The Battle of Kursk meant that they would lose it.
Of course, that was a conventional nation-state conflict, in which winning and losing were pretty clear. Such is not the case in Iraq. Again, talking about winning is pointless. The only valid consideration is the attainment of policy goals.
I don't know that that's evidence of loss, exactly. If you're following the strategic situation in Afghanistan [vice the politics over that theatre] you'll note that AQ/Taliban forces are conducting a winter campaign, which is unusual in itself, and control approx. 50% of that country. Its not looking that good there, currently.
You're both wrong. We lost WW II, because our troops still haven't come home. That's the Chris Matthews Principle.
Check out this article I came across today. Nothing about direct investment in Iraq, but it offers some names of some asset managers who have launched Middle Eastern Equity Funds. It doesn't appear that they have much (or any) exposure to Iraq, but perhaps in the future?
It's a pretty decent piece on ME investment in any case.
Of course we all lose our tempers now and then. Dean freely admits to being imperfect in this regard, which is why regulars to this establishment will generally be cut more slack than people who we don't know very well.
Still: behave like an adult, or go find somewhere else to play. Thanks.