Addressing that statement:
I think it is probably safe to say that there are insurgency groups operating in Iraq that are specifically and singularly targetting United States military targets. We can't be sure, but i think it's a fair assumption.
On the other hand, we CAN state as a matter of fact that insurgency groups have detonated explosive devices at locations that were gauranteed to have both civilian and military casualties. These groups are also targetting Iraqi civilians who are openly assisting the US effort. I think it is more than a safe assumption that these same groups can, and are, attacking US military targets if given the chance.
So I wasn't basing my statement on any intelligence i'd read, or news reports.....just assumptions that seemed logical to me.
What do you think?
----- Original Message -----
From: dana tierney
To: CF-Community
Sent: Tuesday, October 12, 2004 2:53 PM
Subject: Re: Definition of terrorism(WAS The politicization of the Iraq War
sorry, was unclear.
As best I am able to determine from limited news coverage, afghanistan
elections are a success.
I was questioning this paragraph:
The groups that are attacking the US are the same groups that are
> killing
> > Iraqi civilians, beheading journalists, and blowing up police stations.
> A
> > bomb that kills 10 Iraqi civilians, and 1 US soldier....is considered
> > "acceptable loss" by these groups
DO we *know* that these are the same groups? How do we know what they
consider an acceptable loss?
Dana
<snip>
[Todays Threads] [This Message] [Subscription] [Fast Unsubscribe] [User Settings] [Donations and Support]
