> Dan:
> What do you consider as first? IIRC, we did start troop movements, but
> first bombs didn't drop until after the coalition was in place.

That's my point.  it was a LOOONNGGG time between the two events.  We are
not even near the point where bombs would drop, and President Bush seems to
be building his coalition much better than most anyone thought.  of course,
only time will tell.  The big election wins didn't hurt his efforts one

Granted - at least when measured against the length of time of actual
fighting. But again, IIRC, most of the delay was due to our inefficiency in
moving the heavy armor and supplies over there. We really didn't have much
in the way of forward bases before then, and we needed to create a line of
defense before we could get serious about going on the offensive. Saudi was
clearly on board at the very start; we couldn't have started moving troops
until then. I think the announcement of the coalition was delayed until we
were on the ground and ready to go.

This battle will be different - and this is only a battle in a _very_ long
war; because the situation is different. We already have a lot of material
there, we have troops on the ground training already, and the tactics will
most likely be "search and destroy" vs. "denial of ground" type missions.

///  ZION LIST CHARTER: Please read it at  ///
///  http://www.zionsbest.com/charter.html      ///

This email was sent to: archive@jab.org

EASY UNSUBSCRIBE click here: http://topica.com/u/?aaP9AU.bWix1n.YXJjaGl2
Or send an email to: [EMAIL PROTECTED]

T O P I C A -- Register now to manage your mail!

Reply via email to