[William Tell]

justshutupandtakeit said: "How ridiculous is the idea that the Soviets could defeat our military and be beaten by a militia? Very ridiculous even absurd. "

What a comfort to know that our military efforts in Iraq are going to be successful. I was afraid that an armed segment of the Iraqi populace which is opposed to us might be able to discourage us into leaving and plunge Iraq into a civil war from which one faction or another would gain power.

I suppose that there is some explanation for Soviet failure in Afghanistan?

[eskimo]

<justshutupandtakeit said: "How ridiculous is the idea that the Soviets could defeat our military and be beaten by a militia? Very ridiculous even absurd. "

No rational military leader of proper intellect would ever discount the effectiveness of militia forces defending their homeland. They have superior commitment, superior supply line structure, and superior knowledge of the area. Weapons are easily commandeered and there is no hesitation by those defending against invaders to be just as savage as they can to protect themselves and their families.

[justshutupandtakeit]

Al Queda is bewailing just that as the intercepted letter clearly states. It is recognizing that its attacks are not shaking US resolve though if a RAT gets in he might well pull out and allow the crazies to take charge. This would be just one of the unsupportable costs of removing Bush.

The mujadeen in Afganistan were funded from without, supplied with equipment and advanced armaments from without and provided trained fighters from without. It was an international effort covertly supported by the US. In addition, the political price to the Soviet leadership was too high for it to pay. Having little hold on the loyalty and support of the population it did not have the moral authority to accomplish its purpose.