To: bert
The philosophical subtext here is that **betrayal** led to Saddam's defeat, not coalition military skill or the rot at the core of the Iraq regime.
From a propaganda perspective this feeds into Arab self-delisions about their inherent abilities and need for moral purity.
To: NativeNewYorker
The philosophical subtext here is that **betrayal** led to Saddam's defeat, not coalition military skill or the rot at the core of the Iraq regime.Except if you scratch a little deeper its obvious the "betrayal" was only necessary because of certain defeat.
12 posted on
04/17/2003 7:46:30 AM PDT by
VRWC_minion
(Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and most are right)
To: NativeNewYorker
NN Yorker,
Yup. This is the core around which an Arabic "dolchstoss" myth might form, as with the post-WW1 Germans. Not beaten in battle, but betrayed by wicked leaders.
To: NativeNewYorker
This is little more than David Irving, a man with his own agenda, promoting a 'stabbed in the back' theory. He calls von Stauffenberg a traitor, for goodness sake.
16 posted on
04/17/2003 7:56:48 AM PDT by
JohnGalt
(Class of '98)
To: NativeNewYorker
From a propaganda perspective this feeds into Arab self-delisions about their inherent abilities and need for moral purity.Yeah, I thought the comments about the Rep. Guard causing a 'living hell' for the US military were a bit over the top. The battles that did take place were a turkey shoot. ( No offense to Turks...)
18 posted on
04/17/2003 7:57:25 AM PDT by
ovrtaxt
(I thought I was wrong once, but I was mistaken.)
To: NativeNewYorker
Thank you for your excellent observation.
This story's implicit stance is that the "valiant Arab forces" would have defeated the US Army and Marines, but that they were sold out by venal bosses.
We know that in reality committed Iraqi commanders were losing hundreds of soldiers a day to desertion.
20 posted on
04/17/2003 8:00:09 AM PDT by
wideawake
(Support our troops and their Commander-in-Chief)
To: NativeNewYorker
...**betrayal** led to Saddam's defeat, not coalition military skill....
There are two sides to this truth of betrayal. The coalition saught and received the betrayals. There is no loss of honor for seeking and obtaining the capitulation.
It will be seen as a different weapon used to subdue Saddam. Money, plain old US$, did the trick when used along with extreme skill.
Could have any others pulled this off? No! certainly not.
The message still remains......"Don't screw with America. Those boys are good!"
28 posted on
04/17/2003 8:14:53 AM PDT by
bert
(Don't Panic !)
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson