Grimis
Scrapple Level: 135
Posts: 1021/4700 EXP: 28695299 For next: 639782
Since: 11.7.02 From: MD
Since last post: 4713 days Last activity: 3168 days
| #1 Posted on 27.2.03 1004.24 Reposted on: 27.2.10 1011.04 | Something just to throw out into discussion. This, actually, should bolster the side of the anti-war folks lending credence to the argument that Iraq is no threat to the US or its neighbors.
Why Arabs Lose Wars Promote this thread! | | dMr
Andouille Level: 97
Posts: 352/2229 EXP: 9304240 For next: 13118
Since: 2.11.02 From: Edinburgh, Scotland
Since last post: 2852 days Last activity: 1198 days
| #2 Posted on 27.2.03 1010.16 Reposted on: 27.2.10 1011.09 |
Originally posted by Grimis Something just to throw out into discussion. This, actually, should bolster the side of the anti-war folks lending credence to the argument that Iraq is no threat to the US or its neighbors.
Why Arabs Lose Wars
Interesting article, but it shouldn't really have any bearing on whether or not we go to war.
I dont think anyone honestly believes that Iraq's gonna turn round in a month or so and declare war on America. The threat to the west comes more from the potential for them to sell arms to terrorist organisations. | Bizzle Izzle
Bockwurst Level: 54
Posts: 337/564 EXP: 1193959 For next: 39918
Since: 26.6.02 From: New Jersey, USA
Since last post: 2928 days Last activity: 2928 days
| #3 Posted on 27.2.03 1220.28 Reposted on: 27.2.10 1221.25 | Originally posted by Grimis This, actually, should bolster the side of the anti-war folks lending credence to the argument that Iraq is no threat to the US or its neighbors.
I would put the opposite spin on it. The anti-war crowd seems to have some psycic ability to be able to predict how many people are going to die (lots and lots and LOTS!) and that war will drag on and on and on. This article would lead one to believe that since the Iraqis suck so bad, the war will be over shortly and with a minimum of US casualties. I know it's the Pentagon's job to cover all scenarios, and the press loves the doom and gloom worst case stories, but does anyone see these guys posing any threat? And by threat I mean the ragtag army that will stand in our way as we go after Saddam and his WMD. The WMD are the real threat, not the army that's going to surrender to CNN crews again.
(edited by Bizzle Izzle on 27.2.03 1322) | TheBucsFan
TheChiefsFan Level: 118
Posts: 1456/3428 EXP: 18086967 For next: 296001
Since: 2.1.02
Since last post: 3516 days Last activity: 3516 days
| #4 Posted on 27.2.03 1458.10 Reposted on: 27.2.10 1459.12 | The potential alone for "lots and lots and LOTS!" of unneccesary deaths is enough for me. | Mr. Heat Miser
Blutwurst Level: 39
Posts: 86/259 EXP: 375036 For next: 29739
Since: 27.1.02
Since last post: 5989 days Last activity: 4091 days
| #5 Posted on 27.2.03 1517.50 Reposted on: 27.2.10 1517.57 | Does anyone know where this came from, or what "strategy page" is?
I can't say anything about the claims made one way or the other, but the fact that there is no author's name, combined with the propaganda-like writing style, makes me question the degree to which these statements are accurate.
These might be valid; might not. This article has a lot of assertions with no evidence. The topic (how culture would affect militaries) is very interesting, though.
And a question (genuine)- what kind of wars have Arabs lost to non-Arabs? I can think of the Six Days War, Desert Storm, and ... that's it from my poor brain. And I've got the feeling that someone around here knows the answer a lot more quickly than if I were to research it right now
Just looking for some context, | MoeGates
Boudin blanc Level: 100
Posts: 1095/2353 EXP: 10282944 For next: 71488
Since: 6.1.02 From: Brooklyn, NY
Since last post: 23 days Last activity: 1 day
| #6 Posted on 27.2.03 1533.29 Reposted on: 27.2.10 1534.52 | Post World War II. (between the fall of the Ottoman Empire and World War II is a whole other story).
Multiple Arab Countries: Against Israel - 1948, 1967, 1973.
Egypt: Against Israel, Britain, and France - 1956. Against Israel - 1970 (War of Attrition).
Iraq: Against Iran - 1980-1990. Against the world, 1991.
Libya - Against Chad (Chad!) From about 1973-1994, with the biggest period of hostilities being in the 80s.
This is just counting wars of Arabs vs. Non-Arabs. It's not even counting various Intra-Arab wars (Yemen-Oman, Morroco-Western Sahara, Jordan-PLO) or Civil wars (Algeria, Yemen, Sudan), (although the military actually did pretty good in some of those vs. the Rebels).
(edited by MoeGates on 27.2.03 1635) | Jaguar
Knackwurst Level: 116
Posts: 1353/3284 EXP: 16937061 For next: 387084
Since: 23.1.02 From: In a Blue State finally
Since last post: 1903 days Last activity: 1903 days
| #7 Posted on 28.2.03 1356.06 Reposted on: 28.2.10 1359.01 | Wait, I'm confused. How does Iraq/Iran count as Arabs/Non-Arabs?
-Jag | Leroy
Boudin blanc Level: 100
Posts: 95/2336 EXP: 10151871 For next: 202561
Since: 7.2.02
Since last post: 12 days Last activity: 6 days
| #8 Posted on 28.2.03 1440.40 Reposted on: 28.2.10 1452.56 |
Originally posted by Bizzle Izzle
...The anti-war crowd seems to have some psycic ability to be able to predict how many people are going to die (lots and lots and LOTS!) and that war will drag on and on and on... (edited by Bizzle Izzle on 27.2.03 1322)
Perhaps you can name a modern war in which thousands of innocent people were NOT killed. Rape and murder of civilians is a by-product of every war.
And actually, I do not think the war will be that drawn out, which is another reason why I think thousands of innocent people will be killed. The first Gulf War was very quick, and it still cost the lives of "lots and lots and LOTS" of Iraqi civillians.
| MoeGates
Boudin blanc Level: 100
Posts: 1098/2353 EXP: 10282944 For next: 71488
Since: 6.1.02 From: Brooklyn, NY
Since last post: 23 days Last activity: 1 day
| #9 Posted on 28.2.03 1657.34 Reposted on: 28.2.10 1659.01 | Wait, I'm confused. How does Iraq/Iran count as Arabs/Non-Arabs?
Because Iraq is an Arabic country, and Iran is not. Iranians are Persians (for the most part). They don't speak Arabic. In fact they don't even speak a Semitic language. All major languages in Iran (the most common is Farsi) are Indo-European in origin, and culturally and ethnically they have much more in common with Central Asians than Middle Easterners.
Calling Iranians "Arabs" is like calling Germans "Slavs" because they happen to share a border and a general religion (not even the same sect) with a Slavic country. | asteroidboy
Andouille Level: 98
Posts: 996/2241 EXP: 9548261 For next: 106126
Since: 22.1.02 From: Texas
Since last post: 4873 days Last activity: 439 days
| #10 Posted on 28.2.03 1750.01 Reposted on: 28.2.10 1759.01 | Islamic schools favor rote memorization, especially of scripture. Most Islamic scholars are hostile to the concept of interpreting the Koran (considered the word of God as given to His prophet Mohammed).
Wait... wait. Are they talking about Islam or Southern Baptist?
:) | Jaguar
Knackwurst Level: 116
Posts: 1355/3284 EXP: 16937061 For next: 387084
Since: 23.1.02 From: In a Blue State finally
Since last post: 1903 days Last activity: 1903 days
| #11 Posted on 1.3.03 1257.07 Reposted on: 1.3.10 1259.01 |
Originally posted by MoeGates Wait, I'm confused. How does Iraq/Iran count as Arabs/Non-Arabs?
Because Iraq is an Arabic country, and Iran is not. Iranians are Persians (for the most part). They don't speak Arabic. In fact they don't even speak a Semitic language. All major languages in Iran (the most common is Farsi) are Indo-European in origin, and culturally and ethnically they have much more in common with Central Asians than Middle Easterners.
Calling Iranians "Arabs" is like calling Germans "Slavs" because they happen to share a border and a general religion (not even the same sect) with a Slavic country.
Thanks greatly.
-Jag | PalpatineW
Lap cheong Level: 83
Posts: 513/1528 EXP: 5382441 For next: 49803
Since: 2.1.02 From: Getting Rowdy
Since last post: 6274 days Last activity: 6116 days
| #12 Posted on 1.3.03 1713.17 Reposted on: 1.3.10 1717.00 |
Originally posted by Leroy
Originally posted by Bizzle Izzle
...The anti-war crowd seems to have some psycic ability to be able to predict how many people are going to die (lots and lots and LOTS!) and that war will drag on and on and on... (edited by Bizzle Izzle on 27.2.03 1322)
Perhaps you can name a modern war in which thousands of innocent people were NOT killed. Rape and murder of civilians is a by-product of every war.
And actually, I do not think the war will be that drawn out, which is another reason why I think thousands of innocent people will be killed. The first Gulf War was very quick, and it still cost the lives of "lots and lots and LOTS" of Iraqi civillians.
I respect your opposition to the war, Leroy, but what do you think will kill more Iraqi civilians: War, or Hussein? Hussein has already killed more civilians than any military action in the Gulf. | Grimis
Scrapple Level: 135
Posts: 1027/4700 EXP: 28695299 For next: 639782
Since: 11.7.02 From: MD
Since last post: 4713 days Last activity: 3168 days
| #13 Posted on 1.3.03 2053.25 Reposted on: 1.3.10 2055.31 |
Originally posted by asteroidboy Wait... wait. Are they talking about Islam or Southern Baptist?
:)
Either or... | ALL ORIGINAL POSTS IN THIS THREAD ARE NOW AVAILABLE |
| | | | | | | | | | | | | |