I am still baffled by this. If Iraq flies in the no fly zone, we should either ignore it, or completely destroy them. It's a like child that keeps trying to take a cookie and you keep swatting his hand. There should have been one (maybe two) violations of the no fly zone. After the 1st violation, we should have either done a complete, massive attack, or simply decided to give up protecting the zone.
I mean - consider this - if someone points a gun at you - you don't just get rid of the gun - you get the guy put in jail. (ok, kind of a dumb example, but I think you see my point) -rc > -----Original Message----- > From: Craig Dudley [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] > Sent: Friday, September 06, 2002 12:31 PM > To: CF-Community > Subject: RE: U.S., UK launch major Iraq airstrikes > > > Apparantly that's the 10th such raid this year, albeit the > biggest for four > years. > > It seems Iraq regulary fires on planes patrolling the no fly > zones, and > us/uk planes regularly fire back. > > -----Original Message----- > From: Haggerty, Mike [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] > Sent: 06 September 2002 17:10 > To: CF-Community > Subject: U.S., UK launch major Iraq airstrikes > > > Why are we just hearing about this? > > U.S., UK launch major Iraq airstrikes ______________________________________________________________________ Structure your ColdFusion code with Fusebox. Get the official book at http://www.fusionauthority.com/bkinfo.cfm Archives: http://www.mail-archive.com/[email protected]/ Unsubscribe: http://www.houseoffusion.com/index.cfm?sidebar=lists
