Mercnbeth
Posts: 11766
Status: offline
|
Thorns, It's a shame we got involved in a war where we were told we were invading to go and find Weapons of Mass Destruction; and ended up being duped into a war for constitutional rights, freedom of speech, and women's suffrage. I wish I could take credit for that thought but I'm actually paraphrasing an editorial cartoonist, Henry Payne. But that wasn't your original questions was it? You use an argument I used on my kids growing up and still use on my business' managers. You can critique but must offer a viable alternative strategy. I think the first person who comes up with the solution to that puzzle concerning Iraq deserves more than what they are currently offering for the head of bin Laden. I concur that the US image is at an all time low, but it can only get worse if we surrender and abandon the few allies we have left in the middle east. You only have to look at the past to see a very recent reference. One of the key reasons bin Laden began to call the US his enemy was our abandonment of him in Afghanistan against the Russians. For those who don't read or follow world politics refer to the "Rambo III" movie. Rambo's local "friends" were bin Laden's "rebel" forces. Does anyone think the Vietnam solution would work? Just declare victory, leave the county, roll a few multi-million dollar helicopters off a carrier for the news people and add Iraq to the list of countries you can't go to on your passport? Quick, effective, but more died after we left the area than before. I'm not positive, but I seem to remember more people were killed by the Khmer Rouge under Pol Pot in Cambodia than in the entire war. But no Americans died so if that's the goal let's do it. Would Pol Pot have been able to do that if the US was next door in Vietnam? It started while we were there I beleive, but I'd have to refer back to my Killing Fields book to be sure. But there is the "oil" thing. That's why Iraq and the Middle East is different right? That's the REAL reason we went to war as everyone knows. Except it would have been easier to get oil out of Iraq by just buying it from Saddam. Reference France, see how well capitulation is working for them, AGAIN? The bottom line is Thorns, even separating my personal need for a "pound of flesh"; the solution of Iraq is "accomplish the mission". The mission being, establish a democratic Arab/Muslim state. I can't say I'm sure that it is possible, but I don't think anything so far has indicated it isn't. It lacks a local "George Washington". The best help the US got was the recent bombing in Jordan and the subsequent threat on the Jordanian King. It points out to these people, 100% anti-Israel, mostly Palestinian refugees, that there is evil at the heart of the leaders of the radical Muslim faction. Since you asked and not one to skirt a question; my unpopular but pragmatic solution would be, (SURPRISE) to withdraw. Not only from Iraq and the middle east but the rest of the world too. I'd call for the US to eliminate all military presence throughout the world. South Korea would fall within weeks, Taiwan within the hour. A few more soon after. All returning troops would serve two functions. First to find capture and deport all illegal aliens, while fining the companies who hired them and placing the corporate officers in prison. Then I'd put entire military on border patrol. I remove all the "quality" airport security personnel and replace them with armed military personnel. For security I would adopt the Israeli version of swift and brutal retaliation for any act perpetrated on US soil by a foreign power, or a foreign based terrorist group. Before I get the argument of "how will you be sure who did it and know who to go after?"; I'll take my "best guess" and deal with the consequences of "mistakes". If only congress was forced to offer solutions and to project out the consequences of their recommended strategy there would be a lot less rhetoric. But it seems you only have to be right in hindsight to warrant press coverage these days.
|