November 29, 2006

AREN'T THOSE FEARS ACTUALLY HOPES?

Iraq violence a threat to region (Miami Herald, 11/29/06)

The worst fears about U.S. intervention in Iraq are now true: The nation liberated from Saddam Hussein has devolved into ethnic warfare that cannot be distinguished from civil war. No matter how the United States shifts its Iraq policy, there are no good answers for stopping the violence or leaving the country. Even the high-powered Iraq Study Group, which plans to issue its report next month, has no sure-fire fix-it formula.

Whether the United States stays in Iraq or leaves, the threat persists that sectarian violence will spill over and destabilize the region.


Similarly, Solidarity destabilized the Iron Curtain.

Posted by Orrin Judd at November 29, 2006 9:33 AM
Comments

OJ, I was in 5th through 8th grades in school the years Reagan was having his defense buildup. One could replace Reagan for Bush, replace the Soviet Union with the Middle East, and get the feeling this was the same article.

And the Miami Herald wonders why no one wants to subscribe to them.

Posted by: Brad S at November 29, 2006 9:51 AM

The irony is that many fools imagine that the word, "Solidarity," refers to a shipyard workers' union. A perusal of the encylicals of MFEM Paul the Great will dispose of that notion.

Posted by: Lou Gots at November 29, 2006 9:54 AM

The difference is that some of those being destabilized are our nominal allies. But more important, the inability of American troops to maintain order in Iraq seriously damages American credibility, harms homefront morale, and hampers our foreign policy.

Although the US has achieved most of our own goals in Iraq, the danger is that Iran has rapidly spread its own influence and may supplant ours in Iraq. OJ may not see this as a bad thing given his Shia fixation, but the government and the rest of the world does.

Posted by: Chris Durnell at November 29, 2006 10:40 AM

Chris:

Nominal cedes your argument.

Posted by: oj at November 29, 2006 12:25 PM

"the inability of American troops to maintain order in Iraq seriously damages American credibility, harms homefront morale, and hampers our foreign policy."

After threatening to disarm Saddam, the US stopped short of an invasion, pulled out her hundred thousands of troops stationing in Kuwait "seriously damages American credibility, harms homefront morale, and hampers our foreign policy."

There was never a good policy. At least Bush tried. His fault was listening to naysayers right after toppling Saddam to try to placate the Euro weanies and the Democratic whinies. He should act more like a real cowboy smashing the insurgents as ruthlessly as dropping those 5000 lbs bombs on Saddam. A kinder and gentler America just doesn't work in a war.

Posted by: ic at November 29, 2006 1:53 PM

IC - that is the irony - that in trying to be reasonable for the naysayers Bush allowed the problem to grow and fester which has only increased the number of naysayers.

Posted by: AWW at November 29, 2006 2:12 PM

IC - execution is everything. Churchill's plans to attack the Dardanelles and open the straits in WWI was a smart move, but it was botched and became a fiasco. Landing at Anzio to flank the Germans should have captured Rome for the Allies in 1943, but the General in charge made mistakes and we lost the opportunity.

"I meant well," may earn you a gold star and a pat on the head in 3rd Grade, but adults are judged by results. Bush is President. The buck stops with him.

Posted by: Chris Durnell at December 1, 2006 1:29 PM

No one recalls WWI or WWII as failures either, which is why W will rank with Churchill and FDR.

Posted by: oj at December 1, 2006 1:57 PM
« LEGAL PROTECTION, NOT SOCIAL SANCTION: | Main | EACH ISM WAS JUST A FUNCTION OF THE BEARDED PROPHET'S PSYCHE: »