Some regions of the world are just going to be ruled by tyrants. Whether that’s a matter of seeming preference as appears to be the case in South America, or whether that’s a matter of a populace that’s just so beaten down, war-torn and defeated that they can’t manage to sustain any other form of governance, is open to conjecture. Interjecting and attempting to manipulate these regions into a sort of American-style polyglot democratic republic clearly does not work, whatever the reason. At least Saddam was our tyrant, despite all the claims to the contrary. Look at what has arisen in the wake of his hanging by a military tribunal that we sponsored. Saddam was a scapegoat for 9/11 and he PO’ed the Bushes, so off with his head.
Iraq is actually stepping up. They actually have the will to fight for freedom. When we were there doing it for them, of course they just sat back and let America do all the fighting and dying. Pull-out was the best thing we ever did: https://www.yahoo.com/news/blowing-houses-digging-graves-iraqis-purge-islamic-state-113933138.html
I hit the post button too soon. In continuation from #201:
The Afghanis possess no national courage, are indifferent to their own freedom, and are hopeless. In a 2015 assessment of the situation, US generals announced that we need to stay the course on Afghanistan, we’re almost halfway there. Gotta be kidding. Just like the south Vietnamese, you can’t save somebody from invaders when they care nothing about their own freedom. Freedom is something YOU have to fight for, somebody else can’t do it for you. The Afghanis are weak-minded and happy to be ruled by whoever rolls into town and kicks their ass. I’m totally for cold pull-out. The winning president ran on that platform, that’s what the American people voted for, so quit screwing around and do it already.