[atlaw]

I think it's safe to say that we disagree. : )

If, as you suggest, the paper government of Iraq solidifies into a functioning entity at some point in the distant future, I'll view it as a welcome miracle. In the meantime, I view our protracted expenditure of blood and treasure on that faint hope as a perfect waste.

As for the Sudan, I offered it as an example of a "sovereign nation" splintering itself into bloody shards. Such is the nature of civil war.

[kabar]

You assume correctly. I served a year in Vietnam, including during the Tet Offensive and another 8 months off the coast. We have liberated Iraq, which is far better off than under Saddam and his two demented sons. Walking away has consequences for millions in Iraq. We don't need or want a bloodbath in Iraq or turmoil in the entire region, which will have a major impact on the global economy.

In the meantime, I view our protracted expenditure of blood and treasure on that faint hope as a perfect waste.

It is only a waste if we walk away now and leave a failed state. We shouldn't leave until the mission is accomplished. The only way the enemy can win is to create the kind of attitude you express here at home. You are their last best hope. I will reiterate, the best way to honor the sacrifice of our personnel and the treasure invested is to accomplish the mission. Troop morale is high and so are reenlistment rates.

As for the Sudan, I offered it as an example of a "sovereign nation" splintering itself into bloody shards. Such is the nature of civil war.

There is no civil war in Iraq yet. The six month old government will meet the challenge with our help and resolve. A Democrat takeover of the House will, no doubt, undermine that effort.