To: ZULU
To some extent, one of the points was to keep Iraq a state and prove that a purely civil, non-partisan government could work. This would provide an example of stability for the region, in theory.
Personally, I'm not sure it can, but I don't think splitting it up would help, because that would just leave each of the segments as easy pickings for its sponsor (Iran in one case, Syria in the other).
The Kurds are sort of our friends now, but they have a major Communist-nationalist terrorist movement rooted there that they have not renounced. It is a very complicated situation indeed.
But whatever we do, we have to be perceived as winning, or this is going to lead to even worse things in the future for all concerned.
137 posted on
11/24/2006 7:35:06 PM PST by
livius
To: livius
"prove that a purely civil, non-partisan government could work. This would provide an example of stability for the region, in theory.
Personally, I'm not sure it can,"
I agree with you. I think that was an overly ambitious and optimistic aspiration, given the history and culture of this area.
"But whatever we do, we have to be perceived as winning, or this is going to lead to even worse things in the future for all concerned."
No question about it. The Islamists are watching and waiting to take any propaganda benefit they can from this situation if we are perceived as having failed.
1,991 posted on
11/26/2006 9:33:58 PM PST by
ZULU
(Non nobis, non nobis, Domine, sed nomini tuo da gloriam. God, guts, and guns made America great.)
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson