Thanks for the 20/20 hindsight! Real helpful in 2007 for a decision that had to be made years ago.
Sunni training camp? - poof it's gone. Persians crossing the border?, poof they're f******* gone.
I always get a kick out of this logic, usually coming from the Reid/Pelosi/Murtha Strategic CutnRun department.
I see your point....since we can't control/strike the bad guys while we're actually based in Baghdad, well, we'll be able to hit them much more effectively from farther away on Gulf carriers, or hey, why not Okinawa for the greatest effectiveness!!?
And of course, this strategy worked extemely well in Afghanistan, where we lobbed cruise missiles left and right at Al Qaeda training camps, only to have them strike back effectively on 9/11. Worked great, huh?
Oh. And the intelligence on WHERE and WHEN to strike some camp here or there, why, that will be so much better when we leave and all the locals learn to keep their heads down for fear of those left in control. What are they sposed to do, call USAF911? Tell their neighborhood Sunni police officer that there's a Sunni terror training camp in their neighbor's house?
There's no making your ilk happy. If, as I believe, bugging out is a worse option than staying for 50 years, then you will merely say in hindsight that we bugged out the wrong way, or you would've done it differently and of course, better.
Well it wasn't hindsight. I have held this position from day one (hoping I was wrong and Bush was right) and you can read back through my posts for confirmation. That opinion was based on 11 years as a former covert govt. intel weenie. I am painfully familiar with the ME and only a total ignoramus would think you going to change anything there unless you apply massive, brutal and completely socially unacceptable force.
What is wrong with my logic? Of course you actually have to execute but that depends on who is in power anyway.
Read and think before commenting. NO we can't effectively attack while in country. (Actually that isn't true but changing that reality requires changing the rules of engagement). If we pull out (to Kurdistan not completely - please try to retain this thought) we can sure let them kill each other pretty effectively though. Beyond that, if you can identify discrete targets you CAN take them out (if you have the will). Especially from land carriers (read airstrips) in Kurdistan. Large bases in Kurdistan would allow us to project force quickly anywhere in the region.
You are mixing apples and oranges. You are arguing that stupid and failed policies of the past (Clintoon and his cruise missiles for example) necessitates a new stupid (and failed) policy.
We are not going to change the culture in Iraq. We need to deal with reality and position ourselves as best we can. I'm NOT suggesting we "run away". I am suggesting we take a cold and ruthless approach. Hell if it was up to me I would really deal with the problem. "Reject islam and renounce your culture or I'll kill every man, woman and child in your sick nation." Then we would have culture change. You wouldn't want me as dictator.