A Massive Failure Of Permanent Limited Warfare Against Middle East States

My Opinion

[Odyssey-x]

A theory Carroll Quigley was fond of for managing international relations was called Permanent Limited Warfare. Permanent limited warfare was a way to manage troublesome countries in the third world by engaging them in a state of sporadic warfare. The U.S has used this strategy to deal with Iraq. In doing this though, has the U.S repeated the mistakes of World War I in our dealing with Iraq? After World War I our strategy was to punish the Germans for their agression by forcing them to pay huge reparaations to the allies. This created financial disaster and a huge amount of humiliation and want for vengence among the Germans. When we attacked Iraq during the gulf war we made the same mistake. Instead we should have done what we did in world war II were we took over the country (Japan and Germany), held a nurenber and then been NICE, and even helped rebuild it. Instead we never got rid of Saddam Hussein and kept bombing and sanctioning and remained in a mode of permanent limited warfare and subjugation.

So what do we get? We get a country that's ruled by madmen who are supported by their desparate citizens who finds itself focused on the national goal of vengence against the United States. Which was what brought about the support for Adolph Hitler and World War II. A deep seated loathing and vengence for a government that had been cruel in it's conquest. Why can't we learn from Alexander the Great and Rome and World War II that the best thing to do with conquered territory is to exterminate the leadership and then exercise benevolent government over it?

[First_Salute]

Bump.