[wingman1]

"Iraq was never a "threat to world peace", they couldn't even begin to protect their own country. Contrary to what we are being told about bringing home the troops as soon as possible, Iraq will have a puppet government and U.S. troops occupying it for many, many years. Japan and Korea both have U.S. troops stationed in their countries more than 50 years after their respective wars. Will Iraq be any different?"

While it is true that Iraq was pretty much hamstrung by the no fly zones and our overwhelming presence in Kuwait, Turkey, and Saudi Arabia, I would disagree that they were not a threat to world peace. We DO know that Iraq was in possession of wmd. I would not be too quick to dismiss the two trailers and the buried, rose garden centrifuge.

You are correct about not bringing the troops home anytime soon, but there will be a rotation system in place soon if not already.

It is not hard to believe that we will have troops stationed in Iraq for years to come - judging by past history. But let's also remember that Japan rose from the vanquished - with our help - to become one of our best allies. The ROK were allies to the extent that they were one of the few countries to send troops to Vietnam.

"Will Iraq be any different?" If, after a good number of years Iraq becomes politically and economically stable, it will be a great influence in the region - just like South Korea and Japan. So why should we want Iraq to be different?