[conservatism_IS_compassion]

Early on, the official policy of America was to "do nothing concerning the reconstruction" of Germany's economy and society. This was to be left only to the Germans themselves, regardless of their lack of money, equipment, homes, factories or shops. It took two years for the United States to recognize that its own self interest demanded a functional Germany back on its feet as a bulwark against the Soviet buildup in Eastern Europe. And the American policy was changed to helping the Germans reconstruct their nation, effectively and quickly.

. . . The reconstruction of Germany back to a fully functional society – both economic and political --. . . was not largely completed in Germany for four years, whereas in Iraq it should take about two years.

Would you say that West Germany was in better shape after two years of not-so-benign neglect than Iraq is now? Politically, perhaps it was--2 years of deNazification following less than 15 years of Nazi rule, compared to Iraq's few months of deBaathification following dozens of years of Baath rule.

Economically, tho, I'll bet it was worse. If so the economic reconstruction of Germany only took two years of U.S. help. I don't see that Iraq should take continued US government investments (I hope the term may be used in the non-Clintonesque sense) for more than a year. I certainly hope that by then Iraq has a rule of law in place which will allow private enterprise to undertake the rest of the reconstruction more efficiently than the government can.

[Congressman Billybob]

Even though Iraq is a basket case, Germany was far worse in May, 1945, when it surrendered. The bombing in Germany was not precision, but carpet. The fighting in Germany was not slight, but horrific and house to house.

Germany took more than four years to patch up and get functional. Iraq will take a full two years, by comparison.

John / Billybob