Misty! You should know by now that I don't dance with girlz! No offense intended.
The sad eyes look may work for you and Sam, but not Misty. I'm just not wired 'that' way. ;-)
Well.. Misty could elbow me into "Sad eyes"-ing you.
I'm not so eager as others to blame Bush 41 for stopping at Tigres.
If you've seen my posts about Vietnam, you will recognize my "Keeping Pressure on Schwab" theory that states that human events are interelated. Vietnam, by this theory, not only halted any possible domino effect, it halted Soviet expansion. Our presence there, win or lose, showed that we would could build a wall or two ourselves. Recall that the Soviets invaded Afghanistan during the Carter administration, a period marked by a severe lessening of "Pressure on Schwab." The disasterious 1970s capitulation led to that war, Angola, and Central America, where Soviet and related communist picked up our slack and applied reverse pressure on the U.S.
[Here;s my theory on Schwab:
http://www.freerepublic.com/focus/vetscor/804612/posts?page=166#166 ]
In the late 1980s, the severe pressure of the Reagan 1980s forced collapse of the Soviet empire. It was a moment of enormous change, danger, and opportunity. Bush 41's now maligned "New World Order" was an inspired plan to adopt new methods of keeping pressure on America's enemies, while incorporating old enemies into friends. This came by expansion of NATO and an important reorientation of U.S. military priorities to fight smaller enemies as they appear with international consensus, while at the same time projecting U.S. power in clear tones, all the while using the backdrop of UN legitimacy.
[Here's my theory on the unfinished Cold War:
http://www.freerepublic.com/focus/chat/754695/posts?page=245#245 ]
The coalition built to fight Saddam was tricky, powerful, and offered an incredible opportunity for international cooperation and peace.
Bush 41's team betrayed Iraqi opposition, it is said, but I do not think the betrayal was complete by the time 42 took office. Bush 41 handed his successor unfinished work. One wonders of the conversations at State and Defense: 42's team didn't want to hear it. Think of UK in 1945: Churchill was ousted, and England sank into irrelevancy. Only the U.S. cannot be irrelevant. 42 applied only half the Bush 41 strategy: international consensus. Iraq is case in point. 42 kept the form of pressure without the actual pressure. The UN is a game. 42 didn't read the fine print. By transferring jurisdiction over Iraq almost entirely to the UN, 42 transferred US interests to the UN. Huge mistake, the product of wishful thinking.
Another example is Isreal and Palestine. The opportunity for settlement of the issue was never greater than in 1993. We had turned former Cold War alignments on their heads, for every Arab nation, including Iran, owed the U.S. allegiance for 41's extraordinary gaming in the Gulf War. Instead, 42 turned the peace over to the PLO, rather than to Egypt, Saudi, etc., guaranteeing failure. Free of US pressure or obligation to it, the Arab world ignored 42 and let Arafat run in circles around Olso and Camp David. 42 created a vacuum. Our enemies filled it. [I'm rethinking the Balkans, although I don't know enough about it to comment now.]
The story was repeated just about everywhere, and we ended up with eight years of the "New World Order" without American designs or control upon it. The task of Bush 43 is not to complete the Gulf War -- that was executed exactly; his task is to obligate the world to US design, peace, international cooperation, and respect for life and commerce. These are ideals that can only be realized through force, through the multiple and coincidental application of the military, diplomacy, and dollars.
The War on Terrorism and the coming Gulf War II is not about Iraq and Osama Bin Laden. It is about creating order in a world that abhors it. Whenever and wherever American pressure fails, something and someone else will fill it.
We cannot leave the world alone. We shall manage it by making it form to us. Bush 43's extraordinary manipulation of the UN is exactly what his father was doing back in 1991. That is the unfinished job, not Saddam Husseim. Saddam is a bit player who stole 42's lines. He's about to be written out of the script.
Interesting analysis.
I believe the U.S. lets the UN determine too much of what we do and in most cases what the Un wants is not in our best interests. I think the UN had a lot to do with limiting how far Bush went during the Gulf War.
Yes. But with more feeling.
I'll even dance with Darksheare! And even Jen, for crying out loud(NHH! of course!)
