Posted by zeugma on October 25, 2006, at 18:41:54
In reply to Re: An american ex-soldier speaks out, posted by Declan on October 24, 2006, at 14:42:28
> I suppose the argument is that in the absence of foreign (COW) troops the Iraqis would turn on the foreign jihadists, have a relatively brief (what does that mean?) civil war and sort things out. >>
I don't know what 'relatively brief' means, either, but I know even less about civil wars 'sorting things out,' except, I suppose, in the sense in which the playground bully 'sorts things out.' I've seen the adjective 'Hobbesian' applied to Iraq in my local paper, which is basically descriptive of that kind of 'sorting out.'
>
> That's a problem with invading countries. You can't always declare victory and leave at a time of your choosing.>There may well be no intention to leave. The Senate narrowly squelched an attempt by Democrats to retain the provision (contained in the original granting of war powers act) that no permanent military bases would be constructed in Iraq in the latest authorization of funds for the occupation.
Perhaps it is advantageous to create crime, if you're an out of work policeman. Reasoning along similar lines, chaos may create the need for an elaborate set of fortresses.
Impeccable logic, but the ingratitude of those most in need of your services creates the need for more and more in the way of troops. A draft is not long in coming.
And then as z+ says, there will be riots in the streets here.
-z
poster:zeugma
thread:694101
URL: http://www.dr-bob.org/babble/poli/20061009/msgs/697721.html