WHAT TO DO IN IRAQ....I honestly don't understand this mindset. How severely schizophrenic are you when you can believe that a) US troops cannot achieve their goals, or even stabilize the situation, but b) they should still stay in Iraq.
Foreign Affairs magazine published a piece by Stephen Biddle a few months ago called "Seeing Baghdad, Thinking Saigon," ...Biddle's piece in turn spawned a roundtable of responses in the current issue of the magazine...
...the most remarkable thing about the responses is that everyone seems to agree that (a) we're virtually powerless to affect events in Iraq and (b) none of the proposals by the roundtable authors are remotely practical. Despite this, none of my fellow responders support even a phased and prudent withdrawal of U.S. troops. Apparently we are to stay in Iraq forever despite the inability of anyone to produce a plan for victory — or even bare stability — that inspires even minimal confidence.
Are there simply too many able-bodied men and women in the US today? Is this the best way to get rid of them? (Why not export them? ...Oh, this is exporting them.)
This isn't "honest disagreement" or "realism". This is insanity, asking others to die - and kill - in large numbers when we've got no reason for it.
No comments:
Post a Comment