Rita wrote:
>
> >
> >My side wrote:
> >[snip]
> >> Why continue to pour money and lives trying, in vain, to seek
revenge
> >by
> >> starting and continuing a war in a country that had no connection
> >with 9-11?
> >[snip]
> >
> >Pottery Barn rule. We broke it, now we own it. Gotta fix it before
> >we leave.
> >
> George Bush owned Iraq from the day he invaded it. But I am not at
> all sure it CAN be fixed.
Old expression, to fix it, ya gotta know what's broke.
The country of Iraq exists as it does because of the last imperial
power to invade and conquer. It has never really been "unified".
Even Sadam ruled from a minority party that intentionally excluded
most of the rest of the country. There are still strong tribal ties
with old axes to grid.
Bush and his bunch don't understand tribal cultures and why
democracies don't handle intertribal conflicts well. Add in
significant interest (or disinterest to some extent) from external
powers, not to mention a Kurdish population that is STILL
agitating for effectively independence and you have a major
perscription for disaster.
We might be able to pour in enough money to overcome the
current situation and to provide the trappings of a stable
government. But if we ever leave, there is little evidence
that Iraq will be able to withstand the internal and external
pressures upon the government. Civil war in some form is
almost inevitable, with a dictatorship of some form being the
most likely end result. Whether it is particularly friendly
towards the west is far from certain. It could easily become
a friend of Ossama and far more like the Taliban than Sadam
ever was.
>> Stay informed about: Is this the best return on the dollar