Quote:
|
Originally Posted by Bababooyee
OK, I guess I'll bite some more.
In order to spare my time (a little for now), I'll just handle it broadly:
I think he misses the point on the intent behind a lot of the "new approach" (ie some of the things that "don't matter", in fact, may). Also, in my estimation, the "new approach" is not designed to stabilize Iraq enitrely/completely defeat the insurgents, rather the aim is to get Iraq to the point where the government has a strong enough upper hand that our leaving doesn't cause a total meltdown and Iraq can handle the rest more or less on its own. In essence, its a muscle-flexing before we pull out (save face, claim victory, and shift responsibility/blame to Iraq - however you want to view it).
|
But I can't see how 20,000 is nearly enough men and women, if that's the intent, you know? It seems to me it would take a lot more boots on the ground, and that Bush is still trying to wage war on the cheap as it were.
I also see no way around Iraq descending into sectarian violence no matter what once we're gone. Which is horrible, though I wonder if it will take the focus of Islam vs. the West and put it on Islam vs Islam, you know?