More troops in Iraq

[Downthestretch55]

Originally Posted by pgardn

DTS we could easily have this country under control. But what it would take is not platable in moral terms. We could, if we wanted, make them start all over. But the number of people that would die to give us this effect would be condemned by everyone.

Israel cannot be allowed to live with a neighbor that will bomb them at will. Let us remember that Hezbollah made a calculated decision to start this. In the meeting of the Muslim nations yesterday/today, Iran's president again stated that Israel cannot be allowed to Exist. Israel could get 20,000 troops into Lebanon. That will be enough, this is a very small area compared to what we are trying to take on. But Hezbollah will eventually reinfiltrate and the problems will start again if things are not done correctly. And that is because Lebanon is no longer an independent country. I guarantee if Hezbollah had to do it all over again they would have stayed out. More and more it appears that total victory is the only way. Japan and Germany understand that.

BTW. Anyone on the board want to volunteer for the UN stabilizing force to be sent to that area? The UN force that goes in must be allowed to fight back. So that leaves out the French...

Pgardn,
Short of using our wmd's in Iraq, the very thing we invaded to prevent, there will be no positive outcome for the US. Sadr has a growing malitia.
80% of Iraquis want the US out.
Both generals, when asked at today's hearing,if they anticipated the current situation said,"NO".
This is a failed policy.
Truth be told, all the Dubbya's horses and all the Dubbya's men, will never be able to put Humpty Dumpty together again.
Do I hear "stay the course?" again???

Now, Israel. Yes, Hezzbolah initiated the attack.
Did Israel reply with a "collective response"?
Was their response dissproportionate to the initial action?
Does their continued military action gain or discredit American culpability?
Read the article I posted.
In my view, they continue to diminish US standing in the region (read: their actions are causing us to be suspect in fragile relationships we've sought to develop).
Should they defend themselves? Of course.
I'll just say it should be proportionate.
And no, I don't think they have sufficient military to continue a lasting presence. They were unable to do so in 2000.
Bombing a country into the "stone age" might gain security short term. Far too many people on both sides have already died.
However, "you can kill people, but you can't kill ideas."

It's time for them to talk with their enemies. Failure to do so will affect the US. Their actions undercut our credibility in the Arab world.

Finally, would I serve in the UN peace keeping forces?
In a NY moment...yes.

Peace.