RandFan
Mormon Atheist
- Joined
- Dec 18, 2001
- Messages
- 60,135
Misread the quote. Sorry. Still do not think it will turn into a quagmire.Wayne Grabert said:They were the experts that you cited to make the argument that the war against Saddam would not be a quagmire.
You may be right. I did read something about this. I don't know what the final plan is. I hope we don't occupy the country but I will have to find out more. I don't think it is an automatic quagmire.You have not been following the news. It has been widely reported for the last few months that the administration plans to occupy Iraq in the style of the Marshall Plan used in Germany and Japan after WWII. However, it is worth pointing out that both Germany and Japan had strong nationalist identities, that Germany already had some experience with democracy, and Japan till this day has put its own spin on democracy. It is largely governed by its bureaucracy and the Japanese public don't place much trust or importance on their elected officials.
I couldn't disagree more. Inaction is more the cause of terrorism than anything else. Appeasement is wrong, has always been wrong. Terrorists are waiting to see if we will give up and give in. We must make good our agreement with Saddam and Iraq if we are going to have any credibility this unending "stop that" only emboldens those that whish to do us harm.One has nothing to do with the other. In fact, invading and occupying Iraq will make terrorism worse. The Bush administration wanted to remove Saddam before 9/11. 9/11 is being exploited to disingenuously gain support for a war against Iraq.
We need to stop it. We were wrong for pulling out of Iraq the first time when he did not do as he promised. He is claiming victory today. If those who whish to appease Saddam get there way he will have won. The sanctions were almost pulled the last time we went through this. We must stop this man and stop playing games.