I quote Hapaboy here for no other reason than his just happens to be the last post. I could have quoted TM or optional, or Candle, or the instigator who pretends to be of middle eastern descent. (FPC?...doesn't matter, we know it's just a goof no matter who it is).
So Hapaboy gets the honor.
Someone mentioned if we went in and deposed SH, and did not do any "nation building" that this would lead to civil war. Well, what is the real problem with that? Who are we, or who is any nation to go into a foreign land and tell them how to live?
While I would like nothing more than to see a western style democracy in Iraq, how likely is this to really happen? Is there a single democracy in the entire Arab world?
Is there a single country in the middle east that has a government of the people? Yeah, Israel, which is universally despised by its neighboring countries.
So if we can be the world's "policeman" and go in and take over and put in place a regime in Iraq that suits our sensibilities, then why stop there? As Candle has said, even though Saudi Arabia and Pakistan are our "allies", they indeed pose the greatest threat to us. So why not invade them? Why stop (or even start) with Iraq?
We went to Vietnam to try and install a government to our liking. They were having a civil war, and we stuck our nose in it. We had no business being there, and our presence ultimately served no purpose other than to cause great divisiveness in our own country, resentment in much of the world, the death of over 50,000 American troops. And all for what? The civil war was won by the North Vietnamese, and now 30 years later, we are on a friendly basis with them. Doing business. Sending tourists.
So really, the politics of reality are about business. Look at China. At one time not so long ago, another of our biggest threats. Now they only want "most favored nation status" in our trade policy. The USSR no longer exists, because their economics didn't work.
Of course a readily apparent difference between Vietnam and Iraq is that Iraq has oil. So the game will play out differently at least for a while.
Our real battle should not be a military one. Our real battle.....the one that must be won to preserve our nation for as long as the world exists (a noble if not necessarily realistic goal) is not about installing puppet regimes. It is about two things.
The immediate issue, is, of course, to assure our national security. To be on guard against terrorism. So again, this really will boil down to economics. Get the followers of the Islamic fanatics to stop being so socially and economically desperate as to send their sons (and now daughters) to their deaths as suicide bombing martyrs (and getting money from assholes like Saddam and Arafat). Give them hope and education and stop giving them reasons to be brainwashed by the Bin Ladens of the world, who have them convinced that we are evil and morally corrupt. Anything sells to a barefoot illiterate who is hungry and sees and is taught to resent the great wealth and "decadent" western lifestyle. Meanwhile their rulers take all the oil wealth for themselves. But use us, or the Israelis, or the different sects of Islam, who whoever is convenient, as scapegoats to explain away the sad state of affairs for the palestinians, kurds, whoever.
The second issue is, of course, to end our dependence on oil altogether. There is not an unlimited amount of fossil fuel, and there is no reason to not make an all out effort to find alternative sources of energy. Yes, even the automotive industry is throwing us an occasional bone with a few "hybrid" cars and a lot of promises. But this has now become a matter of national security.
The Manhattan Project accomplished the near impossible during World War II. When it seemed important to beat the Russians to the moon in 1961, we were able to fulfill Kennedy's goal to "put a man on the moon in this decade". Now we need an energy solution. We have always had the ability to coordinate extraordinary efforts and accomplish extraordinary feats of technical achievement. But so far it has all been for the military. Atomic bomb. Space race (truly at the time a military feat....if perhaps only psychological). Now we need to exploit our ability to achieve by eliminating our dependence on foreign oil. And a cure for cancer would be nice too. So many better ways to spend our money and capitalize on our greatness as a nation of achievers. Why is it always done to build bombs (or other military miracles......SDI comes to mind). How about pooling our money and our brains and doing something for ourselves. And the future of our planet?
Here is where Gore, as weak a candidate as he was at least had a policy. The environment is our only irreplaceable resource.
Let it go, and there are no second chances.
A poll about whether Reagan was or was not a great President had a thread here not more than a week or so ago. But while it is and will be argued over whether he should be credited with "winning the cold war", the fact remains that he had no regard for the environment. James Watt, his secretary of the interior wanted to drill for oil in Yellowstone Park, as well as in virtually all of the protected preserves of Alaska. Sure, this would have alleviated the fear of further 1970's style "oil embargoes", but what about the results of this kind of thinking a hundred years from now. Or two hundred? Or a thousand? Or even just five years from now?
So we have two mentalities. Live for today, and let our children's children worry about their lives in their time. Or be responsible, and do what must be done now.
In Tokyo, people walk the streets with masks to filter out air pollution. In a hundred years, if we don't change things, we (our descendants) will be walking around in Hazmat suits and breathing canned air.
Twenty years ago, anyone would have been laughed at if they said in 2003, drinking water would cost far more than gasoline. Not to mention that gasoline would cost $2 a gallon. Or even $1 a gallon seemed incomprehensible not so long ago.
And here we are. I went to the movies the other night. OK, I was overcharged for a bottle of water, because of where I was. But the fact remains that a half pint of water cost me $3.75. So we go nuts that gas costs over two dollars a gallon. But I paid $30 dollars a gallon for drinking water!!!!
"Don't need a weather man to know which way the wind blows."
Sorry for going off theme, but we have a world to REALLY worry about. A future that looks pretty dismal unless we come to our senses. So kick ass in Iraq. But let's realize that no matter how we try to impose our will on the regime change ..."nation building".... it is all just short sighted stuff. We have a planet to worry about. We have our own children and their children to worry about and be responsible to. Let's not mess it up over the immediate gratification of cheaper oil, and a "feel good" victory over a basically pathetic little country run by a thug and his family and his "elite Republican Guard". We know from watching the Sopranos how thugs and bullies are really just losers who don't know it yet.
Peace, my brethren, and again, sorry for the rant.
Rs7