04-03-2003, 02:13 AM
1. I do not agree that it is in the US long term interest to reduce its troop presence in the Middle East, unless you are talking very long term. The troops currently in Saudi Arabia are there because of Saddam. Forcibly moving the troops in Saudi Arabia into Iraq solves the problems posed by Saddam and the troop presence in Saudi Arabia, without seeming to be appeasement.
2. "Kill terrrorists in Iraq" is a good idea. US long term strategy is to kill terrorists everywhere, so this is consistent.
3. "Provoke terrorists world wide to expose themselves" I think this is not a strategy, just a consequence that may not even happen.
4. The Iranian gov't is hostile and I don't agree that it is in the US interest to thaw relations with that gov't. I want to see a different Iranian gov't. It has taken since 1979 for the US to finally get Iran encircled, the opportunities presented with this accomplishment ought to be exploited somehow. Given demographic trends in Iran, containment is plausible. However, the regime is racing to gain nuclear weapons so there may not be time for containment to play out before a nuclear confrontation occurs.
5. Afghanistan helps complete the encirclement of Iran, and the country must be denied to terrorists.
6. Russia doesn't want the US at war in Iraq because they still view Iraq as in their sphere of influence. They lose commercially and diplomatically when the US wins this war, not just in Iraq but thoughout the region. Russian and American interests diverge, this war makes that obvious.
7. Eastern european nations demonstrated independence from French/German/Belgium EU leadership, which is good for them, the US and the EU.
8. Turkey is the loser here. If the US gains a reliable ally in Iraq, we need Turkey less. Also, there is the difficulty of the Kurdish population of Iraq living in a nation with a free press: what will they say? Will they foment revolution by the Kurds in Turkey?
9. Syria's day are numbered because because they are state sponsors of terrorism against Isreal. They occupy Lebanon and support the Hezbollah there. Syria should be on the Axis of Evil. Yes I know they are formally declared to be cooperating in the war against terror, but they are lying. President Bashar al-Assad is not even the key figure, the entire police state must be dismantled. Isreal won't stand down militarily until Syria's regime changes too.
10. I agree that with less military threats against Isreal, the US will find it easier to influence the Isrealis. But if the Isreali-Palistinian situation is solved, the various Arab police states will find something else with which to distract their populations. Furthermore, there is a religious faction of Islam that will remain unrelentingly anti-Isreal regardless of what happens to the Palestinians. Therefore this will never really go away.
11. I agree the Arab police states must go. Hopefully a domino-effect occurs. Calling them "aristocratic" is far too kind.
Long term objectives not yet mentioned:
12. Destroy a hostile power before it gains nuclear weapons.
13. Opportunity to establish an Arab free market for a free press. Al-Jazeera's customer base lives in police states, and that affects how they slant the news. What would an Arab press with a free readership look like? The various neighboring police states and extreme religious sects will sponsor a great deal of propaganda in the guise of native Iraqi opinion in the hope of influencing Iraqi politics. Will the Iraqi's be able to handle it?
14. Reestablish some credibilty for the conventional US military as a deterrent force, hopefully preventing open conflict in the future. 'Asymmetric warfare' only works so long as the US military is not active.
Growler
2. "Kill terrrorists in Iraq" is a good idea. US long term strategy is to kill terrorists everywhere, so this is consistent.
3. "Provoke terrorists world wide to expose themselves" I think this is not a strategy, just a consequence that may not even happen.
4. The Iranian gov't is hostile and I don't agree that it is in the US interest to thaw relations with that gov't. I want to see a different Iranian gov't. It has taken since 1979 for the US to finally get Iran encircled, the opportunities presented with this accomplishment ought to be exploited somehow. Given demographic trends in Iran, containment is plausible. However, the regime is racing to gain nuclear weapons so there may not be time for containment to play out before a nuclear confrontation occurs.
5. Afghanistan helps complete the encirclement of Iran, and the country must be denied to terrorists.
6. Russia doesn't want the US at war in Iraq because they still view Iraq as in their sphere of influence. They lose commercially and diplomatically when the US wins this war, not just in Iraq but thoughout the region. Russian and American interests diverge, this war makes that obvious.
7. Eastern european nations demonstrated independence from French/German/Belgium EU leadership, which is good for them, the US and the EU.
8. Turkey is the loser here. If the US gains a reliable ally in Iraq, we need Turkey less. Also, there is the difficulty of the Kurdish population of Iraq living in a nation with a free press: what will they say? Will they foment revolution by the Kurds in Turkey?
9. Syria's day are numbered because because they are state sponsors of terrorism against Isreal. They occupy Lebanon and support the Hezbollah there. Syria should be on the Axis of Evil. Yes I know they are formally declared to be cooperating in the war against terror, but they are lying. President Bashar al-Assad is not even the key figure, the entire police state must be dismantled. Isreal won't stand down militarily until Syria's regime changes too.
10. I agree that with less military threats against Isreal, the US will find it easier to influence the Isrealis. But if the Isreali-Palistinian situation is solved, the various Arab police states will find something else with which to distract their populations. Furthermore, there is a religious faction of Islam that will remain unrelentingly anti-Isreal regardless of what happens to the Palestinians. Therefore this will never really go away.
11. I agree the Arab police states must go. Hopefully a domino-effect occurs. Calling them "aristocratic" is far too kind.
Long term objectives not yet mentioned:
12. Destroy a hostile power before it gains nuclear weapons.
13. Opportunity to establish an Arab free market for a free press. Al-Jazeera's customer base lives in police states, and that affects how they slant the news. What would an Arab press with a free readership look like? The various neighboring police states and extreme religious sects will sponsor a great deal of propaganda in the guise of native Iraqi opinion in the hope of influencing Iraqi politics. Will the Iraqi's be able to handle it?
14. Reestablish some credibilty for the conventional US military as a deterrent force, hopefully preventing open conflict in the future. 'Asymmetric warfare' only works so long as the US military is not active.
Growler
Growler
"To excuse such an atrocity by blaming U.S. government policies is to deny the basic idea of all morality: that individuals are responsible for their actions." -- Salman Rushdie writing of September 11th
"To excuse such an atrocity by blaming U.S. government policies is to deny the basic idea of all morality: that individuals are responsible for their actions." -- Salman Rushdie writing of September 11th