Quote:
Originally Posted by RIROCKHOUND
I looked back at the thread; I think we could go around and around re: the long-term good of the surge and stability of Iraq and neither would change opinions.
What I am having a harder time with, is the idea that you, who was in Iraq (I think you said there, and not Afghanistan), thinks we should get engaged in Syria. Syria, to me, is more like Iran than Iraq, and, is NOT a country to get into w/o going whole hog, and then likely would require a long-term occupation/'residual force'. To me, without fully proportional financial and troop support from other allies, ME and Europe, is madness, and even then is probably not one we want to be involved in... I am not doubting the evil of Assad, but I don't think a US led groundwar is the answer here.
|
You make good points, and I'm no expert on high-level strategy. In my opinion (I could be wrong), we're going to need to deal with it eventually. Jimmy Carter tried the policy of "put your head in the sand, wring your hands, and hope the problem goes away", but that doesn't always work. I agree that we need big-time buy-in from a lot of other countries.
Between our economic issues, and what's happening in that part of the world, it's getting downright scary.
Threaded Mode