NorthernGent
Posts: 8730
Joined: 7/10/2006 Status: offline
|
quote:
ORIGINAL: HydroMaster quote:
ORIGINAL: cyberdude611 That's a very good point.... History had a tendency to forget things. Even though Eisenhower got the US involved in Vietnam....who got the blame for that war? JFK, LBJ, and the Democrats. The Democrats are going to inherit this war, like it or not. And if the first thing the Dems do when they have power in 2009 is a complete pull out and Iraq falls into Civil War.... Guess who history is going to get the blame for losing the war...Democrats. Just like new management in a company. Does all the problems and failings of the previous management just suddenly go away? NOPE! Now it is up to the new management to fix the problems and set the company straight. If not, then the new management also gets the boot and will now share the blame for the company's failings. Hmm, no I see the blame remaining on Bush for a long long time. I don't intend to blame either really. It's a screwed up situation started by an equally screwed up situation. Just a nastly chain reaction. The terrorists attacked us in reaction to us butting in on their culture, we reacted and attack them, they reacted and waged a guerilla war on us. I can't see the outcome being much different regardless of who was in power. I do know the US as a whole will be blamed and targeted for years if not decades to come no matter what we do to try to fix it. One huge flaw in the argument. The US government didn't react and attack terrorists. They found an excuse to dominate Iraq and create an open economic system open to US interests, as per US foreign policy for decades. Nor did the terrorists attack the US for "butting in on their culture". They attacked the US because of decades of economic dominance over that region e.g. overthrowing democratic governments in Iran, dictating unfair trade agreements etc. You want to stop all of this, keep the US government out of the Middle East. 'Problem is that the US economy is underpinned by controlling the supply of oil. The other problem is that the European economy is to an extent dependent on the success of the US economy - hence the support from the British government. Personally, I think they're there for the long haul. You can see this in the embassy they're building - the size of a small village. Ultimately, you'll have policitians weighing up the political costs of invasion/withdrawal and they'll come to this conclusion: people will accept dead Iraqis, but they won't accept rising prices at home.
_____________________________
I have the courage to be a coward - but not beyond my limits. Sooner or later, the man who wins is the man who thinks he can.
|