SI
SI
discoversearch

We've detected that you're using an ad content blocking browser plug-in or feature. Ads provide a critical source of revenue to the continued operation of Silicon Investor.  We ask that you disable ad blocking while on Silicon Investor in the best interests of our community.  If you are not using an ad blocker but are still receiving this message, make sure your browser's tracking protection is set to the 'standard' level.
Pastimes : THE SLIGHTLY MODERATED BOXING RING

 Public ReplyPrvt ReplyMark as Last ReadFilePrevious 10Next 10PreviousNext  
To: Lazarus_Long who wrote (6127)3/31/2002 10:51:57 PM
From: Dayuhan  Read Replies (1) of 21057
 
we could get dragged into it. We already have lots of troops in the Muslim world.

I don't see that happening, certainly not in any combat role. The IDF has more than enough assets to deal with any plausible military scenario. I also don't think any of the Arab states would be likely to risk a military assault, knowing that they would probably get hammered. They'd rather let the Palestinians do the dying.

This flareup might force us to delay plans for a move against Iraq, but that's not such a terrible thing. If it delays long enough for somebody in Washington to come up with a viable endgame plan for an Iraq operation, it might be a very good thing. There's been some very strange talk about this situation. I've seen talk of "installing" a democracy, as if it were a light bulb, or a spare tire. The naivete you encounter in some quarters is startling.

A peacekeeping deployment is possible, but I think it would be a very bad idea. The US is perceived as pro-Israel, and a US presence would be more likely to inflame violence than to keep peace. Better to let the Europeans deal with that.

I've thought for years that the UN should hire a few regiments of Gurkhas and keep them on the payroll for this sort of thing.
Report TOU ViolationShare This Post
 Public ReplyPrvt ReplyMark as Last ReadFilePrevious 10Next 10PreviousNext