So far, my post holds up pretty well. The opposition collapsed very rapidly, as foreseen. It is also clear that I was correct about what the Administration hoped, which is the operant term in my post, regarding the post invasion situation. It is still the intention to install a transitional regime, once there is greater pacification, and "stay long enough for them to become entrenched, and to destroy the WMD infrastructure." It is looking harder than expected, but not essentially impossible. Thus, as far as I am concerned, you just showed how prescient I am. Thanks.
We did not take an incrementalist approach in Iraq, we smashed the regime. What may be required for complete pacification was always subject to revision, since no one can foresee everything perfectly. However, it is not clear even yet that they cannot largely succeed by increasing the Iraqi security forces.
I do not see the humor in the last quoted post at all. No one expected that bombing would suddenly stop, there are always attempts to scuttle agreements. As a result of the neutralization of Iraq, the willingness of Washington to make a new effort to broker an agreement, and the rise of Mr. Abbas as Prime Minister, there is a somewhat better security environment permitting the moving forward of negotiations........ |
