1. We had killed millions of their civilians, defeating their will to resist (not just the army, but the entire population). We have not done this in Iraq (and hopefully, won't).
Who are you kidding. The Japanese weren't conquered. It was only the threat to kill the Emperor with an A-Bomb that brought Japan to heel.. They were preparing to meet a US invasion with everything they had left.
Which, clearly, we don't. If we wanted to turn Iraq into a success like Germany, we'd need to put in an army equal to 5% of the population (that's about 1.25 million soldiers), and keep them there for 50 years. Any commitment short of that, won't work.
What absolute NONSENSE!!!
US troop strength in post-war Nazi Germany IMMEDIATELY declined in order to transfer troops to the Pacific, as well as demobilizing them back to civilian status based upon a "point system" of merit.
By December, 1945, troop strength had diminished to a total of 600,000 from 3 million forces in theater on V-E day.
army.mil
army.mil
army.mil
Furthermore, I have read that there was even LESS effort to rehabilitate and rebuild Germany than we're currently seeing present in Iraq. In fact, I seem to recall the Henry Morgenthau, Roosevelt's/Truman's advisor recommended that Germany be completely de-industrialized in order to prevent it ever becoming a threat to its neighbors ever again.
Obviously the onset of the Cold War eliminated that option rather quickly.
But there were NEVER 1.25 million US troops occupying Germany for 50 years.
Hawk |
