[ You 'doubt'. OK. Can you EXPLAIN why you think that?]
Re: "Why do you think otherwise?"
So... you are avoiding the question. Does that mean that you *can't* explain why you think that?
Re: "Leaving now would result in a decline in American credibility"
Oh... I see now.
It's simply because you DESIRE things to be a certain way. You want these things to be true.
Well, the words of Thomas Sowell come to mind here (after all, we are all free to 'want' whatever we want to. But we are NOT free to have the facts be whatever we want them to. Facts are facts, regardless of our desires):
"The difference between a policy and a crusade is that a policy is judged by its results, while a crusade is judged by how good it makes its crusaders feel." --- Thomas Sowell
[I DID explain that that was the *long-term* HOPE... but then I explained all sorts of short and mid-term benefits that would immediately accrue for us!]
Re: "The only short term benefit I see is that we get to (at least of the moment) stop paying the cost in lives and money that we are paying in Iraq. What other short term benefit do you see?"
I thought I was pretty CLEAR about the obvious benefits... but let's go over them again:
1) *Both* sets of extremists (Sunni & Shia) exhaust themselves, and their causes, in bloody fratricidal warfare against each other. Thus DEGRADING any military (or even political) threat they could pose to those out-of-region. (One exemplar I gave of this was the *previous* Arab/Persian conflict in the decade-long Iran/Iraq Gulf War: Over one million killed. Both nations near bankrupted, and their military potentials severely degraded. BOTH Autocratic regimes left near collapse, and *deeply unpopular* with their respective people.
2) Lives and BILLIONS upon BILLIONS saved by the US. (This is the one you just agreed to....) NOTE: we are run up the national debt by some 1/2 Trillion dollars thus far in this enterprise. I HIGHLY doubt that a *second 1/2 Trillion* would be anything more then money and lives down the drain.
Not cost-effective. (In fact: not 'effective' at all.)
3) The great hope (I previously expressed) that this yet-unsettled-for-centuries religious conflict *Sunni/Shia) can come to a head by this course of events, and thus, be 'resolved' in the longer-run by an Islamic Reformation --- the exact same course that ENABLED the emergence of pluralistic societies and respect for religious differences in the West!
Further note: this is unlikely to be something that can be 'imposed' from outside.... It needs to be an internal development, else the region will reject it.
[(Funny... 'Cause US Intelligence has ALREADY concluded that STAYING as occupiers is RIGHT NOW providing the extremists a *huge boost* in support!)]
Re: "That study also said pulling out without accomplishing the mission would provide a big boost to the support for extremists. It directly supports my claim, and you conveniently ignore that fact."
No it DIDN'T.
(And, no I'm *not*.)
It said it was a 'possible' development. Hell, ANYTHING is POSSIBLE. But it's for damn-sure that our occupation of Iraq, standing in the middle of their burgeoning civil war, is STRONGLY and NEGATIVELY affecting the appeal of our 'side' in the region... and providing a HUGE BOOST to the recruiting efforts of the fundamentalists and extremists.
[There are no 'guarantees'... but bitter religious and ethnic-fired civil wars do TEND to *FOCUS* quite a bit the attentions and resources of the societies that have spawned them. :-)]
Re: "I think you exaggerate the extent of the likely war."
And, I think not. Every time something comes down to a choice of 'who I'm gonna believe'... some on-the-make politician, or my 'lying eyes' --- I'LL GO WITH THE EVIDENCE OF MY EYES EVERY TIME. :-)
Re: "I think you exaggerate the extent of the likely war... You also assume there will be no winner, at least for some time. I don't think that's a safe assumption."
Define what the term 'winner' means to you in this context.
You can't *seriously* expect anyone to believe, though, that the Shiites are going to defeat the Sunni world, or visa versa, in any ultimate sense.
Do you?????????? If so, why on the Earth would you think that?
Re: "Certainly should one side or the other win, even on a local scale, it can build itself a base and expand its power."
The realities of countervailing forces dictate otherwise....
(And, even if you believed that one side or the other was going to MASSIVELY 'succeed' in it's conflict with the other --- despite all available evidence --- you would *still* be left with having to make the case that standing in the middle of a foreign civil war with a 'target' painted on our backs, getting used as an *excuse* for everything going 'wrong' by the locals, was a PREFERABLE strategy. THAT, I fear, is a Bridge Too Far, my friend.) |
