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.
Politics : View from the Center and Left -- Ignore unavailable to you. Want to Upgrade?


To: ManyMoose who wrote (63792)5/6/2008 3:34:42 PM
From: Dale Baker  Read Replies (1) | Respond to of 542243
 
It worked with the Russians in Afghanistan. That doesn't mean it should be used all the time everywhere, as some would infer from any instance we choose not to make an open-ended commitment.

After we left Vietnam, the Chinese showed little or no interest in gobbling up its neighbors in southeast Asia. It was only 15-20 years before they started knitting together a new economic power-region, Asia as we know it today.



To: ManyMoose who wrote (63792)5/6/2008 5:16:18 PM
From: epicure  Read Replies (1) | Respond to of 542243
 
Following that argument we try not to intervene in civil wars- which is what I quite clearly said. That has nothing to do with being isolationist, and everything to do with the nature of civil wars.

IMO when we leave Iraq there will be infighting for oil money, and the Sunis will be pretty much cut off from enjoying oil profits. Iran will eventually become allied with the Iraqi government (even more than it is now), which I feel sure will be religious and Shiite. We will, essentially, have fought to make one more ME state a theocracy, and we will have helped the Shiites cleanse the Sunis from their areas at the same time. That's a pretty silly thing for us to do, but there you are. If the Kurds are lucky, they will be left alone, and they won't cause Turkey too much of a headache. I'm not sure how likely that is, but it's the best we can hope for.