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 : Politics for Pros- moderated -- Ignore unavailable to you. Want to Upgrade?


To: carranza2 who wrote (257243)7/9/2008 4:46:09 AM
From: Maurice Winn  Respond to of 794909
 
C2, partly it's attitude. <I think the voters are quite upset that all the good will we had heaped upon us after 9/11 has been squandered. Rather than cooperation, we now face obstacles everywhere thanks to a failure of planning and a failure of leadership. >

It was amazing that the Iraqi army was disbanded. It wasn't as though they were particularly supporters of Saddam, Uday and co. If the oil cash flow had been used to fund the military maintaining order, things would have been hunky dory.

When it happened, it looked like a big mistake. So it turned out to be.

Petraeus sensibly explains that money is a very effective way to fight a war and that means paying the soldiers to be on the winning side which serves their and their families' interests. It's not as though the army Iraqi army was particularly against being left in charge while a new constitution was worked out. They were just in it for the money.

Going around putting USA boots on the necks of fathers in their own homes is not a good idea. [As Hawkmoon has explained]. Far better to put them on the oil-funded payroll.

With the price of oil, there should be LOTS of money flooding into Iraq to fund oil production security, development of police and civil service, plus political development.

I'm sure Petraeus is pushing that line rather than just patrolling around shooting anything that moves.

Mqurice