Poll: How long will US troops be in Iraq?
You do not have permission to vote in this poll.
Less than 6 months
0%
0 0%
6 months to a year
0%
0 0%
1-5 years
0%
0 0%
Greater than 5 years
0%
0 0%
Less than 6 months
0%
0 0%
6 months to a year
0%
0 0%
1-5 years
0%
0 0%
Greater than 5 years
0%
0 0%
Total 0 vote(s) 0%
* You voted for this item. [Show Results]

Thread Rating:
  • 0 Vote(s) - 0 Average
  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5
Can the US use Iraq as a base in the ME?
#1
I have noticed that a lot of proponents of the Second Gulk War were very excited about having a base of operation in the middle of the Middle East. When I first heard this, I was excited as well. Not only would this base be an excellent point from which to hit Syria or Iran, it would mean the US could also target Saudi Arabia. Lately, though, I don't think it will happen.

With a continued conflict in Iraq and a serious PR problem with the Iraqis and the Arabs, Iraq will not be a power projecting base for the US. It cannot be.

Quote:When asked how they now view coalition forces, 71 percent of all Iraqis said "mostly as occupiers" while 19 percent said "mostly as liberators," the poll said.
Not good and not conducive to the US leaving an army base in Iraq.

Quote:The new poll found that a third of all Iraqis said attacks on U.S. forces were justifiable; an additional 22 percent said such attacks are "sometimes justified, sometimes not." Only a quarter of all Iraqis said attacks on U.S. forces are "completely" unjustified.
Not only will they not want the US to stay once their job is done, they'll fight over it.

Quote:Asked about when they wanted U.S. and British forces to leave, 57 percent chose immediately, as in the next few months, the poll said; 36 percent said troops should stay longer.
Ouch. I can't imagine those 36% meant that they wanted the US to stay indefinently.

So, will the US stay in Iraq past the time when iraqis govern themselves? I can't see it happening, and if it doesn't happen, someone needs to explain how it will make attacking Iran or Syria easier.

Brusilov
Reply
#2
The questions are somewhat misleading. For instance, how would they feel if the police and administration replaced the soldiers and the soldiers generally remained on the civilian bases?

How would that have changed the questioning?
"I detest the man who hides one thing in the depths of his heart and speaks forth another"
-Homer
Reply
#3
According to Tom Barnett's logical assessment of what is really going on there, how can Iraq be anything but a permanent Core military staging point?

THE PENTAGON’S NEW MAP by Thomas P.M. Barnett at the U.S. Naval War College - April 26, 2004
Quote:...The real reason I support a war like this is that the resulting long-term military commitment will finally force America to deal with the entire Gap (regions plagued by politically repressive regimes, widespread poverty and disease, routine mass murder, and—most important—the chronic conflicts that incubate the next generation of global terrorists) as a strategic threat environment.
Reply
#4
OT: We should have a separate discussion on Barnett. I'm having great time reading his book right now (very slow reading: essentially every page requires stopping to think it through).
Government is necessary because people left unchecked will do evil.

The government is composed of people left unchecked


Reply
#5
The Saudi people hate America, yet we're able to keep substantial amounts of troops there hidden away from them. I don't see why something similar couldn't work in Iraq. The Kurdish area in the north or the largely uninhabited desert region between central and Persian Gulf Iraq would be good places for bases.
Reply
#6
Anonymous24 Wrote:The Saudi people hate America, yet we're able to keep substantial amounts of troops there hidden away from them. I don't see why something similar couldn't work in Iraq.
Only if we dispose with the idea of democracy in Iraq. You simply cannot have both at this time.

Quote:The Kurdish area in the north or the largely uninhabited desert region between central and Persian Gulf Iraq would be good places for bases.

Logistics is not good. No good supply routs; you'll have to supply by air. The area near the Gulf is densely populated by the Shi'ites; this ultimately makes everything dependant on having working relations with them.
Government is necessary because people left unchecked will do evil.

The government is composed of people left unchecked


Reply
#7
The US will not be leaving Iraq for many years to come. It is simply too strategic a country to do so. And I agree with this nice little article. It seems a little out of date, but what isn't if it is over a month old. Still, the concept of 'core' and 'gap' are valid, and will be for years to come.

It appears to me that the solution, which is unnamed here, is the continued push for Market Liberalism, or Capitalism. Start that ball rolling and acquired wealth will follow.

Now, where is Murdok when we need him. Maybe I should send the link to him, or he may never read it. He'll be too busy throwing feces around everywhere. S6
___________________________________________________________________________________________________
All men are frauds. The only difference between them is that some admit it. I myself deny it.
H. L. Mencken
Reply
#8
Howdy-Ho! Mr. Hankey is sensitive to the feces jokes.
Reply
#9
Well, I always assumed that we would dispose of the idea of democracy in Iraq for the time being, until public attitudes change in such a way that they would be pro-U.S.
Reply
#10
Good. Democracy is the most evil of all government structures.
Reply
#11
I can't tell if you're agreeing with me or being sarcastic, because we can't have it both ways(democracy and a strategically cooperative government), at least for the forseeable future.
Reply
#12
All we need is a military contract with the rightful government to allow our presence to help insure that government's existence. Democracy is evil. That is why our founding Fathers fought against it so hard to create a Constitutionally-limited Republic. A democracy is mob rule - and that is what Iraq has had since time immemorial.
Reply
#13
Anonymous24 Wrote:Well, I always assumed that we would dispose of the idea of democracy in Iraq for the time being, until public attitudes change in such a way that they would be pro-U.S.

Given that Bush elevated the need for Democracy in Iraq to be our entire justification for the war, your approach -- which I fully agree with -- is no longer on the table.
Government is necessary because people left unchecked will do evil.

The government is composed of people left unchecked


Reply
#14
Quote:I can't tell if you're agreeing with me or being sarcastic, because we can't have it both ways(democracy and a strategically cooperative government), at least for the forseeable future.

I think we can, it won't be easy though.
"I detest the man who hides one thing in the depths of his heart and speaks forth another"
-Homer
Reply
#15
We can if we can find some kind of leader or leaders who are popular with Iraqis, but who will also cooperate with the U.S. A Fundamentalist Shiite government under Sistani wouldn't be that bad if agrees to control the oil prices and allow us to use his country as a base for U.S. forces.
Reply


Forum Jump:


Users browsing this thread: 1 Guest(s)