|
Edited on Sat Apr-12-08 08:18 AM by louis c
now that john McCain has to defend his comment that American soldiers may be needed to be deployed in Iraq for 100 years, he has been backpedaling from that comment. He has used Germany, Japan and Korea as examples of American troops being stationed after the conflict, but facing no real danger or casualties. Here is what I see as the hole in that argument.
It's the Middle East, not Europe or Asia. In Europe, when a war is over, it's generally over. France holds no grudge against England. Germany, Italy and other European countries seem to play nice. Kosovo is tough, but the dynamic there is similar to the Middle East, Muslim extremists.
Let's look at two of our last three most recent, high causality count conflicts. The Second World War and Viet Nam. We ended the war with Japan by dropping two of the most horrific weapons on civilian populations to end that war. I'm not debating the justification of that decision, just the fact that it happened. Right or wrong, that was it. Japan surrendered, the war was over and now we play baseball there, trade with them, have all kinds of alliances, and consider them an ally. Viet Nam, our greatest military blunder in history, destroying that country. dropping more bombs on them than we did in all the theaters in WWII. When we left, it was over. There are no cases of retribution from that conflict either. The Asian mindset is "move-on".
Now, the Middle East. Is McCain kidding me. Here are people who have hated Western Europeans for twelve hundred years because our ancestors left Western Europe, invaded their countries and stole a vase.
The point of the matter is, the Middle East will never, ever be stable and we will never be welcome. The Middle East is not Japan, Germany, Korea, Italy or anyplace else. It is a unique, diverse and unforgiving area of the world. Other places, when the war is over, it's over. In the Middle East, it's never over. John McCain, read your history.
|