Quote:
Originally posted by RPKESQ
One needs to pick one's battles. We picked exactly the wrong one. Tabs is correct that 50 years worth of administrations backing what ever tin-pot dictator who wasn't a commie, has come home to rest. There is plenty of blame to go around. The policy of "any enemy of my enemy is my friend" has put us in bed with some despicable characters. All for short term gains, never to solve any long term problems.
Bush's problem is too much action, not enough thought. We should have gone into Afghanistan with full force. Once that nest of vipers was eliminated, than we could focus a more enlightened ME approach. These Muslim countries only understand their version of success. The US or Israel backing down or leaving (which is inevitable) is a total victory for them. Our successes on the battlefield count for little or nothing. We lost a couple of dozen men and two helicopters in Mogadishu and we empower the entire ME. Clearly we need a different strategy here.
|
Wow. Very well put; I actually find myself in full agreement on this. Just to highlight one of your points, "their version of success" is the key to much of the problem we face in the ME. We understand what it is, but we don't have the stomach to go that far. Saddam was right. Maybe we will get somewhere when we can finally drop the notion that we are dealing with reasonable people, under our definition of "reasonable". That would serve two purposes. First, it would help us decide if it is really worth it to meddle in their affairs, understanding that half measures are seen by them as weakness. Second, it may give us the resolve to decisively finish anything we choose to get involved with in the ME. Our reputation is that we do not, so they no longer (if they ever really did) fear or respect us. That seems to be all they understand, and they very much intermingle the two. We feel (or hope) we can earn the respect by bypassing the fear. It just does not work that way over there.