Certainly…if you can prove it IS throwing good money/lives after bad. The problem of course is you can’t, as you don’t know the future any better than any of the rest of us do. Iraq COULD be another South Korea…or it COULD be another Vietnam. Its simply too early to tell. My own personal reasons for not wanting the US to pull out are simple…I want to avoid the bloodbath we’d be relagating the Iraqis too if we pulled out, a bloodbath I think would make the invasion/occupation seem like a party by comparison. We broke it, its our responsibility to do what we can to fix it…until and unless the situation gets SO bad that its hopeless. Unfortunately for to gloom and doomers about the situation just isn’t hopeless yet in the minds of the majority of the US’s citizens. Maybe next year.
We probably DO have a long term commitment to the ME and have had one for some time. After all, we get at least half of our energy from there…it would almost HAVE to be a major strategic commitment. If we didn’t need energy from the region, and if the region basically left us alone, I think the US would be more than happy to let it sink back into some kind of medeval obscurity. I don’t really see us occupying one ME country or another for long periods of time…unless you want to count the existing situations, which would kind of be a no brainer…I’m sure we WILL be in Iraq (though not ‘occupying’ it unless you think we are still ‘occupying’ Germany and South Korea of course) for the long term…and probably Afghanistan too.
Any way out of what? Continueing in Iraq? Not that I see, at least not in the short/medium terms. Having strategic needs in the ME? Again, not that I see, at least not soon. There certainly ARE a few ways out of dependance on the region…but will we take them? No idea.
Same place we got the troops that are still stationed in South Korea and Germany…we simply expanded our force structure so that we kept those troops and commands perminent. Like in South Korea and Germany I can see a perminent Iraq station. Other than that I don’t think we are going to need all THAT many more troops…once the logistics is set it will simply be another station where you might be assigned if you go into the military. As long as the region is vital to our interests though we will have to be aware of whats going on there, and we’ll have to be ready to intervene if we need too I suppose (much as it grates on me to say that).
Well, I think this is two issues. I don’t see how we can withdraw ALL or nearly all US forces from Iraq any time soon. The forces stationed in Iraq though are defensive forces…they aren’t going to suddenly pick up and bound into Iran. Nor are the forces stationed in South Korea going to form the basis for an invasion of the North.
So, from an offensive perspective, we will probably do what we usually do…we’ll deploy garrison forces in Iraq (eventually) on a perminent basis (like those in S Korea), we’ll deploy heavy equipment (tanks, arty, supplies, etc) wherever we can stash it (maybe Kuait…I think we have a number there already…maybe Iraq itself, maybe just keep it at Diego Garcia) so that we can stage up again later if we need too. I don’t see us having an offensive army poised for invasion in the ME…the cost would be astronomical (and frankly impossible to maintain…one of the reasons we HAD to invade Iraq was that we couldn’t maintain that level of readyness indefinitely).
The other issue is we will have to be aware of the region as long as its strategically vital, which means we need to be prepared in case we DO need to protect our interests there. That means a hightened state of observation, planning, etc for those ‘just in case’ scenerios.
-XT