Dan M., I think the whole difference here is this:
The rebuilding of Iraq and the building of Afghanistan have proven to be very difficult, complex, and long tasks. The most honest people on both sides of each itnervention conceded this from the beginning. For whatever reason, now that the rebuilding of Iraq and the building of Afghanistan are proving to be very difficult, complex, and long tasks - just as every honest observer predicted! - one side is becoming prone to despair and the other is showing commitment to the task ahead in the long haul. >What is common in all three? Clinton. He was a masterful politician who >was able to work out an arrangement where the US's efforts could continue. A quick question. If Clinton were elected to a third term, and if following 9/11 he prudently decided to ensure that Iraq could never pose a WMD threat to the US - do you believe that Clinton would have succeeded in recruiting France for the coalition, or that he would have failed to do so? >Actually, rebuilding is appropriate because they have not gotten back to >the pre-war levels. (By pre-war I mean before 1979). It will, indeed, >take long and dedicated effort, and we're already reducing the resources >committed to the effort. 25 years ago, the economy and the infrastructure >was is far better shape than it is now. I can't believe that you were able to keep a straight face while writing this. Isn't there any kind of "statute of limitations" on rebuilding? Or do we still need to "rebuild" the Mayan and Ghanaian Empires? At any rate, are you seriously despondent that 25 years of war have not been completely rebuilt in two years? >What I thought was that, since the drug trade was already out, we were in a >position to keep it from being the main source of rural income. That's one >thing that money can do. Given our experiences in Latin America, where drug production has been a lot like a carnival "gopher" game, I found this to be unlikely. Demand will always produce supply, and it always struck me as unreasonable that even a blank check would prevent Afghanistan from being one of the mot convenient places in the world for supply to set up shop. >No, but I thought that a central government and the international >peacekeeps would control more than the capital after 2 1/2 years. When do >you think it would be reasonable to expect security to be provided >throughout the country? After 10 years? Any answer I give to this question would be entirely arbitrary. What I do know is that there are a lot of very expert people who believe that unifying Afghanistan for the first time in 25 years is a very delicate process. If in their judgement there are other priorities - including the establishment of Afghanistan's first elections, then I am inclined to agree with their judgement. I think that our experience in Iraq shows the difficulties in proceeding rapidly with the alternative. >What freedom and liberty. [snip] > Have you looked at >the change in Al Sadir's poll numbers? I am inclined to let the irony of the above two quotes stand for themselves..... but I came across the following message today from a Catholic friend of mine...... ***************** I just finished a beautiful book written by the Baptist Chaplain for the First Marine division in Baghdad. If anyone has the chance to read it, I seriously recommend it. Although written from a Protestant perspective, it has beautiful things to say about the divine Providence of God and marvelous testimonies of how the hand of God was manifested during the war. Maybe the war was a mistake - I don't always agree with George Bush and his advisees. However, I cannot erase from my mind the story the chaplain tells of rolling into Baghdad and liberating a prison filled with children. Saddam had seized and imprisoned the children of the parents who opposed his regime and put them into prison until they reached 15 or 16. After that, they were forcibly conscripted into the Iraqi Army, most likely to die. These people had no choice. I had no idea that this prison even existed. The chaplain goes on to write about his numerous touching encounters with the poor and starved Iraqi people. Granted, there are many evil insurgents and anti-American hostile Iraqis out there - but a large majority of the population has been tormented by Saddam. At least we can say we got rid of a heinously evil man and a horribly repressive regime. There is an old quote - which I can't recall - which states that freedom has a taste to the enslaved that those who have been born free will never know. I would say we did something right - if we liberated this people from the heinous machinations of a dictator. It wasn't until I read this book that I realized that these men and women truly believe they are fighting for a noble cause. Another quote I found today stated that sometimes not fighting against a heinous and terrible evil is worse than war. Maybe we could have done this differently - I desperately hope for the fighting to end and the troops to come home. I don't like the fact that we went in there with no discernable backup plan to substitute for a crumbling regime. However, I do cheer the troops and their defense of the rights of the innocent Iraqi people. Even those like myself, who are somewhat opposed to Bush's policies in Iraq, can say we did a good thing by giving them freedom from Saddam's horror. *************************************** JDG - "What freedom?", Maru
_______________________________________________ http://www.mccmedia.com/mailman/listinfo/brin-l
