I like the analytical approach but I think you are tactically incorrect. Iraq's oil supply to the rest of the world has been non-existent for several years now as a result of the war. The market has adjusted to the lack of output by Iraq by increasing production elsewhere. Increases in prices in the United States have more to do with market speculation, profiteering and refining capacity than they do crude oil supply. There is no great urgency to bringing Iraq's production back to the world. Regardless of who and how Iraq is eventually stabilized, you can be sure that the oil will come back onto the market. And thus far we don't seem to be doing it better, faster or with a greater liklihood of the results being more favorable to us than anyone else.
Afghanistan, on the other hand, actually has a near monopoly on a very marketable substance: opium. They produce over 90% of the worlds opium crop. Opium production has sky rocketed since the fall of the Taliban and since we pulled many of our troops out of the area. In fact, the Taliban and allied forces are now using opium production to help fund the their rise back to power and sending money elsewhere to help other extremist Islamic groups. We are trying to do something about this, I know. One of my best friends in the world is in Afghanistan doing Counter-narcotics work right now. But we aren't sufficiently funding or manning the efforts. And unlike Iraq, there may be an actual chance to disrupt the funding and regrowth of groups that want to see us dead. Most available evidence still points to Iraq being the wrong war, in the wrong place at the wrong time. Our strategic interests are best served elsewhere. Judah Robert Munn wrote: > Our motives are pure? Did I say that? Our motives are economic (oil) and > ideological (democracy and plurality v. extremist Islamism). A regional war > starting in Iraq could disrupt half of the world's oil supply and bring > several countries under the sway of Al-Qaeda. That is exactly Al-Qaeda's > stated strategy and exactly what we must oppose. > > In Afghanistan, we have denied Al-Qaeda a safe haven from which to train and > operate. It would be great to do more to help Afghanistan rebuild, and it > would be even better if we could help the Pakistanis eliminate Al-Qaeda and > the Taliban in the tribal areas of Pakistan. Unfortunately, with limited > resources, we have to prioritize our objectives. In economic terms, > re-building Iraq's oil industry benefits the world economy. Rebuilding the > rest of the country is part of the deal. Rebuilding Afghanistan doesn't do > anything in the short term to benefit the world economy, unless you like > opium. Ideologically, defeating Al-Qaeda in Iraq and giving the Iraqis a > chance at a democratic, pluralistic society, is a tremendous win for > democracy and freedom and a terrible blow to Al-Qaeda's ambitions of a > worlwide Islamic state. Guiding Afghanistan toward democracy and freedom is > good, but not as critical to defeating Al-Qaeda's strategic interests as > success in Iraq. ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~| Get involved in the latest ColdFusion discussions, product development sharing, and articles on the Adobe Labs wiki. http://labs/adobe.com/wiki/index.php/ColdFusion_8 Archive: http://www.houseoffusion.com/groups/CF-Community/message.cfm/messageid:242415 Subscription: http://www.houseoffusion.com/groups/CF-Community/subscribe.cfm Unsubscribe: http://www.houseoffusion.com/cf_lists/unsubscribe.cfm?user=89.70.5
