> Bruce wrote: > And speaking of providing security, well I seem to recall that we still > have the US military in Germany.
(1.) We weren't there to provide security for a civil war. (2.) We were there as a result of a war against a government and a people who supported it (2 'sides') - not the case here. (3.) We were there primarily to oppose a communist threat from a government and the people who supported it. In other words, those were "symmetric" wars and security: government and people. Iraq is not. Iraq is a civil war. No country should put it's troops into a foreign civil war when they neither have the strength to lock down the country nor the leadership to accomplish anything. ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~| Adobe® ColdFusion® 8 software 8 is the most important and dramatic release to date Get the Free Trial http://ad.doubleclick.net/clk;192386516;25150098;k Archive: http://www.houseoffusion.com/groups/CF-Community/message.cfm/messageid:257708 Subscription: http://www.houseoffusion.com/groups/CF-Community/subscribe.cfm Unsubscribe: http://www.houseoffusion.com/cf_lists/unsubscribe.cfm?user=11502.10531.5
