--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, bob_brigante <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> 
> --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, off_world_beings 
> <no_reply@> wrote:
> >
> > With the Iraqi PM pressing for more US troops to come to Iraq to 
> > stabalize the mess Bush has made there, and with the Israelis, 
> > have now said they invaded Lebanon with the intention of having 
> the 
> > international community set up a military protected 
> > zone there. And with UN troops fighting more Taliban in 
> Afghanistan 
> > now.
> > 
> > If Israel loses in Beirut, or is very hard pressed there, then 
> will 
> > the US have to send troops there to keep the peace? Or risk an 
> > Israeli loss. 
> > 
> > If peacekeepers are not sent there (and few other countries will 
> be 
> > enthusiastic to go), will Israel, as it is hard pressed from 
> further 
> > attacks inside Lebanon, have no choice but to push even further 
> > north and risk a conflict with Syria or Syrian/Iranian backed 
> > insurgents?
> > 
> > Does this mean there will be a shortage of troops for US 
> campaigns? 
> > Is this the chance GW Bush has been looking for to have an 
> to 
> > institute the Draft? He wouldn't want to make Iraq the excuse, 
> > once he has them drafted many of them will go to the quagmire in 
> > Iraq.
> > 
> > OffWorld
> >
> ***************
> Support evaporates rapidly when the cost gets high:
> http://www.nytimes.com/2006/07/27/washington/27poll.html
> "Americans are overwhelmingly pessimistic about the state of 
> in the Middle East, with majorities doubtful there will ever be 
> peace between Israel and its neighbors, or that American troops 
> be able to leave Iraq anytime soon, according to the latest New 
> Times/CBS News poll. 
> A majority said the war between Israel and Hezbollah will lead to 
> wider war. And while almost half of those polled approved of 
> President Bush's handling of the crisis, a majority said they 
> preferred the United States leave it to others to resolve.
> Over all, the poll found a strong isolationist streak in a nation 
> clearly rattled by more than four years of war, underscoring the 
> challenge for Mr. Bush as he tries to maintain public support for 
> his effort to stabilize Iraq and spread democracy through the 
Middle East.

So that means, that without international peacekeepers, Israel will 
lose the war. Their tropps, who are not gung-ho for this - will be 
forced to keep fighting hardened geurillas in Lebanon, and push 
further north in order to stop shelling that will come from there 
eventually , then risk a fight with Syria or Syrian and Iranian 
nationals fighting independently of their governments.

Or they will have to pull back to Israel admitting a loss and have 
more continuous shelling and possible incursion .

Without US troops Israel loses this war. With US troops, Bush loses 
everything and US is embroiled in 3 quagmires.
(all of which could have been avoided by just focusing on 
Afghanistan and improving relations with Iran, which were quite good 
during Afghan invasion and afterwards.)

This current situation is a black hole for the US.


To subscribe, send a message to:

Or go to: 
and click 'Join This Group!' 
Yahoo! Groups Links

<*> To visit your group on the web, go to:

<*> To unsubscribe from this group, send an email to:

<*> Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to:

Reply via email to