That's a pretty good call PD
and I think to some degree you and I agree on (part of) the end objective -
stabilization of the region
But we look at different means to do it
My thought is it's best in the hands of the US and if I understand correctly you'd prefer a multinational force.
Not certain we need the Iraqis - if we occupy the country and dictate the terms it's our game. Where is the difference between treating post-Saddam Iraq like post-Hitler Germany and American occupation?
Because it's done by one country with their best interests solely in mind
(Isn't that why the France opposed the war, their own interests)
The other side of the coin with regards to Pakistan, Afghanistan and the other bumfuckistans
If they see a real shock and awe campaign and know what the US is capable of and will do don't you think that will help um ... keep them in line
Basically we better be buddies and play ball or we could be next
Does fear go a long way with extremest or are they so far gone they don't give a flying fig about their own lives?
My major concern is American interests (read oil)
As far as why we're are there or our stated reasons (latest rationalization if you will) no longer matters from my perspective
We're there .........
Let me mull this over the second glass of scotch
<_<
and yes my ideas and opinions may be brash, crude and even ignorant but they are honest, no candy coated liberation bullshit here