Perpetuating The Dilemma

by: Debra

Perhaps we shouldn't be fighting the war in Iraq, has this clown general considered that option? Just because we are at war doesn't mean we should always be at that state and if we have that many enemies, what are we doing wrong? We used to win friends and influence people, not send them into self-destructive murderous rages.

The National Guard and the Reserves are just as tapped out as the regular military. At this point there really is no difference. These people have lives that support the infrastructure of the United States. Robbing Peter to pay Paul has never been an effective strategy, it feels good in the short run and then Kim shows up wanting a slice. Oops.

What you really need is a draft and you can't come right out and say so because that's the third rail, now isn't it? People are not willingly joining the military, so you are going to have to make them in order to increase or even maintain the military and that's going to go over like a personally released fragrance in church. Actually it sounds like you want to make it a forced career by preventing people from leaving when their time is up, for the good of their unit. The only options (surges) being proposed are based on the false flush of too much adrenaline and testosterone without thinking of the long term consequences to America and what we used to stand for.

If this was a just war, if Iraq had ever been a threat to us, if there had ever been a coherent reason for our involvement, I might be able to support these actions. But I doubt it because none of the reasons given so far have had any sense or staying power and throwing good money after bad or live troops after dead ones just doesn't make any sense.

Perhaps a simple demonstration of a timeline would help impart some perspective. Now that was sad, wasn't it? Pop, pop.

Debsweb