SmallTown said:
Been really successful there!
Latest CIA report shows that violence is increasing in Iraq (our own weapons "investigators" left last year because it became so bad) and that Iraq is the new breeding ground for terrorists in the middle east. Yea, Mission Accomplished!
Lets face it. no matter what we do over there, there will NEVER be peace in the middle east. They have been fighting there FOREVER. The hatred runs deep. We joke here about we hate the french, we won't buy their products, blah blah blah. But this is nothing compared to the hatred you find in the middle east. Towards us, and one another.
if you want to talk about removing a dictator, fine. but don't even try to say we are bringing stability to the region, because it just isn't happening.
Gee... where have I heard these kinds of statements before... Oh, now I remember! That's what people were saying about Europe after World War II! Of course, that was before the US put it's big old size 13 jackboots on the necks of the Europeans and made them behave until wiser leaders, who had grown up in a stable environment, could take over.
The reason that no one has been successful in bringing peace to the Middle East is the same reason no one could bring peace to Europe for all those years. They dumped tons of money and support into the region, but left it up to the local leaders to make things happen. It wasn't until active measures were taken, and they were forced to behave, that peace came. It's the same deal in the Middle East, and thank goodness that Bush is paying no more attention to the left than Truman and Eisenhower paid to the naysayers in the 1940s or we would have fought WWIII on the battlefields of Europe.
Lastly, have you ever been to the Middle East, or are you basing your astute observations solely on the open, unbiased, and agenda-free newscasts you listen to? I have been there several times, and there's no more hatred over there than there is over here between Yankees and southerners, or yuppies and rednecks, or republicans and democrats. Yeah, they may not like one another, they may not respect one another, but believe it or not millions of them get along just fine every day. The problem is that a few self-serving despots blow something up, or release some tape, and you guys go painting everyone out there with the same brush. Aren't Libs suppossed to be against stereotyping?
The problem with the Middle East isn't deep-running hatreds... it's that life sucks out there. It's hot, it's rugged, and it's tough to make a go of things. And if you become a leader, and reap the benefits of being the Big Cheese, you don't want to ever give that up no matter how ineffective or worthless you are. And the best way to stay in power despite your faults is to blame all of the problems of your people on someone else... it's a tried and true practice that's worked since the Great Og grunted to his fellow cave dwellers about those a-holes in the cave across the valley being the cause of the lack of fire. Just as we saw in Europe for hundreds of years, it's bad government, not bad people, that cause these problems. Most people just want to work, raise their families, and die happy.
This is why the insurgents are fighting so hard in Iraq. They hate the idea of democracy because they will either lose their power, or they've been convinced by the people who will lose their power that fighting is the right thing to do. The common thread is self-serving leaders - like Hussein. As for Iraq being this great "breeding ground for terrorists", so what? It seems like their breeding and dying in the same place, so where's the down side of that?
