Quote:
Originally Posted by RIROCKHOUND
The Surge undoubtedly worked in the short-term. Do you feel the military could have sustained that level of effort there, and for how long? Would that make Iraq any more stable? Add to that sending ground-forces en masse to Libya and Syria? You certainly had your Neo-Con Wheaties this morning!
|
"The Surge undoubtedly worked in the short-term"
It worked until Obama fu**ed it all up by withdrawing. Yes or no?
"Do you feel the military could have sustained that level of effort there, and for how long?"
Yes. You leave a residual force to enforce stability until the Iraqia are sufficiently able to take care of themselves. What you don't do, is tell the enemy, especially this enemy, exactly when you are planning on leaving.
"Would that make Iraq any more stable? "
Why, specifically, would you doubt that? It was stable until we withdrew. So why would you presume that the stability would not have lasted if we were still there? Based on what? The empirical evidence suggests that as long as we were there, things were stable.
"Add to that sending ground-forces en masse to Libya and Syria?"
If the military isn't equipped to deal with the current state of the world, whose fault is that? I'd also disagree that we were in Libya and Syria "en masse".
"You certainly had your Neo-Con Wheaties this morning"
What I have this morning, is common sense and the ability to process what's going on right in front of my face. If liberals need special dietary supplements to be able to pull that off, maybe that says more about your side than it says about my side. The fact that I wish we had prevented the rise of ISIS when it was within our grasp, makes me a neocon? In other words, you conclude it's a character flaw to regret the loss of the thousands of victims of ISIS. Very compassionate of you.
Hybrid Mode
