Well said oldschoolcalgary.
I was against US action in Iraq. I agreed with Afghanistan, but believe the reasons to go into Iraq were spurious at best. But have always believed that once the US went in to Iraq, they would need to stay until stability resumed, and I thought that would be a long ordeal.
I don't think Iraq is in a position to rule themselves democratically, no matter how many people come out to vote. There is simply too much factionism, and too many religious soldiers for either side willing to to do anything, especially dying, to bring their beliefs to the forefront. They are fighting a religious battle, and politics is a tool or a weapon they will use to their own ends.
The military can help bring democracy only to places that are ready for democracy, are asking for democracy, and are willing to fight for democracy. In those cases, the military can remove the remaining barriers to democratic rule, but attempts to institute a democracy will have momentary, temporary success, if any.
You can lead a horse to water...
__________________
"The problem with any ideology is that it gives the answer before you look at the evidence."
—Bill Clinton
"The greatest obstacle to discovery is not ignorance--it is the illusion of knowledge."
—Daniel J. Boorstin, historian, former Librarian of Congress
"But the Senator, while insisting he was not intoxicated, could not explain his nudity"
—WKRP in Cincinatti
|