In Rude's post in the thread about the bill board he said Iraq was about winning the war
What we now undertake in the Middle East is no different than what we undertook in the pacific against Japan....many similarities, from the suprise attack to them trying to force US influence out of the pacific so as to allow them to mandate their doctrine against innocents throughout the area.
One thing for certain....I want our boys home, sure....I want a future for my kids even moreso....it's time stand up as a nation against this threat, even if it means doing so without our so called friends in Europe.
.
If the Iraq venture is all about "winning the war on terror" and "finally ridding the world of the threat of terrorism" then the administration must have a point they are looking to where they can say "We've won!! - there is no terrorist threat".
In previous wars which have been compared to the Iraq campaign (Vietnam, WW2 etc) it has been easy to define the victor and loser. So define victory in the War against Terror.....
No more Muslim extremists alive in the world?
No more Muslim controlled states in existence?
When will victory be declared ??
If the threat is to be removed then presumably there should be:-
1. No place of refuge or residence for a terrorist to base from
2. No means for a terrorist to gain possesion of weapons
3. No means by which a person can be taught the methods of terrorism.
If you argue that Iraq COULD have become a place for terrorism and so the campaign in Iraq is to prevent this then victory in Iraq is presumably viewed as the point where a democratically elected government has such a control over the Islamic faith in the country that fundamentalism cannot operate or be taught and the control of arms is such that terrorists cannot arm themselves. Realistically is that an achieveble goal ????? I doubt it.
Even if the eutopia above is achieved there are many other places terrorism can spawn from, so victory in Iraq can hardly be called the point that the War on Terror ends. So is this campaign to continue country by country until Islam is subdued ????
Rude made an interesting point about his view of the Pacific campaign
.....to them trying to force US influence out of the pacific so as to allow them to mandate their doctrine against innocents throughout the area.
I think we can agree that fudamental Islam is the basis of the terrorism and that fundamentalists see the west (primarily the Christian west) as the enemy.
With fundamentalism camped in many middle east countries and others round the world and Iraq likely to elect a muslim freindly government then how can victory be declared.
GWB was elected largely on a promise to deliver security for the USA - victory over the terrorists - so define victory........
