I thought Tom’s comments were very interesting and compelling at NPR today. While he is more optimistic about Afghanistan than I his points still make a lot of sense. However, it might be that while we focus on political progress in Afghanistan and Iraq what really will become the dominant issue is the political and economic dynamic here at home. A number of the frequent commentators to Tom’s blogs apparently seem to think that these domestic concerns are not consequential in forming their views on these wars. I think they are about to find out differently that wars abroad such as these are hugely expensive and difficult to rationalize to a economically stressed public here at home. The American economy is an unmitigated disaster area and the problem is becoming more intractable. Eventually, even among the drum beaters for these wars it will be difficult to justify two to three billon dollars a month (probably more) in Afghanistan with unemployment beginning to rise again and the economy with a stagnant 0 -1.5% growth profile. We can already see Bob Gates going into panic mode to bring DOD costs down in order to fund operations in Iraq and Afghanistan. America finds itself in a position not so dissimilar to Great Britain after the First World War with an expanded empire and responsibilities but with an empty bank account and declining financial muscle. Economics has never been a favorite topic among the armchair general set but it had better take its place along side tactics, operations and strategy if one is interested in being a part of the real world.

Actually, Lebanon is an excellent example of the Iraqi future may look like. Lebanon today is relatively peaceful among the disparate communities largely because it serves their immediate interests. There is of course friction with their neighbor to the south but both sides appear to be content with the current status quo. Of course the key element in Lebanese affairs is the presence within that country of Hezbollah a highly discipline and effective political/military entity that sets the political tone of the state. I think one can eventually see that happening in Iraq where an Iranian backed and sponsored Iraqi Shiite force (perhaps the Iraqi Army) but more likely like Hezbollah an independent auxiliary force more powerful than he army assumes control. This will disconcert the nervous oil kingdoms of the Gulf but they are themselves on life support and likely not prepared (or politically stable enough) to effectively intervene. Iran seems to be the winner all around thanks to the brilliant maneuver of the Bush/necons to uncheck Iran’s western flank by deposing Saddam’s regime in favor of instability.

This is what brands Bush, Cheney, Rumsfeld, Rice, Wurmser, Wolfowitz, Feith and many others most clearly as traitors. It was a total no-brainer that Iran would benefit greatly if we deposed Saddam. No one loyal to this country could have failed to see it. These cretins just didn’t care.

I am glad Tom is back. I was missing my fix.

Walt

I thought George Galloway was Sadam's BFF.

It is inevitable that an Iraqi government controlled by the Shiite majority was going to gravitate toward Shiite Iran after the forcible removal of Saddam Hussein. It may have gone that way eventually if Saddam could not hold on to power - the US and allies just helped the process along. Iran has shown a peculiar ability to expand its influence throughout the middle east especially wherever there are pockets of unhappiness with the existing ruling class. I doubt we can stop that, as long as the majority of people in countries from Lebanon to Yemen, to Egypt, etc continue to be unhappy with their lot and their leaders.

Regardless of what happens in Iraq, I hope that our withdrawal continues until we are totally out of there. We need to "extricate ourselves" from Iraq - and not look back. We got rid of their dictator for them (something they were apparently incapable of even after the 2003 Gulf War), we helped them write a constitution (although it is not clear that they share our commitment to human rights), we gave them a shot at a democratic government (the jury is still out on whether they deserve it, or will fight for it), we have trained their police and military to some degree (although it is unclear if they have developed a respect for the rule of law). For all this, plus the economic cost of the war and the loss of lives we and our allies have borne, we should not hold our collective breath waiting for their expressions of gratitude. They have many times expressed the wish that we would cease our "occupation".

The sooner we are done with Iraq the better - we owe them nothing and we have certainly paid a heavy price for a war that was never necessary.

Free Shipping Activities discount 40%discount
http://www.nike-alliance.com
Our company specializes in manufacturing from located in CHINA and Australia,,With more than 6 Years of experience,we are mainly dealing with are:Nike shox?Christan Audigier t-shirt?Ed Hardy?COACH Bag?New Era cap ?Tiffany_Ring. More products.
Supply . COACH Bag?Nike shox.Ed Hardy t-shirt.
Safe Payment.Paypal
Fast Shipment.5-7 days you can receive your order product.
No min order request.You can order only one product
Free Shipping.The price on our website are including everything.

Neither Arabia nor Iran want a secular, pluralist Iraq, preferring (with extreme prejudice) a friendly strongman or oligarchy from their own creed or tribe. Arabia's opinion carries weight in Jordan and Kuwait, and Iran's in Syria, where (oddly) the Baatthist Sunni command cell plots in exile. Turkey is really unhappy with developments in Kurdistan, That's 360º of foreign actors agitating for something other than what they perceive happening.

Throw in the US, which doesn't want any kind of Iraq sovereignty that doesn't include continuing air-strikes, long-term air basing and major CIA access; Russia gaming to regain influence in the Gulf; a flood of bribe-wise Asian and Euro money looking for energy contracts. And, oh yeah, nuclear Israel's muscular strategy of the periphery.

It's a covert and overt free4all of foreign and sectarian/tribal interests, who've broadly demonstrated a willingness to burn Iraq down before allowing their rivals to control Baghdad and the oil. That's what Tom's talking 'bout, the game-board that Ambassador Crocker and Team Bush walked away from.

Indeed Wikepedia says a lot of things, but it didn't address my previous point.

We all know that, Bush Jr. looked upon Israel battling Hez as part of the war on terror. His mindset has been described as, "there are good guys, and there are bad guys, and the role of the U.S. is not to manage negotiations between them but to facilitate the bad guys' defeat.”

The bottom line was the Bush administration was hoping to change the equation in Lebanon by seeing Israel eliminate or neutralize Hezbollah. He didn't count on Israel’s lack of clarity and limited objectives and was hoping for a better outcome, which was why he dragged his feet on a cease fire agreement. A poll at the time (LA Times/Bloomberg) showed most Americans supported Israel and felt them justified. It was European polls/surveys that looked at it differently, and always do as concerns Israel.

I further stand by my statement that the majority of Lebanese, after the dust settled, were critical of Hezbollah’s picking a fight with Israel which they blame for the destruction, and the fact that by the U.S. possibly and misguidedly withholding military aid to the Lebanese army, we would be ceding further power to Iran and thus to its proxy, Hezbollah.

At the moment, Saudi King Abdullah has been trying to entice Syria’s Assad away from Iran, and consequently distancing himself from his supporting Hezbollah at the same time. The immediate crises at the moment is Hezbollah fearing they may in fact be indicted by the U.N.'s investigation on who assassinated Rafiq al-Hariri, and the repercussions it would have on them and their future influence in Lebanon.

sikis
pornolar

ARVAY, you're starting to grow on me. I may have to buy you a tall orange beverage and discuss geo-political events with you, somewhere west of the big Mo - after all, my background is that I hold a doctorate from MAU in such matters (that's Mules Ass University).

Anyway, let's discuss rockets and Hez: I believe the count was approx. 4,228 rocket were reported to halved impacted inside Israel fired by Hez. Now speaking from first hand experience as an old hand at Con Thien, Vietnam, that's a lot of founds for a geographical area in a 30-day period.

However, two important facts were withheld from the media and public in general: most rockets fired by Hez into Israel were taken from the Syrian stock piles rather than from Iran’s and only a quarter of the rockets that landed inside Israel actually landed within built-up areas. Compared to this massive barrage over nearly six weeks, the results were rather unimpressive in my military warped mind. Israel's losses and damage from Hez rocket tallied-up to 53 fatalities, 250 severely wounded, and 2,000 lightly wounded.

The most damaging aspect was that over one million Israelis were forced to live near or in shelters or security rooms, with some 250,000 civilians evacuating the high-risk north, to other areas in the country, considered safe. The latter became one of the reasons for the public outrage over Olmert's deplorable conduct of the war (we're talking PTSD here, a global cottage industry).

Again though, Hezbollah has thus far gone out of its way to refrain from provoking Israel, though you are correct they have been rearmed and updated in munitions. But they also understand the bad PR they incurred back in 2006 due to the collateral devastation and what will surely be an overwhelming Israeli response should it occur again.

Make no mistake about it; though I am not cheer leading for Israel, I know that underLtGen Gabi Ashkenazi, the IDF has invested in huge efforts to recover its basic operational principles it had previously forgotten, and has further held large-scale, realistic military exercises, with combined arms forces.

They will not make the same mistakes twice.

Well ARVAY, one former Hebrew citizen of Israel mentioned to me once he thought at some point in the future, Israel's current non-Jewish minority citizens (Arab) which was growing faster than Israel's Jewish population annually, Israel would be an Arab nation in all but name some day. In other words, the Arab community (Palestinians, etc) would eventually control Israel demographically?

As for the initial topic of Iraq? Unfortunately, about a quarter of the world's oil flows from the Gulf thru the Straits of Hormuz into the Gulf of Oman and finally the Arabian Sea every single day. It is vital that we have influence in this region, and specifically this area, as much as I hate to boil it down to that. . . .oil.

I wasn’t a fan of invading Iraq, though I thought at some point in the future we would have had to deal again with Saddam Hussein militarily. It was primarily the rush to war that bothered me and what we had, or more specifically, I hadn't heard we had planned for afterward.

However, what’s done, is the present, and the present is that Iran remains more problematic than ever, and though I am no cheer leader for Dick Cheney, he did understand that there is nothing like a U.S. presence on the western border in Iraq.

After all we have spent in blood and treasure, I would hate to see us completely exit at the end of 2011, ceding a nation to be manipulated by its neighbors, which is to be expected to some extent, but keeping that extent manageable.

With that all said, what I see thru the eyes of an individual lacking any academic credentials other than speaking street Arabic, is a picture unfold in the Middle East having three major actors moving at different speeds: Israel, frozen in place going no where; Iran, making moves at a rather slow pace and untrusted by its neighbors; but importantly, Turkey, moving rapidly forward without causing any undue alarm, while the Arabs merely watch on the sidelines, save for the recent diplomatic moves by Saudi King Abdullah.

We need to be a player!

"If I were the Chinese, I'd forthwith supply Iran with a modern antiaircraft missile defense system, to make an attack impossible."

Actually the Chinese have a knock-off of the Russian SA-10 (S-300) system that they have approached Tehran about selling to them. Thus far Russia has withheld their probable better system to Iran.

Interestingly, Russia moved the system into their near abroad area of the Black Sea, presumaby to control any planned launch of air attacks by Israel (or the U.S.) from that region, on the nuclear facility at Bashar, since they also noted some unusual training activity by the IAF there awhile back.

Anecdotal comment: al-Qaeda has mentioned the Strait as a vulnerable to the economy of the West . . .again, oil, always oil. Please recall the recent incident with the Japanese M Star super tanker!