BoatBanter.com - View Single Post

Harryk

On 2/9/11 2:04 PM, wrote:
On Wed, 9 Feb 2011 08:14:15 -0500, wrote:

In , payer3389
@mypacks.net says...

On 2/9/11 7:39 AM, BAR wrote:
In ,
says...

On Tue, 08 Feb 2011 14:30:35 -0500,
wrote:

On 2/8/11 2:25 PM, wrote:

According the you.... expert on all things, esp. those in the middle
east.

You don't have to be a middle east expert to predict that. You only
have to look at history (recent and long term). Iraq is a lot more
westernized than Afghanistan.

Well, as you're fond of saying, we'll see. It won't be an
American-style democracy, but it could be a relatively safe place,
free (for the most part) of terrorism.

Afghanistan? Afghanistan isn't even a country. It's an outline on a map,
with hundreds of independent villages and villagers who hate the
villagers in the next village.

Good explanation

Iraq will fall apart. Afghanistan will never be "together" enough to
fall apart.

It might survive as 2 countries.

Then there would be Pakistan, North Pakistan and Outer Pakistan.

East Iran and North Pakistan.

I don't disagree with your analysis. I hope that causes you angst.

It does give you pause doesn't it.

I think it is encouraging that we are actually having a civilized
conversation and actually agreeing on something ;-)

Someone please explain to me in polite terms how the leaders of two
administrations, the current one and the one in the immediate past,
hoodwinked themselves into believing anything worth saving could be made
from either Iraq or Afghanistan.

I understand what Bush I did with his war with Iraq. It was rational. I
understand what Clinton did in Bosnia. That was rational.

Iraq? Afghanistan? Huh?