"DSK" wrote in message
.. .
Apologies for an off-topic post, but this is an issue that we've all been
thinking about.

JoeSpareBedroom wrote:
I predict that we'll be out of there sooner than later.

Probably so. Unfortunate, IMHO, because we broke it and really should try
to glue thei pieces back together.


Bush-1 is now involved (finally). Even if he's doing it just to save the
family name from ridicule, he's lacing various advisory groups (and the
DOD) with a few sane people from his time on the stage.

They're unlikely to come up with a long-term workable solution (if indeed,
one exists). The only way to really solve this problem is with a time
machine.

HOWEVER: my suggestion is that we make a large increase in committed
forces in Iraq, not reduce them. We should have put half a million men
there to start with, put 3/4 million there now. Include large numbers of
civil-works volunteers like the Peace Corps. It's partly an issue of
manpower, partly an issue of putting so many Americans there, doing so
many undeniably good things, that the bad guys will lose all traction.

1- put a big & powerful hi-tech armed force, with a lot of intel
resources, along the border of Iran & Syria. Seal it off. If they
complain, tough ****. As far as Syria is concerned, we should have bombed
a couple of their highways & bridges already anyway.


Don't forget Pakistan. Nut cases from that country seem to be behind the
increased levels of violence in Afghanistan.

We'll also need to deal with the fact that huge numbers of middle-class
skilled professionals are leaving Iraq. That's a bad thing in any country -
just look at the number of hospitals here that offer hefty signing bonuses
and other perks to nurses. But, why would anyone want to spend 8 or more
years becoming a doctor, only to return to Iraq where just walking down the
street is like playing Russian roulette with 5 rounds in a revolver?