Quote:
Originally Posted by astralis
yes and no. our troops getting freed up will give us back the capability, but both of them know pretty well that after iraq, the american public won't be so eager to approve of military actions that will send those same troops back for another tour in the middle east.
|
All we have to do is elect a democrat president, get attacked, and off we go.
Quote:
Originally Posted by astralis
they won't be smiling anymore, but they won't be scared crapless like they were then. back in the first flush of victory after OIF I, both parts were in place. they were taking quite seriously the threat of american divisions deciding to take a quick detour east or west.
but hell, having one of the above is better than having none at all. i think if anything, withdrawing our troops in iraq would probably make a US air campaign, instead of a land war, a good deal more credible threat. we in effect remove 150,000 potential "hostages" to syrian or iranian-financed/assisted suicide bombings et al.
|
We don't have to withdraw our troops from Iraq. Most of the attacks are muslim on muslim crimes. They are more interested in killing each other than killing us. All we have to do is stop policing big cities and start cleaning up smaller cities near Iran and Syria. Have a few bases there to train and work with the new Iraqi army. I bet Iran and Syria will be nervous when the bulk of the US army in Iraq moves to bases near their borders.