Quote:
Originally Posted by Herodotus
Did I say the invasion was wrong, or that no invasion was the correct course of action? Not on this thread. Given certain conditions I would argue that the invasion could have been the correct course of action. However there is a lot of area between absoultely no action and full on years of occupation to resolve the issue with Saddam; targeted assassination(s), proxy wars, tougher sanctions regime (yes I understand that the regime was "collapsing" any day now, but increased interdiction efforts could have helped it ala Libya) increased troop presence in the Gulf (making a show of force before an actual invasion), even allowing weapons inspectors to finish (novel idea I know) all could have been used to some degree to ensure Iraqi compliance.
|
All of that has to be viewed in the context of geo-political strategy. You need to be looking now at the world as it might be 25-35 years from now.
All of the actions you listed are more than feasible and would have been viable options, if Iraq was North Korea, or Libya, or the island nation of Fiji, none of which are relevant to US geo-political strategy.
However, the US Grand Master All-Star Game Plan has not changed in the last 30 years, and part of the game plane requires the US to
control Iraq so that it can be used as a base for future military operations, rather than merely having access to Iraq or the ability to influence Iraq.
The US certainly could have used Iraqi "freedom fighters" trained in Pakistan with US tax payer money channeled through the Pakistani ISI to fight a proxy war, just like it does Chechnyan "freedom fighters" and just like it did the "mujhadeen," but there are no guarantees. A proxy war could last for a decade or more, just like Afghanistan, and the end result could be a government that does not march in lock-step with the US, just like in Afghanistan, which ultimately required military action by the US.
If the US must attain certain objectives within a given time period in order to be successful in its geo-political strategy, then its options become increasingly limited as time runs out. That was the situation in Iraq, and it is the present situation in Iran. If the US does not act on Iran soon, the US will have increasing limited options, lose control, and may have its geo-political strategy disrupted for the long term, even thwarted to the extent that it results in failure, which would be devastating to the US, since it has bet the farm on the eastern Russian republics and has no other viable alternative strategy plan.