Your comments are welcome.

John - 2005-12-19 15:24:09
Something to think about: After the U.S. involvement in WWII, we still have a military presence in both both Japan and Germany. How're those countries doing? Fine. After the Korean conflict, we're still in South Korea. How's South Korea doing? Fine. Bosnia... same. Afganistan... same. We were forced to completely withdraw from South Viet Nam, leaving no U.S. military presence whatsoever, and look what happened: definitely NOT fine. So, we'll probably be in Iraq for decades; and, in light of how things are going in other nations where, post-war, the U.S. is still there, I don't know that that's necessarily a bad thing.

Shadowgm - 2005-12-19 16:38:38
We're committed to staying in Iraq because we now have an obligation to clean up our mess. My primary issue with Mr. Bush is that he isn't exactly inspiring confidence; it's going to take more than slogans and a PowerPoint presentation to win anything in the Middle East. Additionally, your assertion seems to imply that stability is a direct result of an American presence; the challenge would be to initiate the change and NOT have to babysit the country for another 60+ years.

Add your comment:

Your Name:
Your Email:
Your URL:

Back To The Ministry of Shadows - Diaryland