Posted on 01/08/2012 12:57:49 PM PST by jpsb
What to do about Iraq?
Rich Perry announced that he would redeploy US ground forces in Iraq and immediately fierce debate broke out on the wisdom of such a course of action.
Ron Paul has been hampered for saying “they attack us because we are over there” while Rick Santorum contends that “they attack us because of who we are”. Huntsman sides with Paul, “We’ve done what we can do, folks. I say I want to bring our troops home.” Romney seems willing to go back into Iraq and Newt seems less willing. Clearly GOP policy on Iraq and indeed on the entire middle east is not settled and runs from leave them alone Paul to redeploy now Perry. So what to do about Iraq and the middle east?
While I certainly do not know the answer to that question I do know the answer depends on who is correct Paul or Santorum. Does Islam attack us because “of who we are” or do they attack us because “we are over there”?
There is plenty of evidence that both views are correct. So I am not going to get into the merits of the argument either way. But I'd like to look at policy ramifications of each in hopes of shaping some kind of successful means of dealing with Islam long term.
In Ron Pauls' world view our problems with Islam greatly diminish if we simply “leave them alone”. Unfortunately Israel our closest ally in the middle east can't leave them alone since Israel sits on land Islam consider its own. Ron Paul avoids this problem by suggesting that Israel is a sovereign nation and more then capable of defending itself.
Allowing Israel to go it alone is a very appealing proposition since it solves numerous problems for the USA. Plus it forces nations with a far greater stake in the stability of the region than the USA to begin to deal with Islam in a serious manner. Russias' entire southern border is Islamic, Indias' entire western border is Islamic, Islam has a beach head inside Europe and China also has an Islamic problem. In fact the USA is easily the most difficult of the great powers for Islam to target given that we have two oceans separating us from the Nation of Islam. The chances of Islamic states coordinating a successful oil boycott of the USA are small and even if they could why would want to boycott a Ron Paul non interventionist USA?
As appealing as all of the above is, and it is appealing, there is just one little problem. We must abandon Israel to face Islam alone. To many Americans, including myself that is just unacceptable. I'd attempt to make an argument that maybe something can be worked out between Israel and Islam, allowing us to leave with a clean conscious but I don't see it. If Ron Paul is right with are stuck in the middle east as long as Israel exists and as long as we can afford to be there.
In Santorum world view things are worse. No matter what we do Islam is coming after us. There can be no peace with Islam and our fate is continuous war. We can run and we can hide but sooner or later war will find us and the only thing we can do is fight.
So there you have my annalist of the two opposing world views. I do not know which one is correct but I feel this article should at least offer a proper course of action for each.
In a Ron Paul world, since the USA is stuck in the middle east forever and since we have a huge debt problem, the USA should secure all or part of the Iraqi oil fields for it own use. After installing a puppet Iraqi government of course. In a Santorum world we should wage a war of annihilation against Islam in the middle east and west Asia. We should seek the cooperation of Russia and India in allowing them to share in the spoils of the war. I feel confident that both would find it in their interests to do so.
Well Freepers it has been a long time since I wrote an article of Free Republic but I think this topic deserved my taking the time to do so. I hope you enjoyed it and I look (mostly) forward to your comments.
Ping freepers nice enough to engage in discussion on the other thread.
Protect Israel?
You’re confusing parts of the debate that dealt with Iraq versus Afghanistan.
Anyway, the answer is—let it burn. When hajis kill each other, they’re doing us a favor. If they want to become a theocracy, fine; frankly, I think it’s inevitable. If they happen to look askance at us, though, then we bomb them even further back into the Stone Age.
No mercy for those cretins, ever.
Did you read the article? I suggest a possible solution I think you might like.
This is the correct analysis.
We should crush the enemy, see them driven before us, and hear the lamentations of their women.
That is what is best in life.
And not doubt hit a few of the nicer ones, lol. Ok I can go for that.
Just walk away.
Not another dime.
Not another boot on the ground.
Not another drop of blood.
What about Israel? Islam will make war on Israel.
I've advocated that for a long time, but we're not willing to acknowledge that we're at war with Islam, let alone that we only care about the Middle East b/c of its oil, so it will never, ever happen.
After installing a puppet Iraqi government of course.
Irrelevant to our goals if we drained the country dry, don't you think?
In a Santorum world we should wage a war of annihilation against Islam in the middle east and west Asia.
You make him sound like a psychotic warmonger with that statement. We don't have to do any such thing, but we must be ready to strike hard, mercilessly if the need arises.
We should seek the cooperation of Russia and India in allowing them to share in the spoils of the war. I feel confident that both would find it in their interests to do so.
What would their interests be? Do you really want Russia to have a strong physical presence in the Middle East? I don't.
There can be no peace with Islam and our fate is continuous war. We can run and we can hide but sooner or later war will find us and the only thing we can do is fight.
Ask any muslim, they’ll agree.
The world of the infidel is not known as the Dar Al Harb
for nothing.
-----------------------------------------
What do you see the military posture of our (and our allies') enemies going forward with:
Gov. Rick Perry as Commander in Chief?
Rep. Ron Paul as Commander in Chief?
-----------------------------------------
Rick Perry has long held an unwavering resolve to stand with our ally Israel. I will not post all the links and information -- just know that he does.
Actually I left out submit, but that for me is not an
option.
I am not saying that Santorum would wage a war of annihilation against Islam, that would be putting words into his mouth. All I am saying is that if islam hates us because of who we are then no matter what we want Islam is coming after us.
Following Sawyer's question were rambling exchanges between Romney, Huntsman, Gingrich and Santorum on Afghanistan, Iraq, the Middle East and the WOT. [-- Huntsman: "We got something to show for our mission" -- Gingrich: "Not a military problem" -- Romney: his answer was incoherent, he played verbal "twister" -- Santorum: wait and see; what Newt said]. Debate Transcript -- [It’s too long to “cut and paste” in an approved FR length for Washington Post material]
Do you think that's incorrect?
yes like I said there is no coherent GOP policy on the Nation of Islam, everyone just wishes the problem would go away, unfortunately it won’t. I find it very interesting that more then a few seem to think Islam hates us “because of who we are” but will not look at what that means or where sooner or later that leads. Leaders should be required to look at the consequences of the ideas they are putting into the public domain. Here I took the two outters had a look down the road.
The Kurds however, who seem to know the U.S. are a decent lot, wouldn't mind us in their area.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.