[billbears]

Long before this time next year Iraq will be stabilized

LOL, you think that do you? Whose word will you take for that? Oh of course Fox News and the administration. Who cares if it's true or not?

Hate to break it to you but Iraq and stability aren't in the cards without a secular strong man and no democracy. I could explain why that's the case but I've found true believers in the police action I've learned don't like history lessons.

You want to believe three separate sects (and two of Islam) are just going to get along in a nation created by Western powers after WWI be my guest. But it's not going to happen.

[JTN]

Long before this time next year Iraq will be stabilized

LOL, you think that do you?

I'm glad you put up the "LOL". I really wasn't sure whether or not it was in good taste to laugh at that.

[George W. Bush]

Hate to break it to you but Iraq and stability aren't in the cards without a secular strong man and no democracy.

It didn't work 85 years ago either during the British invasion of Iraq in 1917, the first "liberation" of Iraq (then known as Mesopotamia). The British invaders came "not as conquerors but as liberators". They, too, held elections. When the internal troubles escalated, British intelligence warned of terrorists crossing the Syrian border. And finally, in the face of rising opposition to a failing occupation, Prime Minister Lloyd George rose in the House of Commons to declare: "if British troops leave Iraq there will be civil war".

Talk about history repeating itself. Even the slogans are recycled.