|
Lucianne poster suggests a different approach to Iraq
A participant at the passionately pro-Bush website Lucianne.com agrees with VFR’s frequently proposed strategy of placing a cordon sanitaire around Moslem countries instead of trying to democratize them. However, our aim would not be simply to “let them kill each other,” but to maintain enough indirect influence so as to keep regimes dangerous to us from arising.
Reply 8—Posted by: hellfire, 11/13/2004 7:42:17 AM Posted by Lawrence Auster at November 13, 2004 01:50 PM | Send Comments
But let’s not underestimate the importance of letting them kill each other. I agree about the cordon sanitaire in theory. But there is no way to now stop them from having direct influence on America in the form of Saudi investiments representing 8-10 percent of the entire US economy. Posted by: Andrew on November 13, 2004 3:41 PMinvestments (must type slower while stop watching TV in the dark:-) Posted by: Andrew on November 13, 2004 3:44 PMPardon me for again showing my ignorance, but could the VFR Mssngr/Mssngrs who concocted this idea of a “cordon rouge, blanc et bleu”—if indeed it was devised by anyone at VFR—please describe to me, in detail, how many U.S. tactical units/troops would be needed in Kurdistan or some such “buffer zone”? Also, how many jets and attack helicopters we would need there to put down an uprising somewhere in the Middle East? I for one am leery of such a move. For one, it would mean keeping vast numbers of troops in a dangerous area needing to be constantly resupplied. It would require a tremendous maintenance force to keep the planes and tanks and other gear “ready”. We would be extremely close to our biggest enemy in the region, Iran which is about to get the bomb. Also, I am not at all sure it would have the support of Congress and most Americans. Posted by: David Levin on November 14, 2004 4:38 AMIt’s an idea that’s been suggested by a handful of writers. I don’t know that it’s been proposed in detail. People accept tens of thousands of U.S. troops sitting on their duffs in Europe where they’re not needed, but oppose the idea of stationing them in the Mideast where at least it’s arguable that they are needed. Maybe it’s a terrible idea, I don’t know, but I’m interested in people who propose creative solutions in this area, because all the mainstream offers us at present is President’s Boilerplate’s “stay the course” mantra plus NO debate. It’s unbearable. It really is as if politics has died in this country. And, most astonishingly, politics has died, not in the name of protecting the left from the debate, but in the name of protecting George W. Boilerplate from debate! The most detailed and comprehensive proposal for a war strategy including a permanent base is from Mark Helprin. I recommend that Mr. Levin read that article, in the Claremont Review, which I discuss and link here: http://www.amnation.com/vfr/archives/002570.html |