so sure, more troops. what an original idea! This must be it. What we've been missing. I cannot believe I did not see it sooner!! Clarity!! Sure, we've spent half a trillion dollars on 4 years of war, 3000 americans died, and countless iraqis are now dead, displaced, or disgruntled. 20K more troops? Genius!
Why does security always have to come before stability? Are there not other factors which bring about stasis? Could "crushing the opponents of liberty" spawn more converts against occupation? Why is "clear and hold" preferable? Will people not resent the "hold" part, or for that matter the "clear" to begin with as well? Can violence REALLY solve issues? Does revulsion of occupation fuel violence? Why is anyone unemployed in Iraq? Why cant security forces protect infrastructure under construction? Why are foreigners being brought in by american companies to build infrastructure? Why does Baghdad still have open sewers and intermittent trash collection? If we can build a subdivision in 1 year with a couple hundred workers, how about 8 million+- men (not including women) of working age? WHY HAS THAT COUNTRY NOT BEEN REBUILT? 4 YEARS!! I do not want to hear "there was no security". We have found ways to rebuild and maintain the oil infrastructure-why not the water, power, sewer, or transportation sectors? Who wrote that fucked up list of priorities? (hrumph, cheney, hrumph) In forfeiting the first year by shuffling feet and rewriting traffic laws, the Bush administration engendered the situation at hand. WHO pays for the ineptitude of our occupation? The iraqi people are paying now, but who pays later?
No comments:
Post a Comment