Why the U.S missions in the middle east will ultimately fail

Discussion in 'Politics' started by DrEvil, Oct 2, 2007.

  1. DrEvil


    Musings on the U.S war in the middle east, by Dr Evil.

    Note: please don't be a loser and write some crap response. Put something objective down if you care to reply.

    The U.S forces have been unable to contain the guerilla uprisings in Iraq and Afganistan. Why?

    For the same reasons that they failed in Vietnam. Each U.S surge will squash guerilla reistance but that resistance simply sprouts a new head. Short of mass extermination of males in the region the problem won't go away.

    To now spread the U.S forces/budget/patience back home/luck much further by going into Iran will only expedite the arrival of the day when U.S admits defeat and leaves. Oh they will leave a burning wreck when they do, but leave they will.

    The situation is not so disimilar to that of the problem U.S forces faced with Japan at the end of world war 2. This time however they can't take the EASY route and Nuke the place. That would destroy the oil, which is the reason they are there in the first place and leave an environment unsuitable to drilling even if the oil survived underground. Not to mention the nuclear winds affecting the neighbouring countries. Not even Bush is that stupid.

    So, in the meantime, the fed will print those dollars to fund the war. However for each dollar printed, it's effect faces the unsurmountability of diminishing returns. Indeed at levels much below the current levels, the dollar will face abandoment as the reserve currency.

    Have PNAC (cheney/wolfowitz et al) properly thought this one out? Or have they simply skipped over the Vietnam chapter in the history books?