Reply #42: Ummm... read the post

[krkaufman]

> At least they would have the dignity of having their
> own civil war

Oh, yes, I'm sure the millions of people killed in the civil wars over time have felt all sorts of dignity. Genocide is most honorable, even on the receiving end.


> A population under the boot of a foreign force of infidels
> is far more damaging to the psyche and prospects of a culture
> than allowing them to settle their own differences.

I'd agree with you if the bargaining tools of the Iraqis weren't AK-47s and plastic explosives.

Not sure you read my post, though you appear to have replied to it. Nobody's saying they shouldn't resolve their own differences. I'm simply saying that scurrying out of Iraq without any concern for the vacuum left in our wake, as the post to which I replied alluded, would be inhuman. Just look at the looting that occurred in the first days after the fall.

As I said, we should turn over *everything* to the UN ASAP, and only contribute where/how the UN requests. The UN could then act as an unbiased mediator between Iraqi ethnic, religious and political factions, to aid in the country's stabilization. We cannot serve that role, because we were the invaders, remain the occupiers, and the Iraqis (rightfully!) feel we're there only for the oil.


> In any event, how many decades would you propose that we
> continue to keep them under the american boot of repression?

Very visual, but unrelated to my original post. (see "turn over all control to the UN") Here's a similar question for you... How many hundreds of thousands must die before you'd consider a civil war "undignified"?