Originally posted by ris
the importance to the us people of getting to bin laden could well keep troops in afghanistan for a while longer. symbolically he is vital to prove that nothing is too hard.
It's only an issue if our goal is to arrest and try the people responsible. I have strong objections to that strategy, though. Under no circumstances should any of the terrorists be tried in a court of law. This was not a police action, it was a war. We do not have the right to go into another country and arrest people. We are not the world's policeman. We do, however, have the right to go to war against a country that is harboring people who attacked us. That's what we did, regardless of whether Congress had the balls to actually declare war. We went to war against Afghanistan (whoop-de-doo) and won. Now, it's time to move on to the real enemies.
iran has been steadily improving its diplomatic relations over the last 5 years, it has a more moderate government that is working toward removing power from the hard-line clerics. a government toward such radical change and democracy was voted in by 70%.
From what I understand there is a strong pro-western, pro-freedom movement in Iran. It would be great if they could overthrow the mullahs and take back the country by themselves. In the meantime, though, the mullahs are in control. They are shipping weapons, providing aid and giving logistical support to terrorists. Recently, a terrorist conference was held in Teheran to plot out their strategy for the coming years. We can't sit back and wait for the people of Iran to remove this threat themselves. We should go in, take out the mullahs and set up a constitutional republic.
iran is in a position where i'm certain improved links with the rest of the world would help reduce extremist and support for terrorist organisations.
I think it is a mistake to think that links with the west will somehow magically cause a dictatorship to collapse. It is exactly the opposite. The more financial aid and moral support that we give to the government through our contact, the more entrenched it becomes. That's what happened in Russia, and it's what is happening with China. Either go in and take them out, or pull back all support and let them collapse.
iraq is a trickier subject, removing saddam hussein may not remove the problem although it may improve things. the question of how he is removed is the really tricky bit as it may anger and further polarise the region. i'm sure that most countries in that area will support his removal, as long as it doesn't lead to the deaths of too many civillians or start border-wars.
Would you say that the way the Allies removed Tojo from Japan or Hitler from Germany was calculated to win the hearts of the people in those countries? We weren't particularly gentle in either case, but the force we used was justified. The important thing is that we removed the threat, and left the countries in the hands of the people, so that there would be less chance of them starting another war any time soon. So far, it's worked.