Logic is not always practical

Submitted by Rick House (United States), Oct 24, 2006 at 14:46

Mr. Pipes,

Your solution to the many problems in Iraq is logical, but it's not necessarily practical. Our strategy for the war on terror is a multi-level, multi-phased war of attrition. On one level we hunt down terrorists anywhere in the world. You see this level of the war fought in the Europe, South America, Afghanistan, Indonesia, Thailand, and the Philippines. Another level of the war is to follow and confiscate the financial resources of the terrorists and terrorist sponsoring organizations. For examples of this level you need look no further than the recently reveal money tracking program in Switzerland. Yet another level is an assault on Islamic fundamentalist ideology, which is being fought in the world's media and communication arena...etc. etc. etc....

The most important level of the war on terrorism is the isolation and containment of state sponsors of terrorism. Bush named the most important of these in his State of the Union Address in January 2002. Yes, I'm talking about the axis of evil, and the term evil is justly applied. Iraq under Saddam was evil in the same way Hilter and Stalin were evil. His support for terrorism was a function of the state, pursued to intimidate his people and dominate the region.

North Korea under Kim il Sung is evil because of his greed for money and thirst for power. Sung wants to deal with us bi-laterally because he knows in prolonged discussions with us we'll end up trying to buy him off. Under the six-nation diplomacy he can do nothing. (I'm very proud of Bush's N. Korean policy. Bush understands that if one wants to control an oriental one must use other orientals to do it. N. Korea has been very effectively watched and contained for the last couple of years under Bush's policy.) Iran under the Mullahs is the most evil of all. Iran is the focal point of state sponsored terrorism. It's where all that is necessary for terrorism to have global influence joins with a nation-state capable of harnessing and using its potential. (e.g. Hizbollah and Hamas)...

If we do as you say and we reposition our forces in the desert, we allow the expansion of the one nation we most want to contain. We allow Iran to have absolute influence in a third of Iraq... Understand this point clearly. While we're mixing it up with Iraqis, we keep the Iranians and their influence at bay, which is extremely important now because Iran's pursuit of nuclear weapons. The deserts of Iraq are in the west. The eastern part of Iraq is where all the population centers are located. If we pull out of the population centers, Iran will move in.

Your solution seems logical, but is is practical?

Rick House

Denton, Tx

Note: Opinions expressed in comments are those of the authors alone and not necessarily those of Daniel Pipes. Original writing only, please. Comments are screened and in some cases edited before posting. Reasoned disagreement is welcome but not comments that are scurrilous, off-topic, commercial, disparaging religions, or otherwise inappropriate. For complete regulations, see the "Guidelines for Reader Comments".