Changes for the US in Iraq

Submitted by chuck moody (United States), Oct 25, 2006 at 03:59

Moving our forces out to the deserts makes considerable sense. By the same token, the gentleman from Denton, TX, makes the point that then Iran will rush in to fill the vacuum, especially in the Shia dominated areas. But if our bases were nearer to the infiltration routes and stopping the Iranians and their IEDs in order to protect the territorial sovereignty of Iraq became our main focus, we would know who the enemy was and where he was. The PR benefits in the world press would also be helpful.

Al-Sadr militias might try to open up the routes by force of arms, which would be a convenient way for the US to control the population of militias. In the same way as a border fence in the US stops illegal immigration and thus gives us time to figure out what to do with those who already crashed the party, putting our bases out of population areas and stopping the infiltration from Iraq would give thje Iraqis time to grow up and figure how to govern themselves like adults.

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".