[« Stupidest statement of the year?] [Thought for the Day: »]
12/02/2005: Late to the party again.....
Back in August, I posted excerpts from a piece by LTG William Odom, "What's Wrong With Cutting And Running?". LTG Odom, Reagan's National Security Agency head, examined 10 supposedly intolerable consequences that warhawks claimed would result from a withdrawal from Iraq, and noted that all of them were already happening.
On Veteran's Day, Odom published a sequel to his earlier piece: Want stability in the Middle East? Get out of Iraq!. where he argues:
U.S. withdrawal from Iraq is the precondition to winning the support of our allies and a few others for a joint approach to the region. Until that has been completed, they will not join such a coalition. And until that has happened, even we in the United States cannot think clearly about what constitutes our interests there, much let gain agreement about common interests for a coalition.Compelling reading; don't miss it.
By contrast, any argument for "staying course," or seeking more stability before we withdraw -- or pointing out tragic consequences that withdrawal will cause -- is bound to be wrong, or at least unpersuasive. Putting it bluntly, those who insist on staying in Iraq longer make the consequences of withdrawal more terrible and make it harder to find an alternative strategy for achieving regional stability.
Len on 12.02.05 @ 12:43 PM CST
