Liberation not occupation

Write a comment Regarding the first two thirds of your post: Errrrr, what? Do you have a point? "Your support of so-called Iraqi democracy and Afghan democracy belies the facts which are obvious to all. If it were as you say, then what need for maintaining such huge armies of occupation?" Large numbers of troops were needed in Iraq due to the array of terrorists and foreign powers trying to topple the Iraqi peoples fledgling democracy (Iran, Syria, al-Qaida and their surrogates). The Hussein era Iraqi military was not up to the job (its incompetence the result of having been moulded as an instrument of the Baathist police state, not a tool of a democratic government with the role of protecting Iraqis). Foreign troops levels in Afghanistan so far (30-50 thousand) are much fewer than the Soviet force (about 120,000) because they are not striving to suppress a popular uprising against an occupying power, they are fighting off a brutal insurgency by an oppressive thugocracy/theocracy that has little support outside of localized regions. As the Taliban have become more violent the need for more troops has increased and we will see the number go up shortly, until the Taliban are rocked well back on their heels and the ANA can secure Afghanistan on its own.
Say something here...
You are a guest ( Sign Up ? )
or post as a guest
Loading comment... The comment will be refreshed after 00:00.

Be the first to comment.

Reader support is crucial to this mission. Weekly or monthly recurring ‘subscription’ based support is the best, though all are greatly appreciated.  Many methods are available to keep the work rolling. Click the image for a more info.

supp

supp

Quick Link to Paypal

Recurring Donation

QR Code

QR Code

Venmo1

To support using Venmo, send to:
@Yon-Michael

subscribe

My BitCoin QR Code

Use the QR code for BitCoin apps:

bc2020

Or click the link below to help support the next dispatch with bitcoins: