USA's 'plan of attack' in Iraq

[theloniusfleabag]

I was speaking to an East Indian friend of mine, (actually the guy who owns the liquor store that I keep in business in my neighborhood) about the US policy in Iraq. He is older than I, and very astute, so I ask him a lot of questions on culture, (he is presently teaching me to speak Punjabi) history, and our common interest of business ownership.

He told me that the US policy in Iraq is based on an old saying in India, kind of a proverb, about "averting danger by dropping a bucket of popcorn amongst the monkeys". He said, it seems that the US has tried to institute democracy in Iraq not to 'make life better for the Iraqis, but to draw the focus away from America'. It is a dual purpose strategy, for it involves getting the Iraqis (and now the terrorists) to fight amongst themselves, ('Dropping the bucket of popcorn'), thus changing the focus of the terrorists from "The Homeland" to fighting the American imposition of it's democratic values in the middle east. Now, the 'terrorists' can fight against America in their own country, against their own people, and this, in turn, ostensibly makes America less threatened by direct attack.

It seems that, for now, this strategy is working. Iraq, before 9/11, had no ties to terrorism, no WMD's, and, save for the Kurds, (who can't seem to get their way) very little infighting. Now, terrorists and insurgents are drawn like a magnet to Iraq, and that delicious bucket of popcorn. But is it a winning strategy? I do not think so. It is only meant to buy time. Osama himself has not been in Iraq (to the best of anyone's knowledge), so it is difficult to say if the Iraq imbroglio has truly made the USA any safer, for another major attack is expected by most every analyst in the business. Even if Osama is killed tomorrow, most everyone thinks that the US' actions thus far has only increased the chances of another 9/11.

[PocketRocket]

I've seen this basic premise before, and I'm not sure whether I buy it or not.

While it seems to be true for the moment, and there is certainly a fair bit of infighting going on, I don't think the war has really drawn any of AlQaeda's big guns into the fray. I think any so called "insurgents" over there are bottom-rung cannon fodder and little else, possibly motivated by the chance to gain glory, and the fabled 32 virgins, by dying in battle with an enemy of Islaam.

As long as Islaamic leaders can argue with any sort of credibility that their religion and culture is being persecuted by Israeli and/or US interests, there will be a breeding ground for terror recruits. And as long as Terror's top brass is still at large, especially Osama, the figurehead, we will continue to see terror strikes from that organization.

For those who would say that there have been no major striked against the USA on home soil since the war began, well, remember that such strikes were not exactly common before the war. They don't happen every few weeks, more like several years apart.

I for one am not convinced that there will be no further attacks on US soil.

I am dead certain that strikes in other countries will continue on a regular basis.