[Lothar5150]

Originally Posted by bobkoure

Yes, of course invading a country to protect dollar hegemony is lunacy. The whole rush to war was lunacy. The stated reasons did not add up and the necessity was not there. So why did they (really "we", but I tried hard to not do it) invade? War on terror? Nah - no connection to alquaida. WMDs? Nah - we didn't let the UN inspector scenario play out. Desire to free Iraqi people from tin-pot despot? Nah - the US has a history of not deposing despots.
So that leaves a rush to war to make sure we're having victory celebrations in time for the Nov presidential elections (possible - seems to have worked in spite of the slow going there). Or possibly some other reason. Protect dollar hegemony? Protect Israel? Shore up relations with Saud family? Special vendetta against Hussein because of an attempt on GWH Bush's life? Something else?

How about over 10 years of constant violations of a cease-fire. How about not allowing unimpeded inspections of facilities to UN inspectors. How about the fact that he had and used WMD in the past and the reasonable assumption is that he will use them if he has them. I know you guys think that we in the military and intelligence services are infaluable but maybe the Intel was bad. Protect Israel; give me a break…from whom. Shore up relations with Saudi Royal Family…what by creating a Democratic Republic next door…Yeh that helps their hold on power. Special vendetta against Hussein because of an attempt on GWH Bush's life, Why not, he was our President but doubtful.

Originally Posted by bobkoure

If I was going to spend this kind of money and blood to rescue a people, I'd be in Colombia. They want democracy, and are standing up to terrorism in a way that totally shames this country (we get one major terrorist act and end up with the patriot act - they're under much worse assault and are still trying to maintain citizen rights).

It seems to me that Latin America has made great strides toward democracy through gental persuasion. The right tool for the right job.

Originally Posted by bobkoure

We've already tried to invade and annex Canada. You know the story, including ol' Benedict not getting the recognition he thought he deserved... As far as Canada now not being able to defend against a hockey stick, well, first, that was totally uncalled for, and second, do you really want to start an asymmetrical war with a country you share a three thousand mile border with? Think they'd stay home or would a sizable minority bring the war to us? It'd be just like Nazi Germany, trying to sort out infiltrators. ("Your papers please...")
All that said, if Quebec separates, the Indian nations to the north will try to separate from them, and given the recent history of the Mohawks, this will be armed. We could easily be drawn into that one (and it would be in our national interest to see it settled). If that scenario plays out, it's quite possible that the maritimes might eventually become part of the US.

We were only after a small part of Canada the area around the Great Lakes and that was during the War of 1812 not the revolution. We burned the Canadian Parliament but it was more a raid than a campaign for occupation, mostly militia. Besides I was making a point not advocating a policy, come on Bob

Originally Posted by bobkoure

Finally, what would I cut? Well, there's a war that we rushed into. Because of the rush, we're getting essentially no financial backing from the rest of the world - and they'd be idiots to give us money after we rushed right past the consensus process as it would just encourage us to do it again.
We probably disagree on the value of consensus. I would guess that, as a Marine, you get very little exposure to it. I live in a consensus based community. My experience with is is that, although it can be slow and unwieldy at times, it does a really good job of keeping you from doing something stupid - or at least knowing that it's stupid before you do it
On a more macro level, trying to become "world policeman" on our own is a very bad sign. Seems to me Paul Kennedy's "Rise and Fall of the Great Powers" was on that "Marine University" list. Care to poke some holes in his observations/theories?

Therefore, you advocate pulling out of Iraq now regardless of the long-term consequences of that action, based on economic grounds.

No disagreement on the value of consensus I believe in democracy enough to die for the idea. Again a misconception of US Military Culture. You have no idea how democratic the planning process is inside the Marine Corps. We practice bottom up planning, top down review. Rational debate occurs at every level, But when the man in charge makes a final decision everyone support that decision as if it were their own. As professionals we all understand that there usually several logical courses of action, and someone has to make the final call. Further, there are times when I don’t expect to be questioned, for instance if we were under fire, I make the call no debate. I contrast that with my experience working with the British. Who have almost pure top down planning, top down review. Almost no debate at any level occurs during the planning process and that is how they ended up with catastrophes like Gallipoli.

I personally think that our status forces us to be the world police in some cases. Look at Kosovo, if we did not commit to intervention no one was going to intervene. I haven’t read Kennedy’s book yet but I am intimate with the subject. I think that it is difficult to compare America with previous great powers because our very nature is different. We never seek to hold foreign territory. In countries like Germany and Japan, our troops haven’t remained as occupiers. We are there literally as guest of the host nation. There are no issues of extra territoriality with regard to our citizens or troops. Further, once we have defeated a country it is turned into an autonomous democracy with strong economy. Normally, we continue to have great symbiotic political, military and trade relationships with these counties. Contrast that with the nature of the Colonel European Powers.

I think that every one should be very happy that the country that is now the world power is dedicated to the democratization of the world vice the subjugation of the world.