[Rhodes22-list] Dave, the liberal approach to problems

[DCLewis1 at aol.com]

Ed,
 
First, let me apologize for the verbosity of the following post, it  contains 
roughly 400 words but if you focus you can handle it.  
 
To respond directly to your questions, and as an aid to your  education:
- Germany: We are still in Germany, as you know.  The reason we have  stayed 
in Germany is that WE wanted to forward deploy troops there as part of  our 
Cold War strategy.  Recently troops in Germany have been drawn down as  a 
consequence of the end of the cold war. but we are still there.   Currently we use 
those forward deployed troops in Bosnia etc.
- Japan: The  allied occupation of Japan ended in 1952. WE have continued to 
actively seek a  presence in Japan because it provided a forward presence 
during the cold  war.
- Korea: We are still in Korea, as you now.  WE want to be there as  part of 
our forward deployment strategy to contain North Korea and perhaps  China.
 
Now the common thread in all of the above is that WE want, and wanted, to  be 
there to contain a larger geopolitical threat that is inimical to our  
interests.  The threat was the Soviet Union, North Korea, perhaps  China.  The 
interests at risk were OUR interests, not the greater glory of  mankind.
 
Additionally, there were short periods of time following WWII when our  
occupation was focused on "rehabilitation" of Japan and Germany, but in each of  
those cases the countries had explicitly attacked us and we were making sure  
that wouldn't happen again.  With Korea there was no "rehabilitation"  because 
we were always supporting the host country/government.
 
Map the above to Iraq and Afghanistan:  I argue that the  "rehabilitation" 
periods in Iraq and Afghanistan are over; "rehabilitation" has  been 
accomplished.  You can say the "rehabilitation" times are much shorter  than with Germany 
or Japan, but Iraq and Afghanistan's governments and military  infrastructure 
are childs play compared to Germany or Japan's.  If you hang  the top 10 
culprits in each country the party is over - we've done  that.   
 
As to staying on for a longer term, the key thing is to explicitly identify  
why you want to do that.  Exactly what is the larger geopolitical threat  
(i.e. country or alliance of countries) that would cause us to want to stay in  
Iraq or Afghanistan?  Our presence in Iraq or Afghanistan is necessary to  stop 
exactly which large and fearsome military power or alliance from  invading 
which other country that explicitly affects our national  security?   If there is 
none, then it’s time to get out.
 
Finally in response to your comment: “Oh, bye the way, how long did we stay  
in the country that
attacked Perl Harbor?”, that country would be Japan and I  discussed it above.
 
Dave