Why do California liberals hate poor, black women?

[Calabrio]

you better define stable. they been anything but that in most of a century.(if not more)

It was sarcasm, so I think we're both recognizing that the country and region was not stable PRIOR to the Iraq War.
And that Bill Clinton was responsible for instituting the policy of REGIME CHANGE in Iraq back in '98.

no, it's not the ONLY reason. but it is one of them.
nowhere did i say it was the only reason.

Using this kind of logic, any decision made by government for the past century can be argued as being "one of them." And using such a broad, vague kind of logic, I can't disagree with you.

But to present it as a major contributing factor demonstrates a gross ignorance of economics and the way the U.S. government operates. It also demonstrates a limited understanding of foreign policy.

iraq was a war that should never have been fought. it's why the states are going it alone.

That's an overly simplistic observation, and one that isn't accurate. We've discussed the conflict in Iraq countless times, there's no sense in investing the time trying to explain it again in this particular thread.

But your point that the engagement in Iraq is a significant cause of the economic problems facing the U.S., and the world, is ridiculous and horribly short sighted.

it is one that may not have needed to be fought either. after defeating the russians, the american military ties just packed up and left a devastated country to it's own demise.

The American military was not actively involved in Afghanistan. They provided some training, equipment, and supplies to the Mujahideen.
I'm not sure what point your trying to make, but it seems to be based on a misunderstanding.

now everyone is over in afghanistan, yes, it's going to have to be seen to the end or it will crumble.

You're responding to an offhand comment I made, one that could easily hijack the thread. My mistake.
There is no Afghanistan. There's never been an Afghanistan. They don't view themselves as Afghans. They identify themselves by religion and by tribe.

There is no infrastructure worth a damn in that country.
And the people are very primitive and brutal.

There's nothing to "crumble."
Strategically, Iraq is much more sensible and valuable than Afghanistan.
And since it has a national identity, infrastructure, and the reminents of a viable middle class, it actually has the potential be a successful state.
There is a viable, realistic long term potential for Iraq.

Afghanistan will probably be revert to being a failed state regardless what we do, unless we intend to be build the entire country from the ground up.

so shag was wrong. afghanistan and iraq were the conservative "solution" to terrorism.

Liberating 31,000,000 people in Iraq.
And 28,000,000 people in Afghanistan.

....as for the escalation point.
I'm not sure what point your making. I might agree with you, but I might not.
I think I agree with your point, but I think you WW2 example is bad.

Regarding the ongoing costs of a War..that's a profoundly AMERICAN construct.
In the past, the loser would pay reparations. In the 20th century, America would pay to reconstruct the defeated nations.
Arguably this was done because of the countries enormous economic power and, some would cynically argue, a desire to open up the defeated markets economically.

The nuclear weapon was used to prevent the inevitable loss of millions (about a million Americans and millions of japanese) of lives that would have come with an invasion of mainland Japan.

But the costs of the war persist to this day.
We still provide Japan most of it's military protection.

You could argue that this policy is every bit as responsible for the economy right now as the expense associated with Iraq, to tie this into the beginning of the post.
It's time for all of this overseas and domestic larges, all of which designed with the purpose of control, to come to an end this century.
The 20th century provided the U.S. (and many of it's allies) unparalleled wealth and the ability to engage in behavior and policy that was wasteful and unsustainable.