Iraq

[rov1200]

http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/world/middle_east/8 208976.stm

Should the US return to the Iraqi cities to prevent a worsening of the civil war between Sunnis and Shias?

By doing so it will be admitting a failure of their policies to locate elswhere.

Has the previous surge been wasted?

Is there any likelihood that peace will ever come to Iraq whilst the troops are there and should the Iraqis be left to get on with it themselves?

[Lonnie]

1) No, I don't think Wetern forces should return to Iraq.

2) Yes, they should be left to sort it out themselves.

3) Once Iraq is stable, and it won't be with a regime that the West would like, be ready for the backlash.

4) And I reckon the same for Afghanistan.

[R1Geezer]

So 2 slightly different versions of the religion of peace have decided they want to kill each other? I'm struggling to see the downside to that one mate!

[rov1200]

I don't think they have no other option than to return to the cities. The Iraqi police force or Army is incapable of keeping peace. Their guards are unable to check cargoes and the situation must be extremely lax. The problem if the US do have to return is for how long? If you have 2 resident populations the dominant Shia will impose their will and the less influential Sunnis will harbour grievences evermore.
Saddam was removed under the directions of militant Shias, we now know he was the only one to keep some sort of order. We have completely misread the situation in Iraq and we are paying for it.

[whifffey]

What puzzles me is why Western troops have to stay on to "train" local Iraqi and Afghan forces, build roads, etc.

Can't they do it themselves?

Or are they just uncivilised, backward, and lazy?

[rov1200]

""What puzzles me is why Western troops have to stay on to "train" local Iraqi and Afghan forces, build roads, etc. ""

I don't see why they need to Whiffey. This could be done either in Kuwait or one of our bases back home.