Quote:
Originally Posted by Hank Chinaski
I posted it for his take on whether killing the general was flat out insane impeachment avoidance, or if it might have been rational. Obama was the President of the US, and of course it’s interests are what he should have followed. But this guy is saying perhaps the US interests long term could have been better protected by insisting Iraqis rule Iraq.
|
I appreciated the post. I generally find takes from friends who were born in Iraq or Iran very interesting. There is a ton of anger at Suleimani among all of them. Raw anger, regardless of where they fall on the political spectrum.
There also is a much broader, non-polar range of views on what is going on, rather than the US foreign policy for-it-or-against-it view.
Certainly global interests are better solved by insisting Iraqis rule Iraq. It all depends where you define US interests what US interests are. If we want peace, well, that's one thing, if we're happy to have lots of people die so we have cheap gas and wealthy defense contractors, that's another.
