] In other words, Iraq is a means toward an end. It is not
] an end in itself. It achieves nothing definitive by itself.
] Its purpose is to enable the United States to achieve other
] ends later, ends that will bring the nation closer to winning
] the war -- or so Washington hopes.
]
] ...the primary purpose of the Iraq war is to set the stage for
] undermining the foundations of al Qaeda in particular and
] of radical Islam as an effective paramilitary force in
] general.
]
] If the campaign goes well, two points will sink in: First,
] that the international system, alliances and institutions
] cannot contain American power; there is no protection there.
] And second, that the American ability to exercise warfare at
] extreme distances is overwhelming. Therefore, resistance to
] the United States is less rational than accommodating the
] United States.

Stratfor explains US strategy really well...

] In other words, Iraq is a means toward an end. It is not
] an end in itself. It achieves nothing definitive by itself.
] Its purpose is to enable the United States to achieve other
] ends later, ends that will bring the nation closer to winning
] the war -- or so Washington hopes.
]
] ...the primary purpose of the Iraq war is to set the stage for
] undermining the foundations of al Qaeda in particular and
] of radical Islam as an effective paramilitary force in
] general.
]
] If the campaign goes well, two points will sink in: First,
] that the international system, alliances and institutions
] cannot contain American power; there is no protection there.
] And second, that the American ability to exercise warfare at
] extreme distances is overwhelming. Therefore, resistance to
] the United States is less rational than accommodating the
] United States.

Stratfor explains US strategy really well...

] Pakistan, Iran, Saudi Arabia, Syria and so
]
] forth -- cannot simply be

] The United States is in a war with al Qaeda. The war
] began on Sept. 11, 2001. It will conclude when the
] ability of al Qaeda or related or follow-on forces,
] to attack the United States has been sufficiently
] diminished that the United States has returned to a
] state of relative security -- relative, since absolute
] security does not exist in this world. The Iraq
] campaign is not that war. It is a campaign within that
] war. It follows a previous campaign -- Afghanistan --
] and it will be followed by other campaigns.

Interesting speculation. I don't agree with all of his assumptions, especially involving the intent or relative support of some other countries such as Pakistan and Saudi Arabia, but he does present some interesting thoughts about ways in which the geopolitical landscape will be changing over the next year, along with some of the forces - both predictable and unpredictable -- which may cause those changes.

Hijexx wrote:
] There are still plenty of unanswered questions. Rather than
] actually investigate and try to root out the base of
] operations for the 9/11 terrorists, we're conquering Iraq.
] Figure that one out.

You ought to read this link:

Acidus wrote:
] So me a good reason for going into Iraq? Show me a good reason
] for breaking 230 years of Diplomatic presidence.

Linked here: