|
I was wondering (not being a good history student) how the term "cut and run" actually applies to an ocupation that has lasted 3+ years. What if we're still there after 5 years and then leave? Is that still cutting and running?
How long do american wars typically last, in our short history?
So I went to Infoplease, and I found that most of our wars lasted a year or less, and a few lasted in the neighborhood of 3.
But only 3 lasted longer than Iraq, even if we did cut and run today:
Vietnam 12 years American Revolution 8 years WW2 6 years
Civil war 4 years WW1 4 years 1812 3 years Korean 3 years Mexican War 2 years
We're already on par with the civil war, for starters. Was the end of the civil war cutting and running? Who cut and ran? Have we already outlasted WW1? Really? That's what the GOP calls cutting and running?
For a war that is only outlived by the Vietnam war, the American Rvolution, and WW2, why don't we know why we're there? Why don't we have a plan to leave? What would "success" look like, after 3+ years?
The stupid part is, Rumsfeld originally doubted the occupation would last 6 months. So, his first plan was in fact to cut and run. It's on video. We've all seen it.
Why was that a good idea then, and a bad idea, now? The Iraq government has asked us to leave.
3+ years is enough. I say, time to pack up and give these people their country back.
|