Quote Originally Posted by Claymore
... excerpted...

" I prefer to work with moderate, with rational, conservatives, provided only that they do in good faith strive forward toward the light. But when they halt and turn their backs to the light, and sit with the scorners on the seats of reaction, then I must part company with them. We the people cannot turn back. Our aim must be steady, wise progress. It would be well if our people would study the history of a sister republic. All the woes of France for a century and a quarter have been due to the folly of her people in splitting into the two camps of unreasonable conservatism and unreasonable radicalism...

...


The british were once successful in colonising Iraq. The reason we're failing is this: When the british invaded, they had one soldier for every 18 iraqi civillians. Counting the new units standing up within iraq, we have one soldier for every 270 iraqi civillians.

...
The T.Roosevelt quote... the part you highlighted, is very telling. It was true about the French then... probably true about them now.... and unfortunately looks like where we in the U.S. are currently headed. Our watch-phrase should be 'Moderation in all things.' I believe we'd be better off without the polarization we're seeing in this country.

Regarding the Brits vis-a-vis Iraq, let's not forget that the British Empire was wide and far-flung because they were ruthless overseers of their holdings. When they stopped being ruthless, they began losing their empire.

So it's not about the number of troops we have per se, it's about how violent we're willing to be. Nothing more, nothing less. As with Nam, if we're not willing "to do whatever it takes to win" we shouldn't be there.

That being said... we shouldn't be there. We do not need to be a ruthless oppressor.

...and to our British buds... the above was noted with admiration for the past and admiration for the present. The world was different then. I certainly recognize who are most stallwart friends have been and remain.