zk, I said the war was intended in part to ward off a civilizational conflict. You pointed to the level of violence in Iraq as evidence that the war had not diminished the risk of civilizational conflict. I pointed out that most of the violent Islamic strife in Iraq was factional, and to the extent Muslim violence is directed inwards it cannot be directed out. I did not explicitly use the phrase ‘in Iraq’, since I was echoing your term ‘Islamic strife’ which you had used in describing Iraq. If that omission caused you to misunderstand me, I apologize for not being more clear.
Nonetheless, it is not incoherent to say that our war in Iraq could head off a larger conflict between us and Muslims while allowing that it has led to a larger conflict among Muslims.
What made me think (classical) liberalism would be popular in Iraq is that it is popular here, among people from around the world including Iraq, and it is popular in Germany and Italy and Japan and South Korea, all non-American states that were saved from tyrranies by us. Yes, I would be happy with the best case outcome of a nonthreatening Muslim world. 60 years ago it took hundreds of thousands of American lives and millions more from allies to reach a state where German and Japanese pride wasn’t a threat. As for the notion that the cost is measured in trillions, let me carefully quote: “You’re certainly entitled to that opinion, but stated with no reasons or substantiation, it’s meaningless.”
As for the number of troops, I would say as many as it takes for as long as it takes. The cost of the war has been historically low. More died in the war in the Philippines 100 years ago, a war not 1 person in a thousand has ever heard of. If we are not a credible power in Iraq, Iran has free reign over the Middle East. The Sunni states are already talking about developing a nuclear deterrent to Iran; that effort will only accelerate if we leave. In our absence, the stage is set for a regional war on top of the world’s energy supply. That, or the Muslims unite to take on us first.
