Quote Originally Posted by Rank amateur View Post
I think Steve was suggesting that there's nothing wrong with getting rid of the government and leaving. If they replace their government with a worse one, we take it out again. That would be preferable to nation building.

In Iraqi we've already removed the government, so leave and return if the new boss is same as the old boss.

It made sense to me. Less KIAs, less time, less money: probably more chaos, but Steve's willing to pay that price. (Me too.) Gian eats soup with a spoon. You get to see your kid a little more often.
that the action MUST be based on the specific situation. There are times when a reinvasion would be more costly to everyone including us that would a bit of nation building. In war there just is not a 'one size fits all' model.

Take Iraq. We leave and a clone rises to power. I don't think the US is quick enough to react immediately and remove the clone -- and said clone isn't really the issue, its what that nation has been or is doing that creates the problem that causes military action -- and thus, the clone gets to cement his power and build up his forces (conventional or IW is immaterial). The reinvasion will almost invariably be harder than was the initial invasion.

The question is then will that reinvasion be more costly in net terms than would departing and returning if necessary. If it is to be more costly, then it makes little sense to leave, knowing you will have to return.

Take a nation other than Iraq in the future. Ideally, before going in we'd decide on what needs to occur. If a an incursion and immediate redeployment can teach a lesson, then that's what we should do. OTOH, if it is likely to do little more than raise the hate and discontent level and probably will have to be repeated, then a more lasting effort should be undertaken. Too many variables to adopt a policy that says "We will always do this" -- though there is nothing wrong with a policy that says "If you do X, here's what's probably going to happen..."

Absolutes in geopolitics are dangerous...