Steve,

I am sure that there were those who were against the US embarking on war against Iraq.

However, given the opinion that one gathers from a variety of sources including those who have lived in the US and those who are full-fledged and parochial Americans of other origins, the types of Sarah Palin (who could see Russia from her window) and Joe the Plumber are the national opinion index and the types of Obama are the intellectual dreamer, Sarah Palin, the dream girl and heart throb of US politics also endorses the same (Sarah Palin Thankfully Not On Same ‘Intellectual Stage’ As Obama ). I am sure the ‘real six pack, fast food guzzling real Americans’ would have drowned, what you may term as, any sane analysis.

It does not mean that there are not great brains in the US. There are. Or else how come, without fail, they get the Nobel Prize? It is a sad commentary that a country that is a pacesetter in intellect gloats over being an illiterate as equal to the love for the Ma’s American Apple Pie!

That apart, if we rewind, if indeed the US was against the Iraq War then there should have been indignation when the US ignored the UN. There wasn't. What could be the reason? I am sure there were good reasons, as was to invade Afghanistan. I wonder if invading either Iraq or Afghanistan were wrong decisions. At best, from a military stand point, it was as stupid as Hitler’s flouting the Principle of War in Op Barbarossa to deviate from the Selection and Maintenance of Aim.

Then, if the Americans were against the Iraq war, it is surprising that Bush won in the second term elections with 30 states and 279 electoral votes.

Nearly 120 million Americans voted, or about 60 per cent of those eligible, the highest number since 1968, according to the Associated Press.

With GOP candidates picking off a string of Democratic open seats, Republicans expanded their Senate caucus from 51 to 55 members.

In short, the majority of Americans were for Bush, even though the situation by then had deteriorated drastically.

In fact, the world 'liberal' became a sort of a cuss word or an equivalent for being treacherous.

Not to wear the US Flag as a lapel pin became unpatriotic.

It is fine to blame Bremmer, but then was Bremmer a defacto Pasha and not accountable to the US Administration?

It is easy to blame after the event or find plausible reasons for errors.

At that time, Bremmer was the apple of the eye.

Having bombed OBL out of Tora Bora and having installed a democratic govt of Karzai, the US should have pulled out. It didn't. What could be the reason?

On the issue that the US has lost the thread as to why they went to Afghanistan was lost both to the Republican Presidency as also to the Democratic Presidency. It does indicate that those in Govt do not subscribe to that point of view that the thread has been lost. And elected Govts in a democracy represent the country and not splinter groups of opinion. Therefore, one wonders if the US has lost the thread.

It is good that there are people who realise the mistake. But then, it does not show in the actions. The actions merely indicates a desperation to quit even if it means ‘losing face’ but couching it with all hyperbole and excuse that are being trotted out now.

The China – Gwadar rail link is as on the map which follows the road


It does not go through Afghanistan.

ISI controls instability in so far as the Pashtuns are concerned. They do not have control over the Northern Alliance tribes. Therefore, to have a rail link through Afghanistan, currently, is not feasible.

Trade with Iran is already open for all countries, except the US since US does not want to trade with Iran. In fact, if the US reconcile with Iran (which I think is not feasible) it has the second logistic route open i.e. Chahbahar (Iran) to CAR via Afghanistan. That is the easier option in physical terms.