|
My first three lines were intended to mean that if they don't send too many troops, then they probably don't are / dont want to in the first place because they don't like what is going on or what not.
And Iraqis aren't the main target of insurgents - the Americans are. They know they won't get too many supporters if they kill other Arabs - why would other Arabs help them if they were the targets? I don't get how its ridiculous line of logic when you even said that is the current plan (what was ridiculous was dissolving the Iraqi Army then suddenly trying to reform it).
And of course Iraqi's are the best solution but at the same time, there are those who think they're just puppets. That is largely because of the large U.S. presence there in the first place. Arab troops will ease the tension for the more moderate peopl. The more you isolate the extremists, the more likely they'll fail.
You have to present the image
Bush41 assembled a coalition with Arab countries in suppot - hence it was popular among the countries and those being liberated. Had he went in gung-ho with no Arab support, would they have viewed it the same?
If you build a bae of Arabs in an Arab nation, what can they say against their fellow people? Not much, compared to what is done against Americans
|