Korean Job Discussion Forums

[Summer Wine]

I was reading about how Syria was claiming that the Middle East is concerned over the 150,000 US soldiers in Iraq and that those doing the attacks against them aren't terrorists but rather just opposition.

It came to me that maybe it would be better for Syria to have the US troops in Iraq then not. These are my reasons:

1.) If US troops leave Iraq, there is nothing to prevent the US military from regrouping, taking a breather and then attacking another country in the region.

2.) There could be a situation similar to Korea, where US troops while positioned here, do not attack other countries or focus thier desire on having troops placed else where as they know similar to having forces in Japan they can reach those areas if they need to. Thus better to have one large force in one country than have America putting its forces into every country.

3.) Placing forces into a country puts them at risk even if not under attack. Less likely the US would use nuclear weapons on Iran or syria if they have troops next door in Iraq.

4.) US troops spend money, it might benefit the region to have that money spent and just like Itaweon is the US hangout and most things go there, then US troops would corrupt Iraq, but allow the rest of the Middle East to continue thier status quo.

Just a few thoughts, stretching it at the end though, add any more that you can think of.

[Summer Wine]

Had time to think of a few more things I have questions about.

Those who support the US remaining in Iraq, what do you consider the long term benefits of doing so for the US and the region as a whole?

Those who don't suppport remaining, what do you consider the long term negatives of the US leaving for Iraq and what do you believe should be done in the future if it becomes the base of operations for Islamic radicalism and attacks against other states?

And finally one for both: What do you consider the role that non muslim nations should have and play in the region?