...practically every major Arab country in the '67 and '73 wars. The result was that Israel survived, but I wouldn't say they managed to get rid of the beligerance against them.

In my opinion, the major steps that the U.S. could take to relieve the tension are (1). Lift sanctions against Iraq; (2). Remove troops from Saudi Soil; (3). Figure a way to solve the Israel/Palestinian conflict. Well, taking over Iraq will result in #1 being accomplished, but it replaces it with the problem of having troops in Iraq - becoming way too involved into the internal affairs of an Arab country. Although #2 should also be accomplished by eliminating the Iraq threat to Saudi Arabia, it has not been stated that we will remove those troops.

And as for #3, that is the ultimate end-game. The Palestinians have the distinction of always siding against the U.S. - though Arafat seems to be quietly biding his time knowing that a Palestinian State is a necessity for any long-term prospects of U.S. success in the region. Bush has been complacent on this issue, and given his diplomatic track record, I'm not especially hopeful that he can work with either the Israelis or Palestinians.

The way I see it, the Bush administration knew that as long as these 3 issues went unresolved, there was no solution in sight. The biggest problem with the U.S. is that we were half-assed committed in Iraq already, with our insistence of the sanctions and our enforcement of the no-fly zones in the North and South. We have been effectively at war with Iraq for the last 12 years, with no end in site. I suspect that when the toll is added up, more people will have died from the sanctions on Iraq then will die from the current assault. No American's had died from the aerial patrols, but they were constantly placing themselves in danger from Iraq.

Bottom line is that Bush is taking a big gamble to force the issue - hoping that eliminating Saddam will allow them the ability to come to a more stable equailibrium (one wonders what would have happened had the U.S. lifted the sanctions and stopped enforcing the no fly zones - i.e. walked away from Iraq with Saddam in power). I think taking out Saddam is a big fucking gamble, fraught with all sorts of complications and the chances for success aren't especially great, but if they could do it, they will have literally pulled off a major coup. That's what the conservatives want you to see - a world made better without the not-so-great dictator. I mostly see just more of the same.

As a final note, too many people are trying to draw parallels with this war and the one in Afghanistan. There is, however, one big difference - the U.S. used Afghan militias to do a large measure of the land-based offensive - i.e. capturing territory. If the U.S. wanted to do the same thing in Iraq, it could have been accomplished by arming and aiding the Kurds in the North and the Shias in the South. Well, relations with Turkey prevent us from using the Kurds, and our distrust of the Iranians prevented us from going with the Shias. The good news is that the U.S. does not owe a debt to any particular warlords in Iraq. The bad news is that there will be a vacuum from which to get leadership.