>Even one of the least persuasive arguments mentioned in this thread
>(invasion of Syra, Iran, etc.) and subsequent need for larger and larger
>forces is not 100% silly: One of the ways the U.S. seriously considered
>escaping from the Vietnam quagmire was by expanding the war to China. I
>find it hard to imagine that the u.s. rulers would seriously consider a
>draft for the reasons you give. But back after Sadaam's invasion of
>Kuwait I found it hard to imagine that the U.S. would be so insane as to
>start an endless War in the Mideast (as many of us recognized a war with
>Iraq would be). An imperial power at the cusp of its power becomes
>utterly unpredictable.
But GW I wasn't intended to be "endless," unlike this one - it had limited goals, and when they were accomplished, the war ended, for all the reasons that Bush 41 and Scowcroft (and even an earlier edition of Cheney) explained.
As for another invasion, as George Soros told the CFR, "they already shot their.... (laugher, self-censorship)."
Doug