Submitted by Fred Willis, Jan 15, 2007 21:23

In 1980, whilst doing research in Berkeley, California, I met my first neo-Con New Yorker who, by other cultural attributes, should have been a liberal. He gave me as the reason for his turn to the right the fact that there had been a "holocaust in Cambodia, and nobody cared". I agreed with the fact of a holocaust in Cambodia but I could not fathom his turn to the right because it was precisely Nixon and Kissinger who precipated the Killing Fields in Cambodia by invading and driving Prince Sihanouk out of office thereby legitimizing the Khmer Rouge as the only truly indigenous political entity. Sihanouk may have been a neutralist and not helpful with regards to our effort in Viet Nam but he was a bulwark against the Khmer Rouge. With him gone, we literally unleashed the Khmer Rouge to do their bloody work.

It is precisely the arrogant lunkheadedness of W and Dick that reminds anyone with a brain and old enough to remember the Nixon years of the foolhardiness of Nixon's secret war in Cambodia.

The truth is that it will take 100,000 troops to seal the borders between Iran, Syria and Iraq and an additional 100,000 troops each to stop the insurgencies in Anbar and Baghdad. Any escalation short of this number is foolishness. We needed 500,000 troops the day we went into Iraq and we need that many now at least.

Any commitment short of this troop level is mischief-making and not in the interests of the United States or Iraq. In fact, this vaunted surge is only likely to inflame the insurgency and to play into the hands of Syria and Iran.

This 21,500 troop "surge" is nonsense and W and DIck are cynical in all ways and totally callous in their spilling of blood for no purpose whatsoever other to cover their butts for "history".

Note: Comments are screened, and in some cases edited, before posting. We reserve the right to reject anything we find objectionable.