Discuss politics - join our community by registering for free here! HOP - the political discussion forum

Reply to thread

Message

et al,

Yes, that is a thought. But, no covert action in the Middle East/Persian Gulf has ever resulted in a 100 year old stable Regime (or even a 50 year old stable Regime)..

Whether you talk about Iran and the (US supported) Shah --- or Iraq (and the US Ba'ath Party Support). The outcomes tend to break down rather quickly and comeback to haunt us.

The idea that covert action is the most effective means of inducing change is a fallacy "the best choice is...just what we are doing..hard Sanctions...and covert actions..." It is believed by people that don't understand the risk and dangers; even when the plan is successful. While it has worked in a few instances (not many) outside the Middle East/Persian Gulf Region, even those are marginal today.

Sanctions have just as dubious a reputation for effectiveness. Remember the sanctions on Iraq were claimed to have been ineffectual. Sanctions on Cuba, Somalia, where ever. These measures have mixed results.

Neither sanctions or covert action is a strategy in and by themselves. Neither are that dependable.

Most Respectfully,
R

<blockquote data-quote="RoccoR" data-source="post: 179811" data-attributes="member: 2831">et al,&nbsp;Yes, that is a thought. But, no covert action in the Middle East/Persian Gulf has ever resulted in a 100 year old stable Regime (or even a 50 year old stable Regime)..&nbsp;Whether you talk about Iran and the (US supported) Shah --- or Iraq (and the US Ba&#039;ath Party Support).&nbsp; The outcomes tend to break down rather quickly and comeback to haunt us.&nbsp;The idea that covert action is the most effective means of inducing change is a fallacy&nbsp; &quot;the best choice is...just what we are doing..hard Sanctions...and covert actions...&quot;&nbsp;&nbsp; &nbsp; It is believed by people that don&#039;t understand the risk and dangers; even when the plan is successful.&nbsp; While it has worked in a few instances (not many) outside the Middle East/Persian Gulf Region, even those are marginal today.&nbsp;Sanctions have just as dubious a reputation for effectiveness.&nbsp; Remember the sanctions on Iraq were claimed to have been ineffectual.&nbsp; Sanctions on Cuba, Somalia, where ever.&nbsp; These measures have mixed results.&nbsp;Neither sanctions or covert action is a strategy in and by themselves.&nbsp; Neither are that dependable.&nbsp;Most Respectfully,R</blockquote>

[QUOTE="RoccoR, post: 179811, member: 2831"] [B][I]et al,[/I][/B] Yes, that is a thought. But, no covert action in the Middle East/Persian Gulf has ever resulted in a 100 year old stable Regime [I](or even a 50 year old stable Regime).[/I]. Whether you talk about Iran and the [I](US supported)[/I] Shah --- or Iraq[I] (and the US Ba'ath Party Support)[/I]. The outcomes tend to break down rather quickly and comeback to haunt us. [INDENT=1][/INDENT] The idea that covert action is the most effective means of inducing change is a fallacy "[I][SIZE=12px]the best choice is...just what we are doing..hard Sanctions...and covert actions..." [/SIZE][/I] It is believed by people that don't understand the risk and dangers; even when the plan is successful. While it has worked in a few instances [I](not many)[/I] outside the Middle East/Persian Gulf Region, even those are marginal today. Sanctions have just as dubious a reputation for effectiveness. Remember the sanctions on Iraq were claimed to have been ineffectual. Sanctions on Cuba, Somalia, where ever. These measures have mixed results. Neither sanctions or covert action is a strategy in and by themselves. Neither are that dependable. Most Respectfully, R [/QUOTE]

Verification