« Heterodox Friday: Panamanian price controls | Main | The f--king dress »

February 27, 2015

Comments

Feed You can follow this conversation by subscribing to the comment feed for this post.

This is medium silly/crazy on its face, but it's the kind of sophistry that makes Rubio seem "serious" in comparison to his notional rivals.

Let's break it down, using your scorecard. While Pakistan and Bangladesh have participated in peace keeping, their battle records in Somalia are not persuasive towards the premise that their governments would be especially likely to loan them out for grueling urban warfare against a long-running insurgency in two failed states. Even a relatively limited operation, like retaking Mosul, would be out of the reach of most of those militaries.

Pulling back America's Sunni Arab partners, Jordan and KSA have negligible armies and strong intelligence services, while Egypt's army is a bit busy.

In addition to which, this sort of intervention is likely to enhance the spoilers in the various civil wars in Iraq and Syria. And we have a fairly local case study of the mixed results of sucking your neighbors into a civil war: Lebanon. So, asking someone else to fix a civil war that hasn't burned out yet is all downside noise and garbage.

This may not be the silliest thing Rubio has said, but it's a no risk way to claim you're butcher than Barack that has no special basis in fact or logic.

It's also marginally interesting as Rubio tends to be more incompetently hawkish than Romney, but in this case, he's claiming that the American hegemon can't or won't do.

The comments to this entry are closed.

Categories