Why is it that 10 yr stay in Iraq is always trotted out as some kind of 'requirement' ?

[EVDebs]

Document reveals Nixon plan to seize Arab oil fields
'70s embargo sparked 'last resort' measure, says British memo

Lizette Alvarez, New York Times

Friday, January 2, 2004

http://sfgate.com/cgi-bin/article.cgi?file=/c/a/2004/01/02/MNG8G427D61.DTL


This story was posted in print on a holiday time when no one would seemingly notice; also, foreign press broke the story, not US press.

The document also had this to say about how long would be required,

"The British warned in their assessment that any occupation of Saudi Arabia, Kuwait and Abu Dhabi might have to last as long as 10 years. The use of force would also anger and alienate Arab countries and irritate the Soviet Union, although a military confrontation with the country would be unlikely, the document stipulated."

No rationale as to 'why' 10 years was a possibility. Sen McCain is basing his entire campaign on this. Why ? Would someone PLEASE tell us so we can CHANGE COURSE NOW ?