Stay the Course in Iraq, or Cut and Run?
The whole argument whether to "cut and run" is interesting and complex. For liberals and Democrats it is a big problem. If Democrats regain power, how long do they have to keep trying to fix Bush's mistakes? Do they get blamed if they just can't fix the mistake in Iraq?
One consideration is that perhaps Iraq is unfixable. At times I think that we should just pull out of Iraq right now and just try and provide some humanitarian aid (or war reparations, but not military aid) to whomever takes power after the brutal year or two that would follow. It would be hard on the Iraqi people, but it will be hard not matter what we do and some mistakes just can't be fixed. George Bush has broken the egg of Iraq and all his horses and all his men may not be able to put that egg together again.
I myself have never totally understood the argument of why Iraq can't be allowed to divide itself into two or three separate countries (I know the Oil Companies oppose this because it would increase their costs to negotiate oil deals with more than one country). It seems that three countries, Kurd, Shiite and Sunni Iraq, would at least reduce the fighting to border fighting instead of block-to-block fighting.
Iraq is one tough conundrum brought to us courtesy of Mr. Bush, but I guess I do lean towards "cut and run".
George Bush has screwed the pooch in Iraq and no amount of 'abstinence only' sex-ed will make that dog a virgin again...
Article comments
— go to most recent comments1 - Shark
Shark's Plan for Iraq -- written over a year ago, and as true today as it was then.
Actually, things are worse.
2 - DrPat
Gee, BTP, do you think you could maybe get a few more hot-button words in your post title? How about "self-mutilation" - I hear that's a strong draw for comments.
3 - dee
I thought I was the only who used George bush, iraq and screwed the pooch all in one sentence. I am glad to know there is someone else who holds this opinion.
4 - HW Saxton
I think we should pull out NOW. Fuck the
consequences. It is a bit late to think
about it now,isn't it? We didn't think
about it going in why worry about it
when we are leaving? We sould just give them a kiss on the cheek, send flowers and tell them we'll call sometime soon.
It's as good a plan as any I've heard.
5 - Dave Nalle
Nice emotional outburst. Any interest in providing some data or facts to support the theory that the situation in Iraq is beyond redemption? Every day I hear news which offers more and more hope.
Dave
6 - JR
I myself have never totally understood the argument of why Iraq can't be allowed to divide itself into two or three separate countries (I know the Oil Companies oppose this because it would increase their costs to negotiate oil deals with more than one country).
Actually it's Turkey that strongly opposes an independent Kurdistan. I happen to be a big believer in Balkanization; on the other hand, Turkey is the last Muslim nation we should be opposing.
7 - Bennett
"Every day I hear news which offers more and more hope."
Damn, I just gotta get me some rose colored glasses.
Please post some good news pieces involving Iraq. Seriously Dave. I need to learn something other that what I read in the papers and hear on the radio.
8 - Leoniceno
We're not pulling out of Iraq any time soon. The situation is bad, but we're committed. If we were to pull out we'd leave Iraq a worse terrorist threat than we found it.
There's always insurgency, and it doesn't seem to be letting up. The new government is going forward today, and there was a piece in the NY Times today saying that the Shiites are giving the Sunni proportional representation on the Constitutional Panel.
9 - Leoniceno
Scratch that first today.
10 - Marc
Here you go Bennet, read them and weep.
Number 25
Number 24
Number 23
Thats only the last three out of a total of 25 posts. All very well researched and documented.
And yes I agree, you do need to read something other than the NYT, WaPo, LAT or Boston Globe all of which wouldn't print anything good about Iraq if a gun were held to the editors mothers head.
11 - Dave Nalle
I'll try to do an omnibus summary of some of the best recent news from Iraq this weekend, Bennett.
Dave
12 - Bennett
Thanks Marc. Why would I weep?
13 - Bennett
Ya know, at the risk of sounding even more naive, I have to say that if things were total gloom and doom in Iraq, several million citizens would probably be in the streets protesting on a daily basis.
The links were interesting, not that I have had time to read all of the info, or follow all the links to the original stories. But what I did read was good news about a continued recovery despite a dedicated group of assholes with guns and explosives.
I don't agree with the path taken by GW to take our country to war, but these feelings are totally separate from my feelings about the Iraqi people. I want them to rebuild their country into the paradise that it once was.
All other issues aside, nothing would make me happier than to have history record a dramatic turnabout in the quality of life for these folks, as a result of our invasion.
Perhaps it already is.
14 - Steve S
Has anybody asked Laura yet, if her husband screwed the pooch before or after he whacked off the horse?
15 - gonzo marx
and are you going to balance that , in the spirit of Fairness, with the number of our troops killed this week, the death of yet another Iraqi elected official,and the Iraqi police and recruits killed?
i totally agree that there is some good news coming out of Iraq...but i also agree that there is an escalation of the bad in the last few weeks...both need to be presented together for a more accurate overview
unfortunatly there seems to be a dearth of Media that approach this without some kind of partisan Agenda and are willing to present the ENTIRE picture for better Understanding
just my one sixth billionths of the World's Opinion..
your mileage may vary..
Excelsior!
16 - sydney
I think Americans have to stick it out in Iraq. You can't move in there, kill so many people under the false pretenses of fighting terrorism and then just fuck off, leaving civil war behind you.
Sadamm’s regime must have been a nasty one, but it wasn't one that prevented the average Iraqi of a some relative freedom and some stability. Sadamm killed and tortured many, but he wasn't able to inflict the damage that a civil war or an invasion could do.
One thing is for certain, it’s got to be Iraqi’s who decide what happens next. I hate hearing Americans proposing suggestions like "split up the country". Give me a brake.. it’s not a fuckin board game. What the hell place has an American got in deciding anything to do with Iraq?
17 - Nancy
An interesting scenario looms in the future, however: no one is voluteering for the armed forces anymore, it seems. The youth of the hoi-polloi have glommed on to the fact that signing up entails a straight ticket to spend an unlimited amount of time sight-seeing beautiful downtown Baghdad, among other places. Also, that once in there's no guarantee you're out, even if they DO give you a 'shorter' enlistment time; after all, Bush can always unilaterally tear up that contract just like he did with the troops already in the field, hey? So where is this going? Well, if we're going to be there for awhile, and the troops aren't being replaced, where does that leave us vis-a-vis personnel? Ultimately with a depleted force incapable of doing more than trying to defend itself, if that, before being overrun. A draft? I don't think even the neocons would be able to argue that one; fer shur most of the country would probably rise up and try to shoot down AF 1 next time it flew overhead. NOT that it would give W a second's unease or moral distress to have to betray his promise on that score, since you can't distress what you don't have. But it is an interesting dilemna. Someone up in congress seems to think a president can't take a drafted military force into this kind of situation, but that doesn't sound right to me. Comments, anyone, on what that actual rule is? They certainly sent plenty of people over to Vietnam, and they were mostly draftees.
One more snarky comment/observation and I leave the question to more expert persons than I ref: draft laws: if the military are having such a hard time getting volunteers, then why aren't the Bush twins setting a good example as well as demonstrating belief that their old man did the right thing, by lining up to enlist themselves, hey? Ah - I must be on drugs: no Bush dead or alive has ever put him/herself in the path of actual possible endangerment. That's for the peasants.
18 - Richard
Sure, a dramatic turnaround in the quality of life for these folks would be great, at least for the live ones.
19 - sydney
I disagree with the suggestion that all kids of age must go off to battle because their parents say so.
I mean, if you asked the Bush twins whether they believe in the war in Iraq and wether AMericans like themselves should be fighting it, they'd probably say "no".
EVen if they did say yes, you could follow up by asking if they would enlist and they would probably say "no because I don't believe that my life is worth losing over this war".
Personally, I wouldnt have any problems with them saying that. Why would they believe in this war... there hasn't been any clear reasons laid out to fight it.
In any case, parents shouldn't be in any position to to pressure their childeren into going to fight a war.
20 - Bennett
Gonzo makes a good point (what's new) in that there seems to be a total lack of objectivity in ANY news source. No one is giving the good and the bad together, but that's not surprising. You can only fit so many sound bites into 15 seconds before hitting the commercials.
But the print media has the space to do this, but aren't (they deserve the decline in distribution for failing the public in this regard?). This leaves the blogosphere, and that takes effort. That leave blogcritics.... Hey!
Sydney. Valid stuff!
Nancy, I dunno.
21 - Joe
Would you guys mind spending a little more time thinking before commenting:
"Sadamm killed and tortured many, but he wasn't able to inflict the damage that a civil war or an invasion could do." Consider googling Iraq/Iran war and invasion of Kuwait. Geez...
"no Bush dead or alive has ever put him/herself in the path of actual possible endangerment." May I recommend the book Flyboys by James Bradley, it tells the story of a pilot who is shot down in the Pacific in WWII.
Your ignorance of simple facts tends to negate any point you may actually have.
22 - Eric Olsen
there is relatively good news that is more germane to the big picture and the long haul, and there is almost daily nightmarish violence that is numbing in its regularity - the question is where do you place the priority. I still have no choice but to see the big picture, as painful as the daily events may be
23 - Nancy
I agree w/Sydney: the US is putting its nose in all over the world where it has no business being. The Right argues that We Must Uphold US Interest Abroad - except that argument is lame when it comes to the fact that as often as not we aren't liberating anyone, but rather upholding repressive regimes the citizenry hate. Bush makes it clear daily that he won't tolerate anyone tell the US how to do it's business, including the world court. Yet he expects the world to leap with delight when he tries to tell them how to run their private business? I think the US would be a lot more respected if its leadership spent more time attending to their own internal national problems rather than trying to dictate everyone else's because they can, like the 1000-lb gorilla. That's how bullies operate. The real killer on this one is that Bush spends so much time and blather on "moral" reasons for the US to come into XYZ country and take over, which becomes downright embarrassing, because no one in their right mind believes it has anything whatsoever to do with his self-vaunted sense of ethics (which is nil, IMO) and everything to do with economic control issues.
On the other hand, I can also see arguments for intervening in cases of gross malfeasance on the part of some regime. Battling Hitler was right. Battling the Japanese was right. Battling Kim Il is right. But if these are right, then why aren't isn't Bush as eager to go over and intervene in Darfur? Just as bad as Serbia, after all. Or could it be he has no business interests there?
24 - sydney
>>"Sadamm killed and tortured many, but he wasn't able to inflict the damage that a civil war or an invasion could do." Consider googling Iraq/Iran war and invasion of Kuwait. Geez...<<
Joe, that was some time ago, before Iraq's economy and military were dismantled. All people responsible for determining Iraq’s capabilities pre-invasion, suggested that Iraq was not a threat to American security. The Iraq situation had been far more stable than it is now.
ERIC,
You think there is positive signs for the long haul but really, those signs are set upon extremely shaky ground. IF ever there was a country likely to engage in long lasting civil war, it is Iraq. If ever there was a country that has been turned into a hotbed for terrorist sympathizers, it is IRAQ. We’ve demolished their country, there is going to be a generation of steaming mad Iraqi’s who’ll seek revenge, and they’ll be indoctrinating their children with the same hate.
Also, Iraq could fall back into another dictatorship the minute Americans pull out. The difference being this new dictator is that he won’t be able to secure total control of the country as Sadamm had, and as such there'll be civil war for years to come.
I don't propose any solutions, but I'm just saying a person can't objectively look at the situation and predict anything. The country is as a volatile mix of forces.. anything could happen. The best scenario would be to calm the fighting and then get eh UN involved… however, the world hates America and will be reluctant to help us now since we went in there against their wishes (like a bunch of cowboys)
25 - Big Time Patriot
"Gee, BTP, do you think you could maybe get a few more hot-button words in your post title"
I did the best I could... but torture and gun control just wouldn't fit in the sentence.. Wait, wait, how about this?
"George Bush has screwed the pooch in Iraq and no amount of 'abstinence only' sex-ed or 'Guatanmo Style' abuse will make that dog a virgin again..."
Dang, maybe I should re-edit the title..