What suggestions do you have for how we should handle Iraq?
Panel May Have Few Good Options to Offer
After meeting with President Bush [Monday], a panel of prestigious Americans will begin deliberations to chart a new course on Iraq, with the goal of stabilizing the country with a different U.S. strategy and possibly the withdrawal of troops.
Tuesday’s dramatic election results, widely seen as a repudiation of the Bush Iraq policy, has thrust the 10-member, bipartisan Iraq Study Group into the kind of special role played by the Sept. 11 commission. This panel, led by former secretary of state James A. Baker III and former Indiana congressman Lee H. Hamilton (D), might play a decisive role in reshaping the U.S. position in Iraq, according to lawmakers and administration officials.
Those familiar with the panel’s work predict that the ultimate recommendations will not appear novel and that there are few, if any, good options left facing the country. Many of the ideas reportedly being considered — more aggressive regional diplomacy with Syria and Iran, greater emphasis on training Iraqi troops, or focusing on a new political deal between warring Shiites and Sunni — have either been tried or have limited chances of success, in the view of many experts on Iraq. Baker is also exploring whether a broader U.S. initiative in tackling the Arab-Israeli conflict is needed to help stabilize the region.
iJames,
Who says I’m a Liberal? You’re plan just sucks. Too many contingencies that almost all depend on using force to implement. And creating a nation for the Kurds? You will find that other global interests have power to foment changes too.
My plan at least allows the Iraqi’s to fight it out and then gives the American’s an opportunity to go in a get what they want through a proxy. Very American indeed!
#30 iJames, you continue to make great (constructive) points!
#31 Trying to be witty and clever. Achieving neither.
18: Sounds like you’re in need of a hug. Don’t like what I post? Don’t read it. Don’t place yourself in a position to be mocked and then stamp your foot when it happens, though.
As far as my being able to read is concerned, I think it’s great that you’re in favor of an ordered withdrawal; if you’re just coming on board, though, I’d point out that we’ve been out of gold stars for a few months.
Otherwise, gee, you open with a cheap-shot and then wonder why somebody doesn’t want to retype what they’ve said for months and contribute to a constructive debate of the subject. Maybe it’s because you’ll be trying to blame us for the outcome in two years, respective?
I had to smile when CNN mentioned that this meeting was to examine “fact-based evidence”, but outside of that, it’s already been mentioned that this is a pretty academic discussion, regardless. All I see coming out of it is some idea of what kind of scenario we’ll be asked to support, but as far as influence is concerned, it’s nice to think we’re less likely to be presented an option we’d have to oppose.
The all-in scenario would have been great a few months back, but we’d have needed to staff it and be up-front about how much more it was going to cost to pull it off. The problem is as it was, we’re simply not winning as many popularity contests as we were a while back. I know Syria’s probably disappointed that it won’t beat out that conniving bitch, Iran, for being the next “it” Muslim nation on the short list for regime change, but I’m not exactly crazy about getting there and missing the really good parts of the genocide because we had to dick around with a more diplomatic option.
As far as new ideas go, it really pissed me off to find out that Tony Blair’s already on top of the one that had occurred to me earlier. Apparently, he’s looking into the possibility of obtaining assistance from Iran and Syria.
Much as I’m thrilled about having the rest of the muslim countries making fun of the wussie diplomats, it might not actually be a bad idea to have them sending in troops and arms to cover our exit instead of sneaking them in to shoot at us. I’d as soon be dealing with them openly and demonstrating a little good will than having them think we don’t do anything but sit around all day wishing we could bomb them.
Ain’t gonna happen, but it doesn’t bother me too much. I didn’t think going IN to Iraq was a great idea, but apparently you have to know how to get OUT these days to hang out with the cool kids.
Of course, if you have one, I’m sure Ken Mehlman is gonna be pretty pissed off you didn’t share it before he resigned.
Why do the neo-cons think its up to the Iraqis to fix this issue?
Show me the desperate plea they wrote to Bush to send in the troops.
The Republican lead government of the United States Of America unilaterally invaded a sovereign secular nation under amazingly false pretenses (something that some of us knew and got called traitors for saying at the time), slaughtered thousands, destroyed an entire infrastructure, set up a mock election, and now the neo-cons are acting all surprised when the battered and bruised people of Iraq seem too shell-shocked to step up to the plate, and they just can’t imagine where this insurgency came from.
I know the Republicans won’t fix this mess. They can’t. They’ve failed at everything else from education to health care and they suck at foreign policy. They are good at isolationism and helping CEOs avoid paying taxes.
I hope the Democrats don’t just bail. Sure, Bush made this mess, but we are all Americans and Americans must take responsibility and fix Iraq. I can’t turn my back on Iraq just because I knew this was a bad idea and didn’t support it. We are there and we’ve allowed the shit to hit the fan. We’re in. We have to stay until there is a stable government there, which can defend and police itself, and which, above all, is not just a mouthpeice for Islamic radicals.
No matter what Fox viewers think, the reality is that the average Muslim wants to live in a peacuful nation, have a good job, and raise a family. We have no right to wreck their nation then bail.
And at great risk of sounding crude, the first of you right wing SOBs who says I’m a traitor, I hate freedom, I blame America first, or I support terrorism are welcome to drop to your knees and suck on my delicious salty balls. You had your shot and you broke my country. Hands off from now on.
basicallty, we need to return to a pre-ww2 isolationist country
stop messing around in places we’re not wanted/needed
pay attention to the problems in this country
have an elected administration who know wtf they’re talking about
stop assuming our way is better
that would stop about 95% of issues from occuring
16 out of 18 provinces are relatively peaceful, with Iraqi security forces. How about letting them take Baghdad too, and double down on the other areas?
If we are really earnest and honest about helping Iraq, the troops and government officials sent there should learn the local language and culture etc. We should not equate US materialism with democracy. Simply going in with hamburgers and MTV does not make Iraq into a democracy … much less if we go in with guns rattling.
If the troops and government officials sent there speak their language and appreciate their culture, I think democracy would have a better chance of taking root. If we go in acting like some 21st century English speaking colonial masters, that’s how Iraqis are going to see us as.
Oh and, if we don’t go in and gun for the oil, I think we’ll at least get some respect despite our self-righteousness. As it is, we do not even qualify as self-righteous, we are hypocrites at best, looters if not.
28 As for those of you kvetching about the Turks; you need to understand that the dynamics of the situation are not of the 1980s anymore.
True. And we’ve had such cordial relations with them since our invasion of Iraq.
http://www.csmonitor.com/2003/0715/p11s01-woeu.html
28 Their concerns are of secondary importance now, and probably never should have been given as much weight as they have been…
And if they feel the same way about our concerns?.
28 Regional stability now requires that ALL the ethnic and religious divisions that are now in open war with one another in the area be cooled off. And the only thing capable of doing that is giving each group their own space in which they can feel relatively safe and in control of.
so we overthrow Saddam, give them limited choice in what government to form, then tell them to junk that idea and just split-up into….? What?
24One, the lease plan is interesting, but it would have to be approved by the federal Iraqi government which could be accomplished as the major political parties do not want large FOBs inside major cities.
That makes more sense than negotiating the lease with two different governments.
24Also, sovereign doesn’t need to be in quotations as the nation-state of Iraq is a sovereign country.
Except we are discussing how to partition it, as if it is one of our possessions…
24Secondly, Turkey has invested over 2 billion dollars into Kurdistan so whether or not you believe their relations is in good
oops, we got cutoff…
24Secondly, Turkey has invested over 2 billion dollars into Kurdistan so whether or not you believe their relations is in good standing it is.
I can see them investing 2-million in the region, but I doubt they call it “Kurdistan”…
http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/europe/5391880.stm
As violent attacks by the PKK have escalated in recent weeks, Turkey has been talking tougher than ever, even threatening military intervention in northern Iraq where the group has its bases, our correspondent says.
#38 – Snappy said, “We should not equate US materialism with democracy.”
Now THAT is the single truest sentence I’ve read all day.
It’s not what Bush or any of the voices out there from the Dem’s are talking about. But as I said in this blog months ago, almost is what James is putting forth now. His plan is more detailed than mine, but most of it isn’t beyond the reality of the the situation.
Iraq was a creation of Britain and the French after WWI, it’s an artificial country. They took an area with a huge Shite majority and then put a Sunni monarchy in charge of it. The Shite’s have been oppressed since. The Kurds were prone to uprisings, so Saddam made holy war on them, thus the gassing and ariral bombings for years.
The Kurds have a viable regional goverment(a democracy even) going, an established economic system and a real militia(army). They have been trying hard to keep everyone together, to no avail. The Shites and the Sunni just keep going for the jugular.
If we pulled to regional bases similar to what james said, and left it up to the Iraqi goverment to bring some sort of calm to the cities, with a time table(given only to them, not the press) and tell them they have 12 months or 24 months to get their act together, before we withdraw completely. This is what I have seen suggested by several top Republicans and several top Democrats, and I’ll bet it comes to pass in the next few months.
In the meantime, talking to Iran and Saudi Arabia and Syria, and getting a feel of what they think will, I’m betting, result in a defacto partition. The Iranians would wrap a defensive shield around the Shite south. The Kurds will be able to protect themselves(but will be glad to have 10 to 20 thousand American troops sttioned in a regional base) and the Sunni’s would get western and central Iraq. Since there is little oil there, the Saudi’s(also Sunni) would wrap a defensive blanket around them and an economic one.
We could even try for a small share of the oil in the Kurdish regions and the Shite south, to be shared with the Sunni’s, thus helping them to have a basis for a viable economy.
If we set up 3 regional bases, 1 in the Kurdish region, 1 in the western Sunni region, 1 just inside Kuwait, we could be close enough to be available to stop any really outragous acts by any of the 3 areas. This could be done under a Federal type goverment(very loosely formed ).
It could be built a little on the E.U. model. Independent states, but under a federal cover. Baghdad could be the capital of the Federation of Iraqi States.
But then, what the hell do I know, I’m just an anti-war Conservative. 🙂
#27, Odessy67 and #35 OFTLO have the best posts to date. Honorable mentions to Max B and Mike V. iJames, your plan is just unworkable on so many levels, but I give you credit for a well presented plan.
Face it. American policy screwed up the whole country simply by going in with too few troops and not securing the areas captured. By dismantling the entire Iraqi military and police forces. By firing the entire bureaucracy. By not having a plan to rebuild the country that reflected the local forces (building huge power stations to serve large areas, complete with transmission lines instead of local generators belonging to each town) By continuing to act as the God ordained, can do no wrong, storm troopers continuing to shoot locals. Hiring foreign workers instead of locals in a country of 50%+ unemployment. Giving immunity to private contract “guards”.
Now the right wing nuts are cheering for iJames’ plan because it continues the unworkable philosophy America has contributed so far? Get effen real people !!!
We can pull out immediately. And let a partial civil war go full blown and possible drag in some neighboring countries.
We can do a phased withdrawal. And let a partial civil war go full blown a little slower and possibly drag in some neighboring countries.
We can stay and continue the current policy. And get caught in the civil war as it goes full blown and remain everyone’s favorite target.
We can divide the country into sections and get in the crossfire as each faction fights for control while remaining the favorite target.
OR
We can invite neighboring countries including Iran, Saudi Arabia, Syria, Jordan, UAE, Turkey and yes, even Palestinians along with Hamas and Hezbolla to settle the civil war and help stabilize the region. Of course that would mean a radical change in American foreign policy by actually using diplomacy and recognizing that the current Administration’s idea of a perfect world is not widely held. It would mean rebuilding trust and the dialog Clinton left in 2001.
Of course there is no guarantee that it would work. But the first four options are almost certain outcomes.
Plan, my ass. We should have never went there, we don’t belong there. MY PLAN: Establish a bullet proof perimeter around a few of the biggest airports in Irag. Load the wagons! Tanks, bulldozers, humvees, whatever, load it all on every C-17, C-141, 747 or Cessna 172 we can lay our hands on. Kind of like a dry Dunkirk. Leave nothing behind. Move the people out, and the last American unit can turn Saddam out, naked in the streets. That ought to be a challenge worthy of an absolute dictator.
Let these people seek their own destiny.
And speaking of destinies; now is the time we should pay attention to ours. First thing: Deal with this oil problem. Second: The health and well being of our own people. With all the money spent on the war we could have provided free health care to all the men, women and children in this country, illegal or not, with enough money left over to buy lollipops for the kids.
43 We can invite neighboring countries including Iran, Saudi Arabia, Syria, Jordan, UAE, Turkey and yes, even Palestinians along with Hamas and Hezbolla to settle the civil war and help stabilize the region.
Agreed.
They are influencing it now. They will have to live with whatever evolves out of this mess. They should be involved.
Ironic that we were supposedly making Iraq a beacon of democracy for that area of the world, and now we need their help in knifing the baby…
I also like being told I don’t need to put sovereign in quotes, with regard to the elected government in Iraq, when so many players are being suggested for deciding Iraq’s future… 😉
Reminds me of the recent order to remove roadblocks around Sadr City.
http://tinyurl.com/ycyy5k
Neither side has shed much light on whether Tuesday’s turn of events was a case of al-Maliki forcing U.S. officials’ hand, or a joint and orchestrated effort to boost al-Maliki’s political stature with his Shiite partners, and thus help his efforts to curb militias.
I thought it was amusing when I read people complaining that the Prime Minister was exceeding his authority… over foreign troops on Iraqi soil… in the Capital city…
What Prime Minister of what country doesn’t have a say over what foreign troops do in his own Capital?
Doesn’t Tony Blair have a say in what US troops might do in London?
I am Syrian and English is not my first language.
I have read most of the above comments and I say most because some make me laugh too much.
After I have said that I ask, Do you wish another country to make your foreign policy for you? Your own country had internal strife about 150 years past and was there uninvited foreign intervention?
I am here in the mist of all this turmoil that has been ongoing for at least 1000 years and now outside persons propose 5 year plans to end the problems.
If you choose to comment . please be civil for I am a very old grandmother and I am so tired of hurting.
oldsity:
I’m afraid you may never read this, but I only just returned to this thread and unfortunately too much time may have passed to expect you to still be reading it.
I was one of the ones who advocated partition of Iraq, and perhaps I did so in a way that portrayed me in the way that made you laugh. If that’s so, let me tell you I’m actually in total agreement with your valid point – that we in the US have been behaving in the Middle East for far too long as if the people who live there don’t matter. I can’t speak for everybody, but I think more and more of us in the US are finally getting that through our thick heads, if our recent election is any indication. And while I wouldn’t expect any miracles, I do think our policies (after 2008 at least) will start to reflect that.
As for now, I think what you see written on this comment section comes from a genuine desire by the people here to actually solve this problem, more than to rule the lives of others without their consent. As someone said above, we are at fault for this horror in Iraq. We all know it. But it’s not yet beyond America’s capacity to at least want to try to fix what we have broken, regardless of whether we ultimately succeed.
Along those lines, I get the impression you don’t think much of the partition strategy, if only because it smacks of more US meddling. I will tell you that my reason for advocating partition (so long as the Iraqis vote on it and approve, as I mentioned before) is presicely because I think it’s what most Iraqis – Kurds, Sunnis, Shiites – want now, not because it’s what is good for America. I honestly don’t know if a ‘good’ outcome for us is even possible anymore – we have made too many enemies, and they will be around for a long time. Nevertheless, “Iraq” itself was itself a political creation imposed by outsiders – the British. And even though most Iraqis came to ‘own’ the reality of their country, and would have been happy to live in it forever had we – the US – not destroyed it, for the life of me I can’t figure out how to get that back for them. That sense of unity seems lost to them. And without that desire by the majority, it seems to me that letting each of the major groups in Iraq carve out a new destiny, based on whatever their own unique desires are, is more responsible than trying to force them back together.
Anyway, while our country has done some very stupid things these last few years (and some other stupid things in your part of the world going back much further than that), please accept that not all of us are blind, or imperious, or evil. Some of us have better natures than that. And the vast majority – no matter what their natures – would like nothing more than to get this right, get it done quickly so to stop the suffering soon, and then never be so wrong again.
I’m only one man, and what I say will probably never reach your eyes, any more than it will the eyes of anyone in my government … but no matter. You still have my deepest apologies grandmother.