U give us the solution for Shias and Sunnis to live together in peace and u can do what u want. Remeber this clampdown is temporary and has worked becoz one side (Sadrs militia) has voluntarily backed down. If  solve the Shia Sunni conflict u also get a $billion in ur swiss bank account, but if u don't.......u get a bill; fair??

What if it's in our strategic interest to have the sunnis and shias decimate one another?

 

There, I said it.

 

I have a question for those who would quit the war in Iraq. What would it take to get your support?

How about AQ declaring it the centerpiece in their war on terror?
How about it being the strategic linchpin to US strategy in the GWOT?

Not against AQ? Not for the US?

Would it be easier if there were many less casualties that WWII, Korea, Vietnam?

Or does it have to be painless, easy to summarize in a 30 second news bite, and over before you feel any real effects from it?

Or does it have to have all the 'right people', the old 'communist internationale', the 'fashionable intelligencia' telling you it's ok?

Just wondering.

 

Simple Answer:

 

Get the Iraqi people to support democracy and stop killing one another, and I'm back on board.

I have a question for those who would quit the war in Iraq. What would it take to get your support?

How about AQ declaring it the centerpiece in their war on terror?
How about it being the strategic linchpin to US strategy in the GWOT?

Not against AQ? Not for the US?

Would it be easier if there were many less casualties that WWII, Korea, Vietnam?

Or does it have to be painless, easy to summarize in a 30 second news bite, and over before you feel any real effects from it?

Or does it have to have all the 'right people', the old 'communist internationale', the 'fashionable intelligencia' telling you it's ok?

Just wondering.

If thats the case, then we should leave so they can do it faster, playing referee for 2 sides you would rather see kill each other off doesnt make much sense.  As far as AQ, just because they declare victory if we cant control sunni vs shiite violence doesnt mean it is one.  Arent these the same loons who declared hurricane katrina as a victory for AQ?  we would probably have just as much or more success against AQ if we spent a fraction of the money that went into the invasion and occupation on a massive buildup of our intelligence agencies.

JUST A THOUGHT BUT....

What if we used the military to protect iraq's oil fields, wells, refineries, pipelines, the port, and the tankers and let the iraqis work out their own problems, with our military presence used to prevent iran from making military moves in iraq...give the iraqi government their cut of profits minus a "freedom fee" and whatever governing body survives is irrelevent because we still have the old/new government by the balls for the forseeable future.

The Iraqis snitched on one another for decades to the point Saddam had an iron grip on the country. Now they clam up and remain silent, allow terrorists and insurgents to live among them while carrying out attacks against our troops.

 

I would like to see some geniune positive cooperation from the Iraqis. If they truly wanted to help us and and started blabbering where all these dudes were it would be a good start to eradicating the insurgency.

1) You seem to have missed the big WMD that was Saddam Hussein.  But I forgot, he didn't kill too many Americans, so what he did to his own people was okay.

 

2) Took us awhile to achieve a liberal democracy.  I think asking a country where democracy has never existed to become Dubuque, Iowa in four years is a pretty tall order for any country.

 

3) Well, they're talking oil revenue sharing now, so it seems that part of your agenda is on the table.

 

See, here's the problem.  You want complete, incontrovertible proof.  In other words, 500 gallons of sarin mounted on an atomic bomb inscribed "To GW With Love, Saddam" would not be enough--after all, someone might have forged the message.  Me, on the other hand, I'm quite satisfied with seeing Saddam swing. That's enough WMD prevention for me.

 

 

A few other things people forget:
1) Only a minority in Iraq want to keep the violence going. Millions in Iraq want exactly what America wants - peace and democracy.

 

2) Prior to the war, if Saddam's oil payouts to EU, Russia and Chinese officials had worked - and it might have worked well if he had been alloted just a bit more time - then sanctions would have been removed Iraq/Saddam.  Once this happened he would have been under no restrictions and would have started up his WMD programs again. Heck - he had billions of dollars of industrialization and weaponization contracts already lined up with these countries in anticipation of just such an opportunity. Its another reason these countries were so angered by Bush.  I've always felt that this helped  push Bush's decision to attack Iraq when he did. In other words I blame the EU, Russia and Chinese for Bush's attack (its a stretch I know...)

 

3) If Saddam had restarted his WMD - you'd possibly have had both a nuclear Iraq and a nuclear Iran to deal with later.

 

 

A few other things people forget:
1) Only a minority in Iraq want to keep the violence going. Millions in Iraq want exactly what America wants - peace and democracy.

 

Where the proof in this is: What you think waving purple fingers in the air and voting for your religious sect means Iraqis want democracy?

 

2) Prior to the war, if Saddam's oil payouts to EU, Russia and Chinese officials had worked - and it might have worked well if he had been alloted just a bit more time - then sanctions would have been removed Iraq/Saddam.  Once this happened he would have been under no restrictions and would have started up his WMD programs again. Heck - he had billions of dollars of industrialization and weaponization contracts already lined up with these countries in anticipation of just such an opportunity. Its another reason these countries were so angered by Bush.  I've always felt that this helped  push Bush's decision to attack Iraq when he did. In other words I blame the EU, Russia and Chinese for Bush's attack (its a stretch I know...)

 

Except he was lining his own pockets, never told anyone else in his government that he had the explicit intention of re-starting WMD programs, nor made any effort toward a re-start. 

 

3) If Saddam had restarted his WMD - you'd possibly have had both a nuclear Iraq and a nuclear Iran to deal with later.

 

Well the thing is if you had a nuclear Iraq…it could deal with a nuclear Iran, since Saddam’s nuclear and chemical programs were always meant to balance Iranian hegemony. And since Saddam is gone now, and the US can’t really do anything about Iran’s nuclear program…Iran is poised to become the hegemon in the Persian Gulf.   

 

Yeah Saddam was a bad guy; killed some Kurds and Shiites, but in the scheme of power politics sometimes you want and need guys like that around to do the dirty work.  This incessant moralization of American foreign policy, while nice for the chattering classes, is counter-productive and doesn’t deal in reality.

sorry for stealing the thread, but.....

 

I wonder if things would be better off if we had the same program going that we had during the cold war...oust tinpot dictators who cozied up to the "wrong" element (commies) and replace them with tinpot strongmen who, despite having an iron grip on their own populations, would do what we told them to.  Hey, it worked then (most didnt "pull a castro" on us like saddam did), it was faster and cheaper, and we did win the cold war afterall.

So we were supposed to leave a nutcase in power to stop another nutcase in power?

 

Yeah, that worked real well with Hitler and Stalin, didn't it? Let's give them both nukes and watch what happens.  Carl Sagan once compared the Cold War to two men holding matches standing hip-deep in gasoline.  The difference was that neither man wanted to drop the match, not a case where either Saddam or the mullahs can't wait to drop first.  Assuming they simply don't nuke Israel for grins first, or maybe Riyadh, since neither has any love for the Saudis.  Doesn't matter--they aren't Europeans or Americans, so who gives a damn?

 

But hey, Plutarch, you already made your feelings clear months ago about how much you actually value democracy.