Immediately sack Bremmer. Bring in someone new to run things - and here's the key - this person has to be somehow independent of the Bush administration (so I guess they'd have to have bipartisan congressional approval.) Have this person publicly apologize to all the Iraqi people. Admit we fucked up. Admit we were completely wrong, and most likely afoul of international law. Back a UN commission to look into possible coalition war crimes.
After these admissions of guilt, lay out a plan for *immediate* withdrawal of all coalition troops.
Pay huge reparations to the Iraq people.
There is no other way.
But yes, I realize this plan would never be put into action.
How do you feel about one empire stretching from Iraq through Iran, Afghanistan, and Pakistan? That's quite an army. With nukes. Time for the U.S. to take this seriously.
immediate withdrawal?
let's forget about what this would mean for the US - what would it mean for Iraq?
No army capable of defending Iraq's borders, no legitimate government, no internal police force --?
Immediate civil war and anarchy will result. MUCH worse than what we're seeing now. Kurds make a grab for Kirkuk and Mosul. Shia and Sunni battle for Baghdad. Etc. Chaos.
Predictable result? Iraq's neighbors act to "stabilize the region". How'd you like Turkish, Iranian, and Syrian troops in-country in about 2 weeks after we pull out?
do you really think this is a good option? seriously?
Meanwhile, do you think Al-Sadr would really think "bipartisan congressional approval" would make a new viceroy more palatable than Bremer? FWIW, John Burns was saying today on Charlie Rose that most Iraqis seem to respect Bremer, even though they hate the occupation...I'm not too sanguine about Robert Blackwill, the likely replacement (and nominally the guy in charge of this whole mess right now, reporting to Condi).
Well we agree, at least, that things are a mess.
There is chaos in Iraq now, and there will be for the foreseeable future, so I'm not sure that saying my plan will lead to chaos is really a significant point. What plan on the table does not lead to chaos?
But stepping back a little, I think the U.S. is creating a monster, and it is almost - but not quite - too late to stop it. If the U.S. pulls out there will be a vacuum, and the different regional factions will fight it out to fill this vacuum. But if the U.S. does not pull out then it looks like there is a real chance these different factions will unite against the U.S. This is the big danger I think.
For example, the Shi'a and Sunni working together. Or the reports of Sunni groups working with Al Qaeda in the north. Who would have thought this possible? These are long time enemies.
I don't particularly want Iran and Turkey and Syria in Iraq. But I'll take that (with them and the various local militias all fighting each other,) over the muslim world uniting in one giant nuclear equipped global jihad against the U.S. I don't think my fear is close to being realized, but do we really want to push it? And for what? So that we can impose democracy like we are doing in Falluja right now?
Some might want to argue here "well, be patient, it takes time." But how much time? Another 6 months? Another year? We can't keep moving the line.
I love this David Brooks op-ed which to me is representative of the ridiculously flawed thinking coming from our leaders. "Everything is fine", "No problems", "The sky is not falling", blah, blah, blah, and then in the second to last paragraph he slips in this one little reservation: "If people like Sistani are forced to declare war on the U.S., the gates of hell will open up." But despite his strong language, it's a complete afterthought in the article. He spends 99% of the article explaining that things really aren't that bad and we shouldn't be worried. And then, oh yeah, except maybe it could be super duper bad. Except don't worry it's not.
What I'm saying is let's get our heads out of the sand make sure the fucking gates of hell do not open up. That is priority number one. And it is rather urgent at the moment. Pulling U.S. troops out will have the negative short term consequences for Iraq that you outline, but I think those are far better than the worst case scenario if we keep pushing.
|
After these admissions of guilt, lay out a plan for *immediate* withdrawal of all coalition troops.
Pay huge reparations to the Iraq people.
There is no other way.
But yes, I realize this plan would never be put into action.
How do you feel about one empire stretching from Iraq through Iran, Afghanistan, and Pakistan? That's quite an army. With nukes. Time for the U.S. to take this seriously.
- jim 4-09-2004 12:35 am
immediate withdrawal?
let's forget about what this would mean for the US - what would it mean for Iraq?
No army capable of defending Iraq's borders, no legitimate government, no internal police force --? Immediate civil war and anarchy will result. MUCH worse than what we're seeing now. Kurds make a grab for Kirkuk and Mosul. Shia and Sunni battle for Baghdad. Etc. Chaos.
Predictable result? Iraq's neighbors act to "stabilize the region". How'd you like Turkish, Iranian, and Syrian troops in-country in about 2 weeks after we pull out?
do you really think this is a good option? seriously?
Meanwhile, do you think Al-Sadr would really think "bipartisan congressional approval" would make a new viceroy more palatable than Bremer? FWIW, John Burns was saying today on Charlie Rose that most Iraqis seem to respect Bremer, even though they hate the occupation...I'm not too sanguine about Robert Blackwill, the likely replacement (and nominally the guy in charge of this whole mess right now, reporting to Condi).
- big jimmy 4-09-2004 8:46 am [add a comment]
Well we agree, at least, that things are a mess.
There is chaos in Iraq now, and there will be for the foreseeable future, so I'm not sure that saying my plan will lead to chaos is really a significant point. What plan on the table does not lead to chaos?
But stepping back a little, I think the U.S. is creating a monster, and it is almost - but not quite - too late to stop it. If the U.S. pulls out there will be a vacuum, and the different regional factions will fight it out to fill this vacuum. But if the U.S. does not pull out then it looks like there is a real chance these different factions will unite against the U.S. This is the big danger I think.
For example, the Shi'a and Sunni working together. Or the reports of Sunni groups working with Al Qaeda in the north. Who would have thought this possible? These are long time enemies.
I don't particularly want Iran and Turkey and Syria in Iraq. But I'll take that (with them and the various local militias all fighting each other,) over the muslim world uniting in one giant nuclear equipped global jihad against the U.S. I don't think my fear is close to being realized, but do we really want to push it? And for what? So that we can impose democracy like we are doing in Falluja right now?
Some might want to argue here "well, be patient, it takes time." But how much time? Another 6 months? Another year? We can't keep moving the line.
I love this David Brooks op-ed which to me is representative of the ridiculously flawed thinking coming from our leaders. "Everything is fine", "No problems", "The sky is not falling", blah, blah, blah, and then in the second to last paragraph he slips in this one little reservation: "If people like Sistani are forced to declare war on the U.S., the gates of hell will open up." But despite his strong language, it's a complete afterthought in the article. He spends 99% of the article explaining that things really aren't that bad and we shouldn't be worried. And then, oh yeah, except maybe it could be super duper bad. Except don't worry it's not.
What I'm saying is let's get our heads out of the sand make sure the fucking gates of hell do not open up. That is priority number one. And it is rather urgent at the moment. Pulling U.S. troops out will have the negative short term consequences for Iraq that you outline, but I think those are far better than the worst case scenario if we keep pushing.
- jim 4-10-2004 8:26 pm [add a comment]