Girderman

At least every other day the "Big Story" in the Mass-Media is the latest insurgent/terrorist attack in Iraq. Despite what we Americans may "know" on an intellectual level, the visceral message message from "over there" is "We don't want you here, and will continue to kill you until you leave."

Now that the Republicans that have initiated this "war" have been taken down a few notches, it is the Democrats that must (for the first time) shoulder the responsibility of managing the life-and-death issues of the strategic involvement of the US/Coalition Forces, and balancing them against the sentiment of the American People.

It's natural for us Americans to insist on completing the mission. We are winners, not losers. We have already sacrificed and lost so much in pursuit of the mission, and it is shameful to quit when (or if) victory is still achievable.

But it is also natural for us Americans to want to cease providing assistance and making sacrifices for (and on behalf of) a people that (seemingly) do not want us there, and (also seemingly) will not take up our role once we have abandoned it.

There is a critical component that is starkly and conspicuously missing in the American perception of our involvement in the affairs of the Iraqi people, and that is a clear sense of what THEY want.

If they want us to stay, to continue to fight, to die, to spend money and remain politically divided as a people (against ourselves) on this issue, the Iraqi Government needs to make this message CLEAR.

REPEATEDLY CLEAR, with iteration after re-iteration delivered regularly by credible Iraqi Government spokespersons that utilize a full command of the English Language, so there is no ambiguity, no xenophonic, anti-arabic "filter" to distort the message.

The message SHOULD BE that they understand our losses and the natural desire to withdraw. The sense that it could all be for nothing, with (ultimately) no certainty of any "gain" for having initiated the action in the first place.

BUT -
There has been a dream offered here by the American People. And with full awareness of the price the Iraqi people themselves are paying, the American People have (IMO) no real sense that there is anything tangibly possible for either the American People of the Iraqis. And it is the Iraqi Government's responsibility to shoulder this burden, and send a clear message of exactly what they would like us to do, and why.

And personally, I think the American People would respond to this message from the Iraqis in a way that neither the Republican OR Democratic Party could achieve. The arguement to be made is that we started this thing, and they (the Iraqis) believe they would be horribly betrayed by a Nation that is supposed to be Noble, if we were to Abandon them in their Hour of Need.

jeffdrummer

Wow, as always you impress me. I have a lot to learn from you. I can't really rebut that, I agree with the whole thing. Mega (x5) dittos.

95five-0

I think the problem in Iraq can be solved, but the Iraq people need to get involed. The underlining problem is most Iraq's don't trust their current government, so they do not do anything about the insurgents. I think what the government should do is offer profit sharing on the oil (much like Alaska), but only if the Iraq people will help calm the insurgentcy.

jeffdrummer

That is a good idea, but how do we keep the money out of the al Qaeda's hands. Remember oil for food, it was very similar to your idea and it was a total failure.

Chode

At the bottom of much of the debate is the fact that the Bush administration has failed to define the meanings of "victory" and "defeat". The President keeps talking about "winning" as though the term were self explanatory.

Sorry, but in war, just as in games such as soccer, baseball, tennis, and football, victory conditions differ. In fact the ability to define the conditions for "victory" is just as important as strategy and tactics in warfare. Most wars have been fought for clearly defined goals, and I'd say that has been true of all successful wars.

Most wars haven't had "unconditional surrender" as the only condition for "winning". If you are serious about getting in the game, you should have read (as a minimum) some Trevor N. Dupuy, John Keegan, B. H. Liddell Hart, And Sun Tzu.

Girderman

Personally, my opinion is that it isn't really a war. It's an occupation.

The US is uniquely suited to win "wars", and equally flawed in it's ability to occupy conquered people's. We haven't the will, money or lack of morality to do the job properly.

Hussein held Iraq together, and how brilliant was he ? In a protracted war against Iran (no middle-eastern slouch), no less.

Simple truth is, if you are willing to mercilessly brutalize a people into submission, "occupying" is not so difficult.

I wonder to what extent the US was manipulated by Iran, Syria and possibly other Middle Eastern countries into invading Iraq and deposing Hussein (an accomplishment they were incapable of). With full awareness of the US's incapacity to effectively occupy Iraq for a sustained period, and the natural instability of the Iraqi people due to the fact that they are a diverse people held together as a country by brute force, and no shared and noble ideas such as "cultural diversity", "freedom", "individual rights" nor even (despite all the impassioned fanaticism) the Islamic Religion.

They are just as likely to kill each other as they are a foreign invader.

"It is me against my brother, me and my brother against my cousin and my family against the world." or words to that effect; an Islamic saying I recall from years ago.

And Arabs are wise beyond I think what we appreciate. I think it's possible the long-term strategy has always been to use the US to do the dirty work, and divide the spoils of our war's efforts once they have made it too costly to remain in power.

yustr

What the Iraqi Government Needs to Do? It needs to establish that it runs the country. The best - in fact the only - way for it to do that is to kick the occupying forces out. Just say "thank you very much we can handle it from here." If they allow us to stay they will always be considered a lap dog of the Americans - which is something that is not palatable to any proud people.

Will there be a power struggle? Yes. Will it be violent? Yes. But it is their struggle and that is the key. It will be up to them to solve it and they will. Not this year or next but they will within their present history.