Jimmy wrote on Mar 21, 2006 1:38 AM:From the start of this war and from simple available knowledge of the history, culture and clanmanship of Iraq and the Islamic middle East in general, the Bush Doctrine of Unified Democratic Iraq is fool hardy and a danger to human life and the world because it's an unworkable pipe dream. Historically when other nations have invaded the land area we call Iraq over the centuries and tried to unify it the only way it was done was by dictorial-oppressive means. But what has worked in the absence of outside incursions and force there is the recognition of the strong clans, gatherings of likes in religion and culture and regional governments. If we had of divided Iraq into 4 countries that were autonomous self ruling states with only a central unified commerce-production authority in a central city-state that would equitably distribute proceeds from Iraqs natural resources and act as a buffer and arbriter, thousands of lives could of been saved. These would be: A free and independant: Kurdistan to the north, Shite Iraq to the east and south, Sunni Iraq to the west and an Central Trade City-Country of Baghdad. The divisions of these folks go deep in history, culture and religion and simply put aside from commerce and trade most of these folks have deep set anomosities and even generations long vendettas. To try and unify these clearly seperate countries would take centuries, not months. Americans have a mental different concept of Government than most of the middle east, the closest we can come to understanding this clan type system is an insitutionalized Mafia. WE could at this point help set up these countires and quell the systemic violence to a great degree by empowering the clans to get the job done. Remember in their culture it's an eye for an eye, death for a death in an never ending downward spiral. If we decrease our power and forces in Iraq there is a great probility that the government we are trying to create will dissolve and Iraq will slip into civil war unless we respect their cultural dynamics. If we want a unified democratic Iraq, we might as well make it a State of our USA because it will take decades at best to make it work and the cost in dollars and lives, well.....but that is our choice as we have become nothing more right now than an neo-imperial power whose leaders are afraid to admidt they were wrong and now they are covering their keisters with paranoia and a battle cry of insurgency.

Rupert wrote on Mar 21, 2006 9:03 AM:Good question. The only good answer is for us to get at least competent leadership on our side of the ocean.

Dug wrote on Mar 21, 2006 10:11 AM:The Iraq and Mid-East conflicts are basically spiritual. There are no state boundaries, no countries with which to legally, as a nation, delcare war. Even the destruction of human beings will not cause the conflicts to cease. Rather, somehow, the need is to come to grips with the reality, which is a vast spiritual and physical domain.

Jim wrote on Mar 21, 2006 1:58 PM:The best strategy is to continue the present strategy of increasing the abilities and training of the Iraqi Army until they are capable of taking care of their own problems. We can then turn over responsiblilty for their self defense to them. If we do this too early they will not only fail to defend themselves, but we will set up a situation whereby some military strongman, a Saddam lite, will step in and set up a new dictator ship that could possibly be as deadly and bad for the people Iraq as the original was. The future is uncertain, but with patience and perserverance we can begin a process that will have positive long term consequences for Iraq and the Middle East. While a democracy somewhat like ours is unlikely at this time, we can begin the process that will lead to more freedom for the people of this region than they have ever known. It may take generations but we have to start. To do nothing only encourages the Bin Ladens and the Zarqawi's of this world to continue their terrorist ways.

Ben wrote on Mar 21, 2006 3:40 PM:Well, the answer surely isn't to elect the Democrat Party to power. Howard Dean, Nancy Pelosi and the other Defeatist Dems would lead only to more terrorism. We must stay the course, and Iraq will be a success. The Democrats will do everything to stop this success, as they only seek power for themselves, and care not about the our national security.

Observing wrote on Mar 21, 2006 3:45 PM:1-Ask the Iraqi government to ask us to leave. 2-Set a date to depart 3-Depart.

Harry wrote on Mar 21, 2006 6:58 PM:I am not sure the Democrats are up to the task of trying to clean up the mess that Bush and the rest of the fools have made! It is staggering how much damage they have done in such a short time and how arrogant they are at trying to save face by "staying the course". It is absolutely clear that the Republican party is cognitively and morally bankrupt and hasnt a clue or inclination to do anything other than cover their butts; divide up the pork pies amongst themselves and their corporate owners and pray that they don't end up in jail like Duke-stir. The Democrats are the only choice this election. We need a Democratic congress if we are to have any hope of controlling the white house and neutralizing its ongoing blunders.

Kate wrote on Mar 22, 2006 9:31 AM:Jimmy is absolutely correct. As is true with all of his appointments, President Cheney called on neocons and war profiteers to craft the Bush foreign policy rather than historians and political scientists. Iraq is a nation whose boundaries were decided by Great Brittain, with little consideration of the nature of the people in the region. Yes, four separate political, somewhat self-governing states would work better for the people of Iraq, but greed is a universal trait. It would probably take a very strong (perhaps dictatorial) leadership to ensure that revenues from oil, reserves of which are not equally divided by region, would be shared by all. But I do not believe this administration is interested in what is best for the Iraqi people in the long run; we are putting up PERMANENT military bases there (is that 161 countries around the world where we have a constant military presence?) and we don't intend to leave any time soon, no matter what the political landscape looks like. No one is really discouraging the internal violence, because it justifies our presence.

jim doyle wrote on Mar 22, 2006 2:55 PM:We must withdraw now. Our government is being destroyed; Iraqi civil war was inevitable anyway, so let's get out while WE still have a country

fred wrote on Mar 23, 2006 9:11 PM:Kate and Jimmy get an "A" the rest will cry "Peace ,Peace,and there'll be no Peace"

Ricardo wrote on Mar 24, 2006 4:36 AM:Bush says he won't get us out of Iraq, it'll be up to the next President, or the next. That makes things easy. Get Bush out now! Why wait?

David wrote on Mar 24, 2006 9:08 AM:I agree with Jimmy. I think that people need to start understanding that this not a war of attrition or a war of territorial gains. This is a conflict that began with the dismantling of a dangerous regime and the building of a new nation. No we are in a period of nation building that is going to be a time consuming and because of the demographics of the area a dangerous one. Civil unrest and conflict is going to be frequent and deadly. That is the nature of the beast in this region. If Nazi Germany or Japan would have been as tribal as Iraq is then the rebuilding of those nations after WWII would have been much more costly too. Maybe you do not agree with the reasons for the start of the war. Maybe you don’t agree with handling of this stage of the process. That’s fine, that’s your right as a United States citizen. But you might as well get used to the idea that we will be Iraq for a very, very long time just as we have been in Germany and Japan. At this point it really doesn’t matter who is in the White House. We will continue to support the nation building process. Eventually we will establish permanent military installations there. We will continue to spend money and casualties will continue to grow. I sorry that you may not understand that or agree with it, but like it or not it’s the way it is. For us just too simply pull out would be the most irresponsible thing that the United States could do and quite frankly its just not going to happen.

Nation Builder wrote on Mar 25, 2006 5:32 PM:Well, nation building is one of the jobs of an empire. The only freedom we are fighting for is our own -- to keep that oil flowing freely, or at least at less than $10 per gallon. The gift we have given to our children is an endless future of war and one very deep hole of debt. This war will not end because there is no land to be conquered, no DMZ to agree upon. We are fighting a war of ideology with weapons of violence. That will ensure more violence into perpetuity. As long as we insist on being occupiers of lands where we are not wanted, we will forever be fighting unwinnable wars. Let's be honest. Our president made a mistake and we would like to give the Iraqi's their country back and help them rebuild. They will do a better job without us there.

Rob wrote on Mar 25, 2006 5:54 PM:I love hearing all these experts. I wonder if any of you have actually have been over there. I have during the 80's and this culture only understands one thing Strength. We tried it Bill and Hillary's way and now President Bush is cleaning up that mess. If this liberal press had been around in 42, we would have surrendered USN Veteran

Monica wrote on Mar 26, 2006 6:46 AM:This is yet another manufactured crisis by those whose ultimate goal is building financial empires, not democratic governments. The Iraqui people did not ask for our interference. Our arrogance is to insist that all cultures think as part of our cultures think. Our ethnocentrism is appalling. However, we destroyed the country and we are now morally responsible for rebuilding it. We are in such a ethical and fiscal mess in Iraq that the solutions are not clear. The Bush Administration alone is responsible for this situation. Perhaps the Republican Party would like to pick up the tab for restoration.

lrover wrote on Mar 26, 2006 12:04 PM:Lest we forget: Dicktator Cheney/GW violated our most sacred promise to the world by pre-emptive strike. The rest of the world "trusted" us as the world's only nuclear (not, "nuculer" Dummy!!) superpower (even after we were the only nation to use these weapons against an enemy) because for 200+ years we've expressed a policy of respect for other peoples and nations. A promise, if you will, to "fear not" for we are a just and fair people, a nation of laws, with no interest in empire building. That's all history now and Iran, N Korea and the rest of the world feels (and rightly so) they had better be ready to defend themselves if they don't wish to be conquered by the Hell-a-burden empire. But back to the point of the best strategy for decreasing U.S. troops in Iraq and transitioning power to Iraqis: Vote! Reclaim your right as an American to "Self-Govern" by finding the honest patriots in your districts and urging them to serve in Congress (or, how about you?) for a term and replace these dynasties (GOP AND Dems) we've allowed to rape this nations coffers and use its military for greed. Only then can we escape the myopic obsessions this Corporate empire pursues and bring our favorite sons home. The "insurgency" will desolve when we cease being the oppressor and return to the values that made us the envy of the world (remember that?). Why not put the Iraqis to work (their "new deal") with the oil revenues instead of stealing them? Where has our pride and honor gone? Democracy is not freedom. It is responsibility.

Fool on the Hill wrote on Mar 27, 2006 4:33 AM:This manufactured war is an obscenity. The current administration is the architect of the obscenity. I do not support those who have created this mess. Heaven help any country that looks to us for the moral high ground.

Jon wrote on Mar 27, 2006 5:29 AM:The only way to solve the problem in Iraq and get out troops home again is to fix what never should of happened.First, the French and Brittish problem created arround WW1.Turn Iraq back into the three original states it was before ther meddeling in the area.Separate the warring factions and give them back ther original homelands.Democracy? the Iraquis dont know what to do with it.

Secular Bob wrote on Mar 27, 2006 10:27 AM:Maybe we should "stay the course" and maybe we shouldn't. If we do, we may be able to hang on until Iraq turns out to be a secular democracy like ours, where people settle religious differences by insulting each other on blogs, like we do, instead of blowing up each others' places of worship. Tis war is costing our country 50 lives and $10 billion a month. If Iraq is peaceful and democratic and most of our troops are home by 2010, we may conclude that 5,000 American lives and $800 billion was a reasonable price to pay. But if we're spilling our blood and our resources for no tangible result in 2009 or 2010, we're going to wish we had "cut and run" sooner. We need to decide now when that acceptable point is going to be, even though we as Americans are averse to considering such a scenario. So far, the debate seems to have been "should we or shouldn't we pull out in the next six months?" But that's the wrong question, partly because it puts our involvement in moral and political terms, pitting pro-war people against anti-war people. Focusing on an acceptable deadline for cutting our losses will make the debate more analytical, more rational and less emotional. The answer won't be perfect or absolutely clear, but I think we'll all be able to live with it.

The DC wrote on Mar 27, 2006 3:27 PM:When has a war ever been short? Didn't we occupy Germany long after World War II? What about Japan? We're only now getting around to the possibility of closing down the base there. Everyone needs to stop whining about the war and the time scale it's going to take to get it done. If something is worth doing, it's worth doing right, right? Let's not go through another Vietnam. And what I mean by that is, let's not let the enemy win by simply giving up. Other than that, I'd like to see more airstrikes, and less boots on the ground. But I'm not the one who makes those kind of decisions.

Panicked democrat wrote on Mar 27, 2006 3:37 PM:It's all coming to an end! The Bush administration has doomed us all, civil war is destroying Iraq! We're all doomed! Run for your lives, go to Canada or Mexico. Oh my god what are we going to do???? Ahhhh George Bush is so horrible! Cheney is a neocon and all that other BS rhetoric that has been spewed on this pathetic blog. You make it dispicable to be American. I hate thinking when I say I'm American that they might think of people like Jimmy and everyone else that thinks we're at an end all here. Give me a break! Grow a pair would you?!?!? We're the mightiest country in the WORLD and do you remember how we got to where we are?? Have you opened a history book lately? Remember WWI, WWII, Hiroshima, Nagasaki?? You're all a bunch of crybabies and you make me sick.

Robert wrote on Mar 28, 2006 10:12 PM:Why are we so damned concerned with developing a democracy in Iraq to the tune of a trillion dollars, when our own presidential administration acts more like a dictatorship than a democracy? Sure, a big segment of society likes to think that if our president says it's so, it must be so. That's easy. Being narrow minded and a Bush lock-stepper seem to go hand in hand these days. When those in government--including a tremendously growing segment of Republicans--want honest debate and discussion our President either remains quiet, speaks to a crowd he is the Commander in Chief of, or simply attacks those with a differing point of view. It's insecure at worst, and disingenuous at best. By the way, Panicked Democrat, regardless of which party held political control in the past I have never been ashamed of my President and our country until now. He's a buffoon who's over his head, and his list of bad decisions, outright mistakes, and one-sided decision making is so long that most people can't even remember them all...and counting.

Jacob wrote on Apr 5, 2006 9:53 AM:I am only 17, and am currently a junior in highschool. I know people think that I wouldn't know much about politics and the war in iraq, but believe it or not, I do. I am currently in the Reserve, and will go full time after my senior year is finished. I'm so tired of all these people protesting the deaths in Iraq, saying that they shouldn't have died, and it was unneccessary. Yes, it is sad that they have died, and I sympathize with the families, but shouldn't everyone be happy we did move in, and take out Saddam? And on the death thing, there is not a soldier who signs up who thinks that it is impossible to be sent to the front. We know that it could, and if we died in combat, we would not want our families protesting something we believed, fought, and died for. It is the soldier's choice, not the parent's.

Andy wrote on Apr 7, 2006 10:39 AM:What about all the innocent Iraqi's saddam hussien murdered? President Bush is cleaning up Saddam Husien's mess. Is stopping the murder of millions of innocent men, women, and children worth it. I think it is.

Scott wrote on Apr 9, 2006 8:07 AM:I am so glad that WWII did not occur AFTER the war in Viet Nam. My God, if the spineless people who inhabit this country had gotten word that something like 7 or 8 thousand soldiers were killed in the first attack at Normandy, the liberal media would be screaming, "Why don't we leave this Hitler guy alone? Aside from having a really bad haircut and moustache, who is he hurting?" Wake up. As for having an "exit strategy," there never has been and never will be an exit strategy for ANY war other than, "We will leave when we are through, and not before." How can you strategize your movements when they are based upon the movements of others? Maybe we should get Kreskin to head the department of defense. War is something to be avoided, but when it can no longer be avoided, it is essential to survival. As to those surrender monkeys who suggest that we should have let the Oil for Food program go a little longer, the leaders of Russia, Germany, and France saw to it that that plan would never have worked. As far as I am concerned, Jacques Chirac, Vladimir Putin, and Gherhardt Schroeder should be given blindfolds, cigarettes, and a firing squad on the front lawn of the White House. Yet there are those Americans who worry, "Why doesn't the rest of the world like us?" The leaders in the rest of the world never have liked us, except when we were dragging their sorry butts out of the fire, and even then it embarrassed their leadership that they had to turn to us for help. The rest of the world FEARED us, and for that reason and ONLY that reason, they kept their mouths shut for years about how they felt about Americans. Finally, people like John Kerry (who is borderline retarded) and Jack Murtha are cowards. I do not care what they did or did not do (but took credit for) in their military careers. There is a saying in show business that you are only as good as your LAST performance. The last performance of those two guys shows them to be COWARDS.