Link
Does anyone in this Administration know the difference between justifying the war in Iraq versus a plan to win the war? it doesn't appear that President Bush did last night. Or maybe there isn't anyone in this Administration that wants to be held accountable by the American public? Now here's where being a centrist can help in this dialogue.
Democrats, Independents, and Moderate Republicans need to contribute ideas to elements of a plan to win the peace in Iraq. I heard one last night when Senator Joe Biden of Delaware offered up something when he said that we need to ask Nato to embrace the idea of securing the borders of Iraq. Someone needs to if we are going to stop the stream of insurgents, from countries like Saudi Arabia, from entering Iraq to join the jihad.
Now how about my readers offering up some suggestions. I throw the challenge out there to start becoming part of the solution rather than being entwined in the problem. Thanks Senator Biden for your contribution to the dialogue.
13 Comments:
Hey I gotta agree with ya. I think Bush's speech was a slap in the face.
I think you got something good going on here. It's time for the center and the Dems to get mad. Now is the time.
I will be coming back.
Charles -- I think that before you can develop a strategy for Iraq, you have to identify your goals for Iraq.
Whether or not you agree with him, Bush did this much: "Our mission in Iraq is clear. We're hunting down the terrorists. We're helping Iraqis build a free nation that is an ally in the war on terror. We're advancing freedom in the broader Middle East. We are removing a source of violence and instability, and laying the foundation of peace for our children and our grandchildren." I agree he was somewhat short on the strategy for getting there, besides just sticking it out.
As for Senator Biden, its hard to judge his "strategy" without having read his entire statement. However, is it really believable that an organization that includes France and Germany as members is going to send troops to Iraq to secure the borders?
Now, rather than just flog the President for not have a strategy to get us there, why don't you say what you think the mission is in Iraq? Then you can lay out your strategy to get there.
In the meantime, I'll think about what I think the mission is and how I think we can accomplish it.
And keep on posting -- the dialogue is interesting.
Salemi
Salemi 1906, you asked me what my goals are in Iraq. I would never have gone into Iraq in the first place without the UN, as Iraq was not an imminent threat to this country, as was claimed at the time. However, I will answer your question. The goals now must be first, to secure the country from terrorists so that the UN can assist the Iraqi people in the creation of a Constitution and the election of a legitimate government. And secondly, we must ensure the training of an Iraqi security force adequate enough to secure and protect its people.
It seems to me then that securing the borders is key to keeping foreigners out and containing the size number of foreign fighters. Senator Biden’s comments then have relevance. As for the question, “Will Nato help?” I don’t know but that seems to me something that should be put directly to NATO. I know they have offered us help to train Iraqi forces. Our conditions on NATO were that they must do it in Iraq. NATO has offered to train them outside Iraq. Seems to me we could allow the training to take place outside Iraq, don’t you? Also, I think our government needs to learn how to secure Iraq’s borders with its neighbors and get the practice (so we can apply what we learn to our own borders with Mexico and Canada which are very porous. J). Now I have done my part, now how about a contribution of your own?
OK Charles, I accept your inviation.
The United States has a number of important interests in the Arab Middle East. The first and most important interest is access to oil. The economy of the U.S. and of the other industrialized nations, including Europe, Japan and now China, require oil as the primary energy source. (Interestingly, the U.S. is not as dependent on Middle East oil as some of these other countries.) However, if that oil were to stop flowing, it would do tremendous damage to the world economy, possibly plunging us into recession or depression. Therefore, it is in our economic interest to keep this oil from coming under the control of a hostile power. There was a real risk of this in the early ‘90’s, when Saddam Hussein’s Iraq invaded Kuwait and threatened Saudi Arabia. And there is some risk of that today, if the radical Islamists were to comed to power in Saudi Arabia.
Neutralizing the radical Islamists in the Middle East is obviously an interest of the United States, as they have both the will and the power to harm us right here in America.
Another interest of the United States is to slow the acquisition of dangerous weapons by dangerous people. A nuclear weapon in the hands of a Saddam Hussein or, God forbid, a bin Laden, would make the world a much more dangerous place and would directly threaten the security of the United States.
A secure Israel is in the interest of the United States, mainly because it is a friendly democracy in a sea of autocracies.
A prosperous Middle East also in our interest, because wealthy nations are less prone to create migrants in search of work or violent militants.
The U.S. has a number of other geopolitical interests in the Middle East, such as maintaining trade routes and, during the cold war, counterbalancing thrusts from the Soviet Union.
A final interest of the United States in the Middle East is the spread of democracy and human rights. These political and human values are ends in themselves, but they also have practical implications: For the most part, democracies are stable and peaceful, and friendly with other democracies.
For a long time the United States, under both Republican and Democratic administrations, supported friendly regimes in the area. We did so regardless of the nature of these regimes and without interfering on the side of democracy and human rights. The main justifications of this policy were to stop the advance of the Soviet Union and to protect our oil interests. We sought stability for the sake of security. However, as Condi Rice has aptly put it, this policy gave us neither stability nor security. It neither supported human development in the Middle East nor blocked the rise of the radical Islamists, who recognize that pushing the U.S. out of the region is their best chance to ultimately overturn the secular autocrats and create the basis for the next caliphate.
So, in view of these interests, I generally agree with the goals Bush advanced in his speech: To hunt down the radical Islamists, help the Iraqis build a democracy and advance freedom in the region. To these I would a few others – reduce our dependence on oil from this undependable region and promote a resolution to the Israel-Palestine problem, which is a major source of anti-American sentiment. However, goals are not strategies, that will be the subject of another post.
WOW, Thanks for being so plain about your evil goals, oilman. Which oil are you talking bout dud? Correct me if I’m wrong, but I think that is “IRAQIS OIL” and like the US the Iraqis also have national interest, that interest is ABSOLUTELY not pumping out their gold for others to protect their national interest.
And my friend do you really believe that the Iraq war was fought for “American’s Interest”? I doubt that, cause from what we can see the war is rather FOR parasite. So what is a poor parasite to do, when its host appears to be running out of the fiscal nourishment it depends on for its very survival? Most normal parasites would seek out a new host, but this is an impossible task for the Jewish State. There is simply no other country on earth capable of generating sufficient revenue to cope with the greed and corruption in Tel Aviv. So what to do?
The only answer of course was OPERATION SHEKHINAH renamed OPERATION IRAQI FREEDOM and designed to provide the Jewish State with massive income streams from stolen Iraqi oil (via the Mosul to Haifa pipeline). The prime objectives were to decapitate [murder] President Saddam Hussein, decimate the Iraqi military structure, and DESTABILIZE the country completely.
Buddy those people your talking bout, those “terrorists” “Islamists” and all names you call’em, they have the same goal as yours the only difference I can see is that they are fighting for what is theirs. DO NOT try to make YOUR cause noble or more dignified than theirs. AND lets not cheat the American people with all this cheap rhetoric.
Hey the other thing is about the “nuclear weapon at the hands of a Saddam Hussein” oh boy you don really buy that thing? We can see that without their knowledge or consent, American and other “Coalition” troops, and countless Iraqi citizens were sacrificed on the high altar of lice.
Well at the time, most did believe that this was a heroic western effort to rid the world of “Weapons of Mass Destruction”, while a cynical minority nodded wisely, muttering under their breath that America really wanted to steal Iraq’s oil reserves. BUT both claims were completely false.
On the weapons side, UN Chief Inspector Hans Blix had already made it very clear to the Security Council that, in his view, Iraq no longer possessed any long-range Scud missiles, nor any viable chemical or biological weapons. By the time American-British-Australian invasion forces had cluster-bombed their way to the Iraqi capital of Baghdad, this first reality had become became self-evident. Till now we did not see any WMD and all the other craps listed as justification to go to war. Did we?
That leaves American domination and theft of Iraqi oil, right? No, it does not. The American and British oil multinationals already have enough oil and gas reserves for their needs in various countries around the world, without taking on a HOSTILE COUNTRY recognized in oilfield geopolitical terms as a Russian client. Oil is a strategic military asset, and the American oil multinationals knew then, and they still know now, that taking this insane Iraqi road could easily lead to World War III.
Look, I think we are in BIG trouble and I don believe there is much left if people (especially American’s) don’t start thinking real hard and recognize others “National Interest” too. I know there is much left unsaid. Its ok we will discuss things if we can keep our mind and heart open to real discussions.
Peace
Friends, I asked for ideas to help us to get out of Iraq without having things completely falling apart. Saemi 1906, you gave me a list of US Interests in the Middle East. One you left out was that Bush and Cheney are oil men. They have a special interest in Iraq and for pleasing their friends. But I don't want to rehash our interests there. I would like suggestions as I said earlier for us to be able to to secure the country from terrorists so that the UN can assist the Iraqi people in the creation of a Constitution and the election of a legitimate government. And secondly, we must ensure the training of an Iraqi security force adequate enough to secure and protect its people.
We are never going to develop alternatives to Oil as an energy source unless we are forced into it. I have done my part by converting my home to Solar energy. I have 44 solar panels on my roof which provide enough electrical power for my use for a full year and I send excess energy back into the grid for others to use. You see much can be done if people think about the problem and decide to take some ownership for it. What can you Salemi and Lubu suggest to help this country solve these problems?
Yes Charles, I believe that we can do things individually and I really appreciate your dedication to make a real change. Probably I will be joining you in this means. But what about the “Texan Oilman” and his oil trusty Jew buddies? This war was fought in order to secure Israel's future. Israel, being a parasite nation, needed to create an income stream that would continue if funding from the United States should dry up.
So what follows? Why not all of us design a way to get these parasites sucking our blood, the blood of American soldiers that die in Iraq OUT? Why not show them the red card? Oh, I know it’s not this simple. I know they are the most powerful people. But still lets face the truth. Lets use our democracy to drive them, abusers, killers and devils out. At least lets be aware bout the source of this problem and find our own solution for it.
Charles -- I think it is very important to get an overview of the situation in order to guide your action. It is clear that US dependence on foreign oil has a bad influence on our policy in the Middle East. Therefore, the first part of my strategy would be to decrease the use of oil. Among the things I would do are to institute a gasoline tax to encourge the use and development of more fuel efficient cars and public transportaiton. I would incentivize the development and use of other energy sources, in particular clean ones like solar (congrats on that) and wind, but also recognize that we have to consider more nuclear, gas and coal. It won't be easy. With less dependence on oil, our policy in the middle east can be more even handed and less hypocritcal.
Second, I would encourage the development of democracy everywhere in the middle east, as in the long run, this is the best candidate to defeat the radical Islamists. This could be bumpy, though, as friendly autocratic regimes may morph into less friendly popular ones.
Third, in Iraq, I think the stragegy is to keep fighting the foreign insurgents, bring the homegrown insurgents to the bargaining table, and help the Iraqi government become a stable democracy. The details are tactical and I have no real knowledge about how to fight an insurgency. However, we clearly cannot just get out, as some have suggested. But I have to wonder how this insurgency can find support, as they specifically target civilians.
Salemi, it’s your kind that we need to remove from the whole of the universe. I mean people like you think that you can just go to some body’s country and tell them what to do and you tell them that it’s the only way out. You say “YOU WORSHIP OUR VALUES” and “WE WILL BE BUDDIE” wow wow that ain gonna be the case in the entire world. Cause there are many in the world who need THEIR values intact “FOREVER” in THEIR system.
Salemi I have a question for yaa. Your dady Bush said, they are going to “wait us out”? No, really tell me who is waiting out whom? You guys are the invaders. You don belong here at the first place. Are you guys for real? What? You are now waiting for us to live our country, our continent? ARE YOU REALLY WAITING FOR THAT? Well that can NEVER happen, because it is OUR COUNTRY and OUR CONTINENT, the Middle East is. And for your info we are NOT waiting you guys out, we are FIGHTING and we will FIGHT till the last day YOU MOVE YOUR BUTS OUT. SO THE SOONER THE BETTER.
Salemi, Iraqigirl has made some valid points here, as she has been offended by your remarks. I agree with her in part. As a country and as a people we have no "rights" regarding other countries assets and that includes Oil. It is America's arrogance that has gotten us where we are today as a nation. It seems just like rhetoric but it inflames and incites others to despise us all. We Americans are diverse in our thoughts too, but when we have a country that is controlled by politicians that act with one voice and speak for all of the rest of us, and they are arrogant towards the rest of the world, then we all are painted with the same brush and that is how wars start. I am not very proud of the way our President and his Administration have acted on all our behalves going into Iraq. It was an unnecessary war in my opinion and I have shared my views on this in earlier postings and won't continue them here again.
Salemi, you said, "would encourage the development of democracy everywhere in the middle east, as in the long run, this is the best candidate to defeat the radical Islamists." This may be how we got into trouble in the first place. It is up to the people within a country to decide what they are willing to accept from their government and what they are not. In Iran right now, there is a struggle going on within the population right now. The problem is that we the United States think we know what is best for them too. Does that mean, as some suggest, that Iran should be next on our spread democracy movement through war movement? They fit one of our criteria; they have OIL. I don't think we should bother them. When the people there, usually the students, have had enough oppression, they will rise up and overthrow those in power. That is what happened in the Soviet Union and not one shot was fired. I like that process far better.
I have been reading another Bloggers postings from Iran. The woman's blog name is similar to iraqigirl, her blog name is:
iranian-girl.blogspot.com
Her postings have been quite educational for me and I suggest you read them. She hasn't posted since the Iranian election and I miss her writings, but we all need to hear what others are saying about us and about their own country's government. Iraqigirl, thanks for posting too.
I want to apologize for the offense my remarks have caused. They were obviously thoughtless and unsympathetic. I should have shown more consideration for other's point of view, particularly our international friends. This has been quite a lesson.
Salemi, I appreciate your last comment. I think you believe what you said, but were sorry for offending iraqigirl. I truly believe the offense came from the belief you shared, not for the particular language you used to express it. I might be wrong but it would be good if iraigirl comes back and posts another comment.
It is easy for any of us to offend others when we are not aware of the differences in our cultures. It is an honest mistake, but it can be corrected by a willingness to learn from others about what they think about us and our views, rather than from acting like we know what is best for others. Through discourse we learn, if we have an open mind, an open heart, and an open spirit. This is a difficult journey without the above. Thanks again for coming back and continuing the dialogue. So let's think what we can do to bring people together and solve these problems together with some unique ideas.
THANK YOU for understanding what I wanted to pass over. Dear Charles, you are really a very enlightened person. You seem to get the whole point so delicately that I can’t stop to appreciate American’s like you even if I’ve developed some kind of revulsion towards Americans (well its values). Your kind will do so much good for your country.
And I would like to say “Happy Fourth” what ever that means to you. Not that I care or believe in its core issues but I just want to show my respect for those who deserve it and who I believe would return it back when needed.
Salemi, apology accepted. Thank you for not being stubborn. Well I don’t have much to say because everything is said. Charles has put it sooo….. Clearly “The problem is that we the United States think we know what is best for them” Yes this is totally what I wanted to say.
You guys should fight this arrogance your government is showing all over the world because this very thing would be the foundation for your destruction. It is innate behavior of any nation to fight back when there is so much disgracing intrusion by an outsider. I can guess how long it would take for every one of American’s to realize this because they believe (or made to believe) that they can do any thing because they are the super powers. Any ways there is never better way to listen to others comment and try to understand their points of view.
Peace
Post a Comment
<< Home