On 8/22/06, So Kenfused <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > Herein lies the problem. Going in to Iraq was wrong (I have been on the > record as against it from before we actually invaded). However, we are there > now and must deal with the mess we have created. We cannot just pull and > say hey good luck. We removed Sadam the rest is up to you. We would be > leaving Iraq worse off than it was before we invaded. Sadam was no saint (a > corrupt, murdering, criminal isn't far from accurate), and life may not > have been great in Iraq while he was in power. However, people could go to > the market without fear of a suicide bomber. Children could go to school > and there was an infrastructure in place, lights, water, communications > etc... > > We destroyed their infrastructure, sure with good intent, but it is > destroyed none the less. We have been busting our hump to get it back in > place, however we have not succeeded in getting the infrastructure back in > place and what we have repaired some lunatic suicide bomber blows up. Yet > we cannot blame the suicide bomber or the Iraqi government. We are in charge > of security for Iraq. Hence we are failing.
Very well stated. Correct on all counts imo. mr. bush's you are with us or against mentality isn't very hospitable. > Therefore we are unlikely to get any additional international > support. Without greater international support civil war is likely (maybe > already here). We need other countries to get involved in the rebuilding of > Iraq. We need to move our emphisis away from military operations to more > supportive roles. Hospitable or not, it's true...even if you shouldn't necessarily say it like that. I think there are some countries who publically claim to be with us, but would just as soon see us fail. On the flip side, I think there are countries who will not publically say they are with us, but actually are. Yes the military is still required. However, let's work with other countries > to rebuild Iraq. Support the existing government and provide incentives for > the Iraqi people to join the coalition trying to rebuild rather than the > insurgents trying to destroy. It is a small percentage of people who do not > want jobs, economic prosperity or for their children to be safe. Yes, that is what we should do. I think it's what we are TRYING to do, but as people have pointed out, it's not working. So our goal isn't the problem, the problem is in our methods. We've gotta try something new. Dunno what that is. Religion is secondary to a good life for the vast majority of people. Do > not dictate how I can worship and provide a safe environment with economic > opportunity satisfys most people. Everything is secondary to safety. Gotta feel like i'm not gonna get blown up. Maslow would be proud. Get this Iraqi government to stand up and point out that it is the > insurgents who are the problem. It is the insurgents who are killing our > children, and destroying our economic viability. If you want your children > to be safe and have a future we must work together to stop the > insurgency. Anything short of unity is will result in failure. A shite lead > country will have Sunni insurgents. A Sunni lead country will have Shite > insurgents etc.. Unity, respecting differences, working together, anything > less will fail. What we have now is less, and it is failing. I'm sure the Bush administration agrees 100% with your points....but it's the HOW, not the what, that is vexxing them. While the Iraqi government works together, Sunni, Shite, Kurd, etc.. hand in > hand to get that message out, the rest of the world needs to provide > financial assistance in rebuilding the country and providing > opportunity. If the Iraqi people (government) is unwilling to work together > and publicly lambast the destruction of the insurgents Iraq will deteriorate > into open civil war and we will pull out with our tail between our legs a > demoralized US public and military (VietNam) See Bush's recent comments > about the "straining American Psyche". >From afar, right now, it sure looks as if the Iraqi people are either unable, or unwilling, to work together. I've said it before, mostly in disgust, but I think i'll say it again: I think we overestimated the Iraqi people. Our military role needs to be relagated to the U.N. (could the U.N. really > do any worse than we are?) The U.N. is viewed as more neutral. Take down > the Stars and Stripes and put up that big blue and white flag. This is far > more palitable for those who are against the US occupation of Iraq. Because > as of right now, it looks like a US occupation of Iraq, imperialism. This > will reduce the effectiveness of the insurgency propoganda. It is not a US > operation (we are too polar), it is now a U.N. operation and moving > towards still greater Iraqi self reliance. UN won't do it, is problem number 1. Additionally, they couldn't do it even if they wanted to. We have a force some 150,000 strong under a central command, and even that force is insufficient. No way the UN could assemble and command such a force with any chance of it being affective. Nope, I don't think there is anything that can come to our rescue here....we have to succeed somehow on our own (militarily speaking) additionally the international community needs to hold neighboring and > regional countries accountable. If the Egyptians, Saudis, Pakistanis and > others want peace in the area then they need to get involved. They need to > take a stance and openly support the Iraqi government not just in words but > in deeds. They need to support UN intervention as the next step in Iraqi > freedom. Likewise, they need to secure their borders and stop allowing > support for the insurgence to slip across the border. YES. Secure their borders. They don't have to necessarily openly support the Iraqi government (they may not like the Sunni's or Shiites, or whatever), but they simply have to recognize it's validity. The U.N. needs to secure the borders with Iran and any other sieve like > border coutributing to the insurgency. If France, Thailand, China or anyone > else doesn't want their troops in danger zone of the cities then use those > troops to secure the borders. Again, the UN simply does not succeed as a military force. The countries that share a border have to take responsibility for sealing it. If one won't do it, the other has to. The bottom line is we cannot do it alone. That for the most part is what we > have been doing for the past 4+ years. It is failing by a greater margin > each and every day. This administrations arogance and unwillingness to work > with others must stop if we want to get out of Iraq with any sense of > accomplishment other than having initiated a civil war. I agree, but at this point, it's not a matter of our arrogance or unwillingness to ask for help, it's that others simply have no desire to offer it. ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~| Introducing the Fusion Authority Quarterly Update. 80 pages of hard-hitting, up-to-date ColdFusion information by your peers, delivered to your door four times a year. http://www.fusionauthority.com/quarterly Archive: http://www.houseoffusion.com/groups/CF-Community/message.cfm/messageid:213826 Subscription: http://www.houseoffusion.com/groups/CF-Community/subscribe.cfm Unsubscribe: http://www.houseoffusion.com/cf_lists/unsubscribe.cfm?user=11502.10531.5
