Op-ed column: Unbreaking eggs By David Schlosser, candidate for U.S. Congress
Week of 20th September 2006 http://www.schlosserforcongress.com/media-press/op-ed/060920_Unbreaking_eggs .php Americans expend a lot of energy arguing about whether starting a war in Iraq was a good or a bad idea. I have the answer to this question: it doesn't matter. It doesn't matter because - regardless of your opinion - we started a war in Iraq. Now we need to end it, as quickly and efficiently as possible. The war as the United States is currently waging it is intractable. Victory as the United States is currently defining it is unachievable. And the blood and treasure of Americans and Iraqis is too precious to continue spending on a goal that is so ill-defined that no end is in sight. The starting point of any solution to this global challenge must acknowledge these facts: * The United States and, by extension, the other liberal democracies of the world are engaged in a struggle with violent, committed ideologues. * The roots of that struggle do not lie in poverty, ignorance, hatred, or religion. The roots lie in a desire for power. The extremist interpretation of Islam is a source of power for its adherents. The alternative represented by social democracy and personal freedom threatens their ability to control the humans subjected to their rule. * Americans, Iraqis, and billions of other people would share the pain of a failed Iraq. * Because we started the war, America has an obligation to establish enough stability that Iraq can exist and, potentially, prosper. These facts make the Iraq war - and the fight against Islamic totalitarianism - distinct from any previous war fought by the United States. Since leaders are stereotypically doomed to fight the last war, our Washington leaders must fundamentally alter their strategy. That means ending the political management of the war. I believe our military leaders in Iraq have the vision and experience to determine the smartest and most effective strategies for ending America's engagement as quickly as possible. Our civilian leaders should empower them to do so. I believe that a strategy to successfully conclude America's engagement in Iraq combines economic, political, and military solutions. The political and economic solutions are most important. Citizens of Iraq have no interest to unify them as citizens of a country, and many interests that make unification difficult. The solution of allowing the country to devolve into a federation of three regions based on culture and faith - Sunni, Shia, and Kurd - has been considered a non-starter because it would leave one of the three groups without any of the country's oil wealth. The missing element of the confederation idea is a strategy to maintain a mutual interest in the success of the whole country. I believe the most effective way to create that mutual interest is to issue shares that represent a portion of the country's oil wealth to every adult citizen of Iraq. This solves the problem of excluding citizens of the region without oil from a prosperous future. It offers important advantages: first, it eliminates the accusation that the United States is interested in Iraq's oil wealth; second, it allows all Iraqis to benefit from the American-imposed regime change; third, it immediately creates the foundation of a free-market economy in the Sunni and Shia regions of the country, which is already flourishing in the Kurdish region; and, fourth, it invests all citizens of Iraq in the successful and peaceful future of the country - a hope that is nonexistent for most of the population, empowering insurgents rather than citizens. Another element of the political and economic solution will be some very difficult American diplomatic initiatives to seek the non-US troops and police necessary to maintain stability after American troops have done the heavy lifting of establishing that stability. The military solution to the Iraqi insurgency requires creative thinking from our military professionals in Iraq. This requires that the political sensitivities of Washington policy makers take a back seat to the needs of our troops. If our military leaders require a temporary infusion of more or different troops, or a temporary acceleration of military spending, to successfully conclude America's military involvement in Iraq in the shortest possible time, those are investments we should make. Sadly, our political rulers in Congress and the Bush administration consider none of these solutions politically palatable. The current strategy puts political success and expediency ahead of the true long-term interests of our military, our citizens, and Iraqis. In terms of dollars and diplomatic prestige, a real solution may cost more in the short run. But it's an investment that will pay off in the long run. I am sympathetic to the argument that - because the war is unwinnable - we should withdraw immediately. However, immediate withdrawal leaves a failed state sitting on top of inestimable wealth - a vision far more terrifying, and a circumstance far more dangerous, than a failed state in impoverished Afghanistan or Sudan. Likewise, the cost of "staying the course" is unacceptably expensive in terms of the lives of our servicemen and women. The only solution is to re-envision the problem and, with that fresh assessment, re-envision the options we have to bring home our troops as soon and as safely as possible. I oppose the initiation of aggression against individuals or sovereign states. It is worth remembering that, when the United States launched this war, Iraq was in violation of multiple United Nations resolutions and was shielded from UN response by countries that had significant financial interests in maintaining that unsatisfactory situation. There was also widespread international agreement that Iraq possessed weapons of mass destruction. I do not believe the situation at that time justified an attack in anticipation of an imminent threat. But hindsight is not a solution to the situation in which we find ourselves at this time. "Cut and run" and "stay and pay" are not solutions, no matter how many times Republicans and Democrats repeat those meaningless phrases. The zero-sum game of partisanship is prolonging the war in Iraq. We, our military, and Iraqis all deserve better. # # # Libertarian candidate for U.S. Congress David Schlosser, 38, lives in Flagstaff, Ariz., where he is a writer and communications consultant and has been a part-time instructor in the School of Communications at Northern Arizona University. He brings nearly a decade of political experience to his campaign for Congress, and is a graduate of Trinity University and the University of Texas. His wife, Anne, is a corporate training and development professional. For more information about Schlosser and his campaign for Arizona's First Congressional District, visit www.SchlosserForCongress.com <http://www.schlosserforcongress.com/> . Anyone can take his issues identification survey at http://www.surveymonkey.com/s.asp?u=947042343520. Authorized and paid for by Schlosser for Congress, Scott Gude, Treasurer [Non-text portions of this message have been removed] ForumWebSiteAt http://groups.yahoo.com/group/Libertarian Yahoo! Groups Links <*> To visit your group on the web, go to: http://groups.yahoo.com/group/Libertarian/ <*> Your email settings: Individual Email | Traditional <*> To change settings online go to: http://groups.yahoo.com/group/Libertarian/join (Yahoo! ID required) <*> To change settings via email: mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] <*> To unsubscribe from this group, send an email to: [EMAIL PROTECTED] <*> Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to: http://docs.yahoo.com/info/terms/
