What to do about Iraq? The future of the Middle East.

[Meldread]

Currently we are faced with two choices: Pull out or stay in.

If we stay in the outcome is almost certain. We will fail. Iraq will become an Islamic state. This is a certainty. What happens after that is somewhat uncertain, but we know the fighting isn't going to end.

If we leave the outcome is also somewhat certain, but the result almost definitely disastrous. Iraq has an extremely high probability of erupting into some type of civil war. There will be chaos. It will become a breeding ground for future terrorists (even more than now). The fighting may spread over to other Islamic and Middle Eastern Nations... basically the whole region goes to hell in a hand basket.

Yes, all of this is George Bush's fault. Every last damn thing. We should have never went there in the first place, and now we are screwed no matter what we do. However, we have to find away to salvage the situation in some manner.

It is difficult to say with certainty what the best course of action is because there are a lot of unknowns. I think if we are to salvage anything from this we are going to have to toss the dice and hope for the best, and I think the odds are significantly higher of getting a more desirable outcome by staying. The variables increase too much by pulling out, although that would certainly be the moral and correct thing to do... it just isn't in America (and the worlds) best interests.

If we stay we should begin SERIOUSLY seeking aid from other nations painting the grim picture of American failure. If we fail they will suffer just as we will suffer, especially if the region goes to hell in a hand basket. The worlds dependence on Middle Eastern Oil is a serious handicap in this whole situation and must also be addressed.

By increased international support we can hopefully take some of the burden off ourselves, but I don't think we should delude ourselves into thinking that we could somehow lessen our role in this. We'll always be at the forefront and it'll always be primarily our burden but every little bit can help.

We should try and focus international aid on training the Iraqi forces to help stabilize the country. That should be our KEY goal above all else: Stabilization. Not democracy. Just stabilization.

On the home front we need to begin aggressively looking at our energy policies. We need to begin working on, implementing and creating a fuel source that is renewable, environmentally safe, and cheaper than the oil we get from the Middle East. We can do this. We have the brains and the technology. We need to find away to make it happen, and begin pushing it into the American Public (and other oil-dependant nations as well) this new technology. This new fuel source. It needs to be done in no less than five and no more than ten years. We need to try and sever every tie possible to the Middle East.

While this is going on and fighting is still happening in Iraq we should be aiding those in the government who support a REAL democracy. We should be undermining those who want to subvert democracy and create an Islamic Fascist State at every turn. Ensure that their victory is only temporary, and then once we have freed ourselves from dependence on the Middle East we can become more aggressive in this area not only in Iraq but in other countries as well. The idea should be encouraging the PUBLIC to rise up against the leaders and the United States and other free nations giving support to them. (Rather than going in there ourselves and trying to force it down their throats.)

I would think that the entire region would begin to experiencing some serious economic hard times once the world frees itself from dependence on them as I don't think they have a viable export other than oil. This will make their leaders need foreign aid and that is where we can truly apply the pressure to them and force them to crack.

Of course, we could pull out and allow the entire region to tumble into chaos, but that would have a serious negative impact on the world and on the United States. I'm not sure if it would happen, but I think our economy would seriously start to tank. I think we'd get hit worse than other nations who are already starting to free themselves from dependence on foreign oil. Anyone want to offer a possible scenario of just how bad it could get?

That of course doesn't even go into mentioning the fact that Iraq would become an even better breeding ground for terrorists. It's a damned if you do and damned if you don't situation.

Does anyone else have any ideas or thoughts that could end with us finding something salvageable with the situation?

[Selatius]

1. I blame greed-soaked foreign policy, not necessarily GWB

It is our foreign policy that allowed Israel to become a colonial power over Palestinians after 1967 as well as acquire weapons of mass destruction. It is our foreign policy that drove Iranians to extremes to topple the US-supported Shah of Iran. It is our foreign policy that sold weapons and helped Saddam build his weapons of war because he was slaughtering Iranians, who overthrew the US puppet dictator. Nevermind the fact that Saddam was killing the same people we are now supposedly trying to help. It is our foreign policy that supports oppressive oligarchies and tyrannies in places like Saudi Arabia and Egypt, both guilty of egregious human rights abuses as horrific as those of China.

GWB is just another figurehead in a long line of figureheads. Ultimately, the ones I lay the blame on are the ones who twisted foreign policy to begin with not for the sake of the ordinary man's interests but for their own selfish, greedy interests. They would fund and support candidates with their huge bankrolls who talk sweet to the people at home yet become vicious thugs and murderers abroad. They are the ones I blame.

I don't know what to do about Iraq anymore, but Wesley Clark seems to have gotten the point. Either we shift gears in Iraq rapidly, or the only options left to us will be to continue to bleed for a cause long lost or simply withdraw, and I don't think Bush is the one to do it, not for the next three years.

[Meldread]

3. Well, I agree.

However, it was this administrations choice to go into Iraq which caused the cluster fuck that we have now. Although, I do agree with your assessment of the issue.

I also agree that we need to re-think our foreign policy, but the fact of the matter is... we're stuck. We depend on oil to keep us going and that means we have to suck on the Middle Eastern teat until it runs dry. ...and God help us if it runs dry and we aren't ready to switch to some alternative source.

The first step is to end our dependence on the Middle East. That is the first step, if we weren't dependant on the Middle East we wouldn't be in Iraq in the first place and it wouldn't matter what happened to the region if we decided to withdraw.

Our only long-term hope is to begin fixing the underlying problem NOW so if nothing else we can deal with any backlash that may come from our fuck-up in Iraq.

I agree, also that GWB isn't the guy to do it. In fact, I believe he is scared shitless and doesn't know what the hell to do. He knows he's screwed no matter what he does so he's just "staying the course" and probably praying that something magic happens to change the situation. Either that or he is completely detached from reality, it's one or the other. Actually, right now in private he's probably a lot like Richard Nixon was toward the end. Everything is crumbling all around him and he's trying to plug the cracks in the dam as fast as he can, but he knows it's inevitable that it will burst sooner or later.

[KerryOn]

7. You hit the nail on the head....

>"Actually, right now in private he's probably a lot like Richard Nixon was toward the end. Everything is crumbling all around him and he's trying to plug the cracks in the dam as fast as he can, but he knows it's inevitable that it will burst sooner or later."<

With the above in mind, I have always wondered why Kerry conceded the election so quickly. My hunch is that he new we were screwed - meaning no matter what he did to try to rectify the situation the results were glim. So why not let the man that created the mess clean it up. If kerry would have won, he would have had to make miracles happen. They would not have happened and the righties would be pointing the finger at him. I can hear it now.... "If * would have been reelected we would own the entire middle east, and all the oil."

On Edit: Typo

[Meldread]

9. Pretty much.

However, the Right is going to point fingers at us anyway. When things REALLY go south, we're going to get the blame. It doesn't matter what happens.

Likely we'll be blamed at the fact that because we didn't support the war with unfettered enthusiasm that they couldn't put enough troops in there to stabilize the country, therefore it went down the shithole.

In reality enough troops should have been sent in the beginning to stabilize the place -- the Bush Administration had unrealistic expectations and poor planning. *IF* we had to go back again and we could change only one thing about how we went about doing it, increasing the number of troops we sent over in the beginning would probably have been our best bet.

(Not going at all would have been even better, especially considering Saddam can't live forever and only has like 10-15 years max of life left.)

[FloridaPat]

2. Here's the problem with seeking aid with other countries. We have

screwed them. A lot of folks had contracts with Iraq and Iraq owed other folks a lot of money. That's all been trashed. Our great leader told everyone who was against the invasion they will not get a dime of contracts from Iraq. All contracts will got to US and Britian corporations and a few crumbs to the "coalition". Why should they spend the money to help us? Why should they help out in Iraq and then watch the US invade Iran. The rest of the world know what we're doing. We are planning to take over all the world oil reserves. The rest of the world doesn't like that. The military aggression will stop when the US governmnet goes bankrupt. It will not be pretty.

As for saving anything - pull out Haliburton and the rest, impeach * and the entire administration. Pull out the troops. Get rid of Bremer's 100 point list. Remove the executive orders that basically give us the oil. Let the Iraqis work with others. They will come in to help once we're out of there. And once that happens you can kiss the US dollar goodby.

[Meldread]

6. They should help us because...

...if the shit hits the fan in the Middle East it may go bad for us but they will also be effected. If the United States ship sinks the world goes down with us. Now, granted I'm certain there are countries out there are willing to take that chance and weather the storm. They want to see an end to American Imperialism -- I don't blame them I want to see it stop as well. However, that is beside the point.

Getting Halliburton out would be a good start, but the impeachment of Bush isn't going to happen unless evidence turns up so gripping and damning that even a Republican Congress will cringe and have their hand forced. The fact of the matter is, this *is* a Republican Congress and the likelihood of seeing Bush impeached is just slightly above zero. I wouldn't say its impossible, the guy looks like he is a sinking ship and the cons don't like sinking ships. However, as long as Bush can keep afloat and maintain some level of control impeachment isn't likely.

Even if we don't get international support we can still pursue what I suggested above. It would just require a larger commitment that isn't there. It would likely require doubling the number of troops in Iraq and extending the time that troops have to stay there. That isn't something I want to see, especially as my brother-in-law is currently over there for his second time and will just be getting home in a few weeks.

I think our best bet, our absolute best bet, is to find the best possible American supporting Islamic Fascist in the country and let him take it over. Anything to stabilize the damn place. In the meantime we can work on eliminating our dependence on the Middle East.

[Strelnikov_]

4. Quagmire. We Can't Stay. We Can't Leave

Next edition of Webster's dictionary will have the entry 'Quagmire, see Iraq, GOP Debacle'

Ramping up (along with with massive aid/rebuilding), as you suggest, is one solution. That is, make a real effort.

The other approach, of course, is to pull out. If we do, we had better put a WW2 level mobilization effort into energy transformation, because we will be losing Persian Gulf oil within several years thereafter.

I cannot say in which path the least risk lies. But, just on what I know, I say pull-out. My rationale is as follows:

- There is no guarantee that the rampup would work in preventing general gulf-wide civil war.
- Either path will take vast amounts of resources. At least with the pull-out option we will have begun the transformation of our energy supply.
- Even if rampup works, the region will be out of oil in 20-30 years anyway.

One thing I can say for sure, the current approach is not working.

And if we do exercise the pull-out option, and a massive energy transformation is not implemented concurrent with this event, we are in big trouble. Rent or read Brin's 'The Postman', it doesn't sound like fun.

The extremely dangerous situation the GOP has placed us in does not end with a pull-out from Iraq, it simply changes the nature of the threat.

[KerryOn]

5. I think you have it all wrong....

Its not the middle east thats going to hell in a hand basket its the US. No but seriously...

I liked your post, you have made some very good points. I have given the situation a lot of thought, and have came to the conclusion that we are screwed, no matter what we do. Which seems to be the conclusion you have came to as well. So I support bring the troops home now!

I do not believe in training the people of Iraq because we do not know who we are training. There have already been instance reported where entire police forces were made up of insurgents.

The only way to restore order in my opinion would be to have at least three times the troops that we have, and do a sweep over the entire country going door to door confiscating any thing that remotely looks like a weapon. We need enough troops to keep the insurgents from popping up in the locations we just cleaned out, and enough troops to cover all of the borders. (Its not going to happen.)

So in my opinion its a lost cause. We are better off bring our troops home and using the money that we would spend on the war for the next ten to twenty years to secure our borders, air ports, train stations, metro transport, and nuclear power stations here at home. It would probably be cheaper than a long war, so * could give us all free gas for the next five years.

Bring the troops home now!

[Meldread]

8. I think we are all on agreement on one point...

...we need to end our dependence on the Middle East ASAP. It doesn't matter what option we take, if we don't lose our dependence on them we are screwed. Period. That was our real problem before we got into this mess.

My biggest fear is the ripple effect. If the Middle East collapses into chaos and the world is cut off from oil cold turkey as a result... imagine what would happen. The United States would be screwed but so would every other nation that relies on oil -- which to my knowledge is most countries. I know other nations are trying to lessen their dependence but they are still dependant.

When the United States economy tanks as a result it will ripple out to all other nations. Their economies will tank. Suddenly, everyone is screwed and everyone is wondering what the hell to do. That creates an atmosphere ripe with tension, anger, bitterness... something that could easily breed war. Now, this isn't like the old days where you'd grab your sword, hop on your horse, and go to battle. Folks have Nuclear Weapons. Imagine the United States in about ten years, faced at losing its position as the worlds only superpower, its economy in shambles, and the rest of the world in economic decline. It isn't going to be pretty.

It would set humanity back at least a decade if not more, and if things are not stabilized and we aren't prepared for such a scenario... it could easily breed into a WWIII type scenario.

Like I said, stabilization should be our top priority for the time being. Even if that means we have to install a dictator to do it. We cannot let the Middle East spiral out of control, we need to buy ourselves some time to prepare for the inevitable fact that eventually the oily teat of the Middle East is gonna run dry. At least if we install a dictator we'll get to choose who it'll be, rather than run a gamble of only god knows who getting in charge.

[KerryOn]

10. Scary....

Lets not forget about China. China has become very dependent on oil and the recent war games with Russia should have us all more than just a little concerned. I think they were trying to send a clear message to the * administration.

If we were o pull out of Iraq, would China intervene and try to take over the middle east?

[Meldread]

12. Doubtful.

I doubt China would make such a move. It would be too bold and would provoke a serious backlash. It is likely that China is sitting back and waiting for the United States to foul up.

I'm not sure what China will do, but I am pretty sure they see an opportunity somewhere. I think they would either go the route everyone else SHOULD be going, that is switching to an alternative source and cut ties with the Middle East. Or they could simply wait until the shit hits the fan in the United States and we become crippled. When that happens they could then move forces to the Middle East with near impunity and try and position themselves to be a new superpower.

I'm not sure what will happen in regard to China because I don't know too much about the situation. However, I am certain that China sees an opportunity to increase their power and standing in the world. Will they succeed? Who knows? Really, it’s the worlds desire to see the United States taken out and knocked off as the last superpower. That leaves room for them to fill the void. I am sure Britain sees the opportunity. Blair had his own reasons for supporting this war. What were his motivations? Other countries can’t be far behind in that thinking. China, Russia, and Japan being among them. China and Russia obviously both salivating – I think its obvious with them.

It's simple really. Once the United States topples down there is a void. People are going to race to fill it. Everyone can see it coming -- everyone knows its coming. It's just a matter of when.

[KerryOn]

13. Bold indeed....

China's dependency for oil and other world resources are increasing everyday, as their economy is booming.

It is very obvious to me that China is in an economic war with us. I feel like we are being set up for a collapse. China has for sometime, been trying to control certain markets, like the steel industry. America buys tons of products from China, so they are in a sense partly dependent on us. But on the other hand the US owes China a lot of money. (They are financing Bush's war.) So what happens if China decides to call in some of the promissory notes? It may not be to their advantage to do so, but if they wait until the right moment there could be very severe consequences for the US.

If China plays their cards right they could indeed be the worlds next super power. They have been building their military up at an alarming rate, so I feel all the signs are there for them to fill the void when the timing is right.

And what scares me even more, is that I think this administration may actually be to stupid to see it coming. Things would be different if * would have stayed out of Iraq. His little war of revenge, power, greed or what ever, has destroyed our country, and the out look as I see it is nothing but grim. So I'm trying to say that I feel * and his administration have done more damage than what meets the eye.

[Meldread]

15. Agreed 100%. nt

[wli]

11. it's Zugzwang for the US faction of "globalists" or whatever

They are fighting a domino effect on petroeuros, and Iran is about to fall next while they're powerless to stop it.

Keeping up with Iraq is wrecking the US economy which petroeuros would do anyway.

They're forced to make a move, but no move they can make will do them anything but harm (the definition of Zugzwang).

[Tierra_y_Libertad]

14. We have NO business being there. Out NOW!

The idea that we great deliverers of democracy (in mythology) should be guiding other countries toward our paradise of Walmarts and sleezy politicians paid by the corporations is pure neo-colonial arrogance.

Iraq belongs to the people who live there. Our "help" has, and continues to, destroy their country and their lives.

[Meldread]

16. Erm. That doesn't make a lot of sense.

First of all, we have to be honest. None of this and nothing was for the betterment of Iraq. It was for the betterment of the United States and the Western World. Period. There is no sense in trying to continue the pretense of importing some great democracy there, because it ain't happening.

Second we need to look out what is for our and the worlds best interests now. It no longer has anything to do with right or wrong, it has to do with economic survival. Sure, it is morally wrong to stay but if we leave the question is: ARE WE PREPARED TO ACCEPT AND DEAL WITH THE CONSEQUENCES?

No matter what we do there will be sever consequences. We are in a quagmire from hell, and I think now would be a good time to move from "lets win the war" to "lets salvage what we can from the war." I think our new goal should be just to stabilize the country and leave. Even if that means to put a new dictator into power to keep the country from collapsing into civil war. At least then we'd get to pick the person to fill the void.