If you are seriously asking for proposals, please phrase it accurately, i.e. “I fucked up and I have no clue what I’m doing, I should have listened in the first place, I beg you, please help me.” Listen, asshole. You were told in 2003 that invading Iraq was a stupid fucking idea and not to do it, but you went and did it anyway. You were given the world’s best military to accomplish the mission, and you have left it stressed to the breaking point. You want options… well, you’ve pretty much taken every realistic option off the table… Aside from just doing the sensible thing and bringing the troops home, about the only proposal left is let’s go back in time and not invade Iraq like a dumbass, or let’s go a bit further back and not (s)elect the dumbass who cooked up the plot in the first place.
Has anyone suggested that the U.S. go to the UN and say Mea culpa, mea culpa, mea maxima culpa., and then ask for UN assistance in quelling the civil war? You know, diplomacy and actually using the tools that are in place for this specific purpose, and all that.
I’m tempted to suggest this as well – but is it too late for UN intervention?
Maybe his plan involves getting Cheney to resign, appointing Kerry as Cheney’s successor, and then stepping down himself, allowing Kerry to appoint Edwards VP. “Okay, smartass, let’s see what you’d do.”
I was going to post that if we (we Democratic-aligned [I’m not actually a Democrat; I’m non-partisan as far as voter registration goes.] Internationalist Traitors) kept up the pressure, then maybe Bush would get mad and go home. Bascially throwing up his hands and saying, ‘Okay, you do it if you think you’re so smart!’
An alternate goal was proposed a long time ago, get our military out of Iraq.
The plan? Go to the military and tell them to prepare a plan to have our troops out of Iraq by six months from now. Go to the Department of State and tell them to start a diplomatic effort to try to hold down turmoil in the Middle East when we leave.
Work like hell on Istraeli-Palestinian problem to remove one of the major obstacles to stability in the Middle East.
Speaking as an armchair general, I’d say “ink spots” a la Malaya. Make rigorously guarded green zones all over the country so that people can get on with their lives with less fear of being blown to shit, kidnapped, drilled to death, or shot. “Clean out” the insurgents but hold the territory, rather than cleaning out the areas and then leaving. Expand the green zones slowly until they meet. Re-educate the troops not to despise those they are meant to be protecting. Compulsory Arabic classes andcultural study. Attempt to patrol the borders more effectively.
I believe Petraeus is attempting to employ a similar policy, and I hope he has the resources to do it.
We’re all in this together. Except when we aren’t.
Whenever someone has a suggestion, the Administration counters with a juicy buzz-phrase, whether it be “We don’t go to war with the army we want, we go to war with the army we have” or the notorious “cut-and-run” shit. Our president ignores the recommendations of the Iraq Study Group and says talk about graceful exit stategies is out of the discussion. And while he saying all of these things, he’s decrying the lack of opposing ideas. I guess you can do this when you’re the big boss.
Folks have plenty of ideas. They just won’t result in a happy ending straight out of a Hallmark Made-for-TV movie.
You don’t have to find alternate routes out of a hole to simply point out when one is digging themselves in deeper.
Here is my plan. We impeach Bush, try him for war crimes, and hang him. Then we go to the world and say that the whole Iraq clusterfuck was a mistake of one man and does not represent US policy. We pull out and ask the UN to provide security while Iraq is divided up into three.
I proposed 2 years ago that we should redeploy, yes troops will leave, but like Murtha proposed later, the aerial superiority will remain (to strike if genocide and terror camps appear), what I do fear is that virgin boots Bush will hang around for so much that even that plan will be dismissed by even the conservative elements in the US that could get tired of the whole thing.
IMHO we lost a big chance to leave after the elections in Iraq in 2005, I remember reading a good number of Iraqis were willing to participate in the elections with the understanding that the occupation troops would leave, those surveyed mentioned that they would support or join the rebels if after the election the occupation did not make any moves towards leaving.
You guys certainly have a rather romantic view of the UN and it’s capabilities. The UN isn’t an army, in the past, even WITH US backing in the form of American Bombers and troops, the UN has proven itself incapable of dealing with even minor civil wars. With what method do you expect the UN to magically restore peace when the US army is unable to? Strong language?
Well, the US finally decided to tell the military strongmen in El Salvador that support was going to go away if no negotiations would come, and then the United Nations finally intervening with mediation by a neighbor (Oscar Arias) Costa Rica. The civil war then was finally over.
The lesson that was forgotten was this: only by the US stopping or telling the military government that negotiation was needed or else, that the violence stopped. That does mean also to not intervene directly to allow the locals and the UN to sort things out.
The point is that the US is not (or should not be) the world’s cop. I don’t much care if the Iraqis decide to kill themselves over whether Mohammed’s brother in-law or cousin was the proper successor 900 years ago. Handing the problem over to the UN is just a graceful way of getting the hell out of there. Maybe once the US stops trying to fix everyones problems (and ends up making them worse) the rest of the workd will step up. Off the top of my head I’d guess there are 100 countries geographically closer to Iraq than we are, it’s now their turn.
What’s the UN’s track record for keeping peace?
Compared to what?
Compared to Iraq. (See previous posts in thread.) If, for example, the UN has attempted 100 PKs, how many of the 100 resulted in the UN doing whatever it is that people wanting to call on the UN expect it will do for Iraq?
Yeah, good thing the UN wasn’t in charge of this, they would probably have screwed it up, and then we’d have a real mess on our hands, huh?
You’ve got Cyprus and Lebanon, and various actions in Africa, some of which were successful, with the awful exception of Rwanda.
Their relative success must, though be judged on the rules of engagement they’re given, which is on a per-case basis, I believe. The RoE in Rwanda were very restrictive, hence the catastrophe. I have no doubt that the insurgents would target them in Iraq, so they need to be allowed to attack too, rather than just react.
I have a plan to drown kittens. If you don’t like it, then you tell me how YOU would go about drowning these kittens, smart guy.