# Iraq Study Group Report **URL:** \ **Category:** Great Debates\ **Created:** [December 6, 2006, 10:13pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/iraq-study-group-report/383129 "2006-12-06T22:13:24Z")\ **Posts on this page:** 16\ **Page:** 3
**Author:** ![ElvisL1ves](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/e/5daacb/32.png) [@ElvisL1ves](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/ElvisL1ves)\ **Post date:** [December 8, 2006, 3:18am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/iraq-study-group-report/383129/41 "2006-12-08T03:18:21Z")
True enough, but I don’t think that will ultimately matter. The group’s main value, as I see it, is to get “stay the course” off the list of available options, at least outside the (ever-shrinking) Bush inner circle. It has established that the situation is “grave and deteriorating”, and that we now have to find a way out. The public debate is no longer if, but how and how soon. It may well be that \*only \* the warhawks could most credibily say we have to cut and run. The composition of the group takes away the neocons ability to disparage it. ---
**Author:** ![Squink](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/s/b5e925/32.png) [@Squink](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Squink)\ **Post date:** [December 8, 2006, 3:21am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/iraq-study-group-report/383129/42 "2006-12-08T03:21:12Z")
[QUOTE=elucidator] Why not Juan Cole? How about Paul Krugman?.. [/QUOTE] Hippies, dirty hippies. ---
**Author:** ![elucidator](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/e/8edcca/32.png) [@elucidator](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/elucidator)\ **Post date:** [December 8, 2006, 4:10am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/iraq-study-group-report/383129/43 "2006-12-08T04:10:33Z")
[QUOTE=ElvisL1ves] …The composition of the group takes away the neocons ability to disparage it. [/QUOTE] You’d think so, wouldn’t you?.. [http://www.nypost.com/seven/12072006/postopinion/editorials/the\_counsel\_of\_cowards\_editorials\_.htm](http://www.nypost.com/seven/12072006/postopinion/editorials/the_counsel_of_cowards_editorials_.htm) “ **THE COUNSEL OF COWARDS** ” > [@](#): > > After nine laborious months, the Iraq Study Group yesterday recom mended that there be peace in the Middle East. > > Well, of course. > > But how to achieve it? > > One word: Surrender… ---
**Author:** ![pantom](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/p/34f0e0/32.png) [@pantom](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/pantom)\ **Post date:** [December 8, 2006, 4:17am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/iraq-study-group-report/383129/44 "2006-12-08T04:17:34Z")
Saw that headline while riding the subway to work today; it made me start reading it, figuring if they got the frothers at that rag to make a headline like that, they must be doing something right. So far (I’ve gotten to the “Diplomatic Offensive” part) it looks like they’re asking the Bush Admin to play chess instead of checkers. Somehow, I don’t see that happening… ---
**Author:** ![elucidator](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/e/8edcca/32.png) [@elucidator](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/elucidator)\ **Post date:** [December 8, 2006, 4:34am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/iraq-study-group-report/383129/45 "2006-12-08T04:34:26Z")
Well, its a “diplomatic _offensive_”, isn’t it? Not some fou-fou girly boy Kofi Klatch, but a bare-knuckle, no nonsense diplomatic offensive, a firm and robust statement of unshakeable principles available to be jettisoned. And when we beseech and implore the assistance of others, we do so in no uncertain terms! When we go a-begging, our terms are non-negotiable, take it or leave it. ---
**Author:** ![pantom](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/p/34f0e0/32.png) [@pantom](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/pantom)\ **Post date:** [December 8, 2006, 4:42am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/iraq-study-group-report/383129/46 "2006-12-08T04:42:09Z")
Eh, it beats the real thing. And besides, pieces of it are an interestingly sly attempt to hook the Saudis into getting involved. Very interesting reading, actually. Especially so since you know that the whole thing is going to go right over the Prez’s poor, confounded head anyway. I’d love to be wrong about that, but I just can’t see him admitting that the Middle East is actually complex, and demands a complex, multi-sided strategy. ---
**Author:** ![David\_Simmons](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/d/9de053/32.png) [@David\_Simmons](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/David_Simmons)\ **Post date:** [December 8, 2006, 7:45am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/iraq-study-group-report/383129/47 "2006-12-08T07:45:28Z")
[QUOTE=ElvisL1ves] True enough, but I don’t think that will ultimately matter. The group’s main value, as I see it, is to get “stay the course” off the list of available options, at least outside the (ever-shrinking) Bush inner circle. [/QUOTE] But that ever shrinking circle and its leader are running the show. GW has reiterated that “victory” is the ultimate aim. Victory means leaving a democratic Iraq that can defend itself and be our ally against terrorism. I believe that his meaning for a new course is a new course that still achieves that objective. There is not reexamination of the objective on his part. Furthermore his course can’t be all that new since he has already effectively ruled out the only really new element introduced by the Study Group. Namely, involving Iran and Syria in diplomatic conversations seeking their help. ---
**Author:** ![elucidator](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/e/8edcca/32.png) [@elucidator](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/elucidator)\ **Post date:** [December 8, 2006, 9:01am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/iraq-study-group-report/383129/48 "2006-12-08T09:01:51Z")
That points out a curious development, in that al Maliki seems to be pursuing such conversations independently. Which, of course, he is entirely entitled to do, being PM of a completely sovereign nation, and all. But you gotta wonder: is he being a sock puppet, permitting the guy who will not negotiate a way to do just that\* **OR** \* he’s operating under instructions from a different master _ **OR** _ he’s a bold and decisive statesman, charting a new course for the ME, and GeeDub can go fuck himself. “You guys can stay, and I’ll use you to beat up the Sunnis, or you can go and I’ll do it myself. Your call.” ---
**Author:** ![BrainGlutton](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/b/82dd89/32.png) [@BrainGlutton](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/BrainGlutton)\ **Post date:** [December 8, 2006, 3:39pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/iraq-study-group-report/383129/49 "2006-12-08T15:39:08Z")
[QUOTE=want2know] Regarding that particular recommendation: This morning I was watching an interview with Mort Zuckerman of the NY Daily News on FNC. His concern with getting Iran and Syria involved–apart from the obvious “nations that harbor terrorists” argument-- was that we would be turning our backs on our “loyal Middle East allies Saudi Arabia and Jordan” if we allow Iran and Syria to assist in stabilizing Iraq. My question is: if they are such “loyal allies”, why didn’t the ISG recommend involving them? It would seem to me that they would be just as concerned with stabilizing the region as anyone. [/QUOTE] Perhaps because SA and Jordan, again, have their own problems. SA is a puritanical country ruled by a Wahabbi Sunni royal family – but they have to contend with internal opposition from \*\*ultra-\*\*Wahabbists who regard the royal family as too decadent and Westernized. Furthermore, in SA an actual **majority** of the population are foreign guest-workers, many born there but still not citizens. Add to that that SA’s oil-rich [Eastern Province,](http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ash_Sharqiyah_Province) bordering on Iraq, has a Shi’ite majority – and I wouldn’t be surprised if there are a few nationalists dreaming of a Shi’ite Arab state encompassing the Eastern Province, southern Iraq, and the Shi’ite Arab [Khuzestan](http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Khuzestan) region of southwestern Iran (remember that one of Hussein’s pretexts for war on Iran was to “liberate” the Arabs of al-Ahwaz from Persian rule) – and you can understand why the Saudi government might be very hesitant to stick its nose into Iraq’s ethnic and religious conflicts. Might give their own people ideas. As for Jordan, it has a Hashemite ruling family and a Palestinian majority in the population and can’t avoid getting caught up, at least politically, in the whole Israel-Palestine mess, which in turn is just about impossible to disentangle from practically anything else in the MENA. When you’re sitting on a powderkeg, you don’t want to play with matches. ---
**Author:** ![gonzomax](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/g/e8c25b/32.png) [@gonzomax](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/gonzomax)\ **Post date:** [December 8, 2006, 6:46pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/iraq-study-group-report/383129/50 "2006-12-08T18:46:30Z")
If the mess in Iraq is unsalvagable,doesnt that reveal a fundamental flaw in the report. That is that we can still achieve some kind of victory. We still have no definition of victory. Will access to oil for multinational corporations be victory?. Will we have to stop violence to achieve victory. Will removal of the tiny Al Qaeda forces do it? There is nothing in the report that solves the civil war problem. They say involving Iran and other neighbors will calm it down. But, the religions which are said to be fueling this mess knows no boundaries. Mosaic TV which is a mideast news program that offers views of Israel, Lebanon, Qatar,Iraq and Iran became an exercise in cherry picking the report to further already entrenched stances. ---
**Author:** ![David\_Simmons](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/d/9de053/32.png) [@David\_Simmons](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/David_Simmons)\ **Post date:** [December 8, 2006, 8:58pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/iraq-study-group-report/383129/51 "2006-12-08T20:58:04Z")
[QUOTE=gonzomax] If the mess in Iraq is unsalvagable,doesnt that reveal a fundamental flaw in the report. That is that we can still achieve some kind of victory. We still have no definition of victory. Will access to oil for multinational corporations be victory?. Will we have to stop violence to achieve victory. Will removal of the tiny Al Qaeda forces do it? There is nothing in the report that solves the civil war problem. They say involving Iran and other neighbors will calm it down. But, the religions which are said to be fueling this mess knows no boundaries. Mosaic TV which is a mideast news program that offers views of Israel, Lebanon, Qatar,Iraq and Iran became an exercise in cherry picking the report to further already entrenched stances. [/QUOTE] Somehow GW has to come off his goal of creating a democratic, internally peaceful, Iraq capable of defending itself and an ally of the US against terrorism. As long as he insists that our military efforts along can gain that objective I think the problem of Iraq **is** unsolvable. I agree with you. The report seems to me to merely outline an alternative approach to gaining GW’s stated objective. If that’s what is meant by a “change of course” it was all a waste of time that could have been used planning our exit. The real goal should be to get the US out of Iraq with the least possible damage. And that “least” won’t be very small. ---
**Author:** ![elucidator](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/e/8edcca/32.png) [@elucidator](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/elucidator)\ **Post date:** [December 8, 2006, 9:40pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/iraq-study-group-report/383129/52 "2006-12-08T21:40:32Z")
[QUOTE=David Simmons] …I agree with you. The report seems to me to merely outline an alternative approach to gaining GW’s stated objective… [/QUOTE] But of course Failure is the elephant in the room, failure is the rotting corpse of the elephant in the room. And as Mr Feingold rightly points out, none of the particpants were active opponents of the war before it got rolling downhill. So the first reaction upon becoming wholly aware of the extent of fuckeditude is to say “Why didn’t anybody see this coming?” Followed close on by “Why didn’t \*\*I \*\* see this coming?”. So they have at least _some_ investment in the elusive light at the bottom of the Pit. They _want_ to believe it can be fixed. A fixer looks for tweaks, modifications, adjustments. A whole big ass pile of useful and thoughtful suggestions that, had they been applied a couple years ago, \*might \* have been somewhat successful. Now, they are only applying a band-aid to a bayonet wound. But in order not to look like utter fools, they have to acknowledge the gravity of situaton. Which they cannot really do, because then the paper would be two sentences long: “We’re boned. Run away!”. So they end up with a melding, a crock pot of doom and despair and plucky proactive notes for the Suggestion Box. And end up looking like utter fools. ---
**Author:** ![Sal\_Ammoniac](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/s/8dc957/32.png) [@Sal\_Ammoniac](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Sal_Ammoniac)\ **Post date:** [December 8, 2006, 10:04pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/iraq-study-group-report/383129/53 "2006-12-08T22:04:05Z")
[QUOTE=elucidator] And end up looking like utter fools. [/QUOTE] But ironically, because GW has rejected their suggestions out of hand, they get to look like sages. They’ll never be proved wrong, in any event. ---
**Author:** ![ElvisL1ves](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/e/5daacb/32.png) [@ElvisL1ves](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/ElvisL1ves)\ **Post date:** [December 8, 2006, 11:27pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/iraq-study-group-report/383129/54 "2006-12-08T23:27:08Z")
[QUOTE=David Simmons] But that ever shrinking circle and its leader are running the show. [/quote] Within strongly-tightening constraints, though. > [@](#): > > I believe that his meaning for a new course is a new course that still achieves that objective. There is not reexamination of the objective on his part. True enough, but that increasingly-undeniable disconnect with reality only forces the people who would otherwise give him deference to act on their own. The ISG report may actually be _optimistic_ and _lack_ candor - [Here](http://www.boston.com/news/globe/editorial_opinion/oped/articles/2006/12/07/pie_in_the_sky_report_wont_fix_iraq/) is our first ambassador to Croatia, right behind the ethnic cleansing: > [@](#): > > Iraq has broken up and is in the midst of a civil war, but this is never acknowledged in the report. The panel seems to assume that nation building is still possible in Iraq, and this underlies its recommendations. The result is a report that, on the most essential points, is pie in the sky… > > More important, however, the Baker-Hamilton program is unachievable. Kurdistan’s voters would have to agree to the constitutional amendments, and having voted 98.7 percent for independence, are not likely to do so. Iraq’s constitution currently prohibits militias and a law regulating them is not likely to have a greater impact. Both Shi’ites and Sunnis consider militias, and other irregular forces, essential for prosecuting the civil war. Amnesty is for losers, and the Sunni insurgents believe they are winning. They have wrested control of large parts of Sunni Iraq – including west Baghdad – from the US-led coalition and the Iraqi government, and bombing Shi’ite civilians has triggered a civil war. If the insurgents were prepared to trade their gains for amnesty, they would never have taken up arms in the first place… > > On June 21, 1991, Baker flew into Belgrade to warn Yugoslavia’s leaders not to break up the country. Four days later, Slovenia and Croatia declared themselves independent. Baker had misdiagnosed the problem. By focusing on the hopeless task of saving Yugoslavia, he missed an opportunity to prevent the war that followed. > > By not facing up to the reality of a disintegrated Iraq, Baker’s panel has missed an opportunity to forge a consensus around concrete steps that could contain Iraq’s civil war and extricate the United States from the quagmire. ---
**Author:** ![pantom](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/p/34f0e0/32.png) [@pantom](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/pantom)\ **Post date:** [December 9, 2006, 1:51am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/iraq-study-group-report/383129/55 "2006-12-09T01:51:55Z")
**Elvis Lives** : That’s actually an excellent summary, although I confess I haven’t read the rest of it yet. The Financial Times had a biting editorial on it, that nevertheless called on the Bush Admin to at least begin to face the reality of what it was saying, that said it was littered with “coulds” that were actually already realities on the ground. From what I’ve read, that judgment is correct, and fits with what you quoted. ---
**Author:** ![BrainGlutton](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/b/82dd89/32.png) [@BrainGlutton](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/BrainGlutton)\ **Post date:** [December 14, 2006, 2:48pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/iraq-study-group-report/383129/56 "2006-12-14T14:48:01Z")
[QUOTE=BrainGlutton] Perhaps because SA and Jordan, again, have their own problems. SA is a puritanical country ruled by a Wahabbi Sunni royal family – but they have to contend with internal opposition from \*\*ultra-\*\*Wahabbists who regard the royal family as too decadent and Westernized. Furthermore, in SA an actual **majority** of the population are foreign guest-workers, many born there but still not citizens. Add to that that SA’s oil-rich [Eastern Province,](http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ash_Sharqiyah_Province) bordering on Iraq, has a Shi’ite majority – and I wouldn’t be surprised if there are a few nationalists dreaming of a Shi’ite Arab state encompassing the Eastern Province, southern Iraq, and the Shi’ite Arab [Khuzestan](http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Khuzestan) region of southwestern Iran (remember that one of Hussein’s pretexts for war on Iran was to “liberate” the Arabs of al-Ahwaz from Persian rule) – and you can understand why the Saudi government might be very hesitant to stick its nose into Iraq’s ethnic and religious conflicts. Might give their own people ideas. [/QUOTE] [Spoke too soon!](http://www.dailytimes.com.pk/default.asp?page=2006%5C12%5C14%5Cstory_14-12-2006_pg4_1) What’s more, Senator Bill Nelson wants [Syria](http://www.miami.com/mld/miamiherald/16234530.htm) to get involved. The WH responded by denouncing the Syrian government’s human-rights record. [Previous page](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/iraq-study-group-report/383129.md?page=2)