Kicking ass doesn’t work. It can only go so far, like a person with one shoe.
Oh, dear, one hates to be taken as obtuse. I believe you posed the following question:
Yes? I believe my words are largely directed to that question, or, more succinctly, to the underlying assumptions the question implies, i.e. that you and I know enough about the insurgency that we can define it meaningfully, and discuss it insightfully.
In case you missed it, I question that assumption. I may have more questions regarding the article, but it is available only to subscribers.
More to the point, perhaps: your question about Baathist insurgents implies, but does not state, that the former Baathists are the essential component of the “insurgency”? Is this intentional, or an unfortunate artifact?
elucidator,
Over the years I’ve come to believe that debate is best met with fewest words. That is how I try to write. I implied nothing other than what I wrote. I realize you have a different style but you tend to inject politics into everything.
My original question:
Will the current government change their tune and work with former Ba’athist insurgents and will outside influences accept the deal?
I did not post my opinion on the matter. I wanted to see if anyone had contemplated the idea of amnesty. I’ve only heard snippets of a government response to the idea and they qualified as sound bites.
So when we (the Coalition powers – which are now down to the U.S., the UK, Poland and South Korea) reach a point where further ass-kicking of the Iraqi insurgency is useless, counterproductive or impossible – what should we try next?