It’s really a damn shame when things come apart so badly that our best option is essentially Vietnamization. I think we all know how that turned out, too.
Way too late. Even if the current administration wasn’t sufficiently unpopular that most elected governments would want to stay away from it for reasons of reelection, what would be the positive motivation ? Raking other people’s chestnuts out of the fire is a pretty hard sell.
As for the leaders of Arabic countries, there’s even less motivation. Their troublemakers are off making trouble for the US in Iraq, which is preferable to them making trouble for their own leaders at home.
Do you really mean that after having paid these guys pretty good salaries; given them large, staffs, paid at our expense; given them all sorts of perks like jet aiplanes to travel around we also have to solve the problems that they created?
That’s the real tragedy of this whole mess, in my opinion. October 2001, we could have, easily. The US had the support and sympathy of 9/10ths of the world then. A leader in the White House could have pulled together a coalition from all regions and religions and struck a serious blow toward eliminating terrorism and perhaps even bringing lasting stability to the Middle East and other trouble spots. America could have been the true Leader of the free world, rather than just the country with the most stuff.
So much potential, and That Man just pissed it all away. Absolutely unforgiveable.
The best solution would be to put Bush, Rumsfeld, and Pearl on trial in Iraq and issue a huge apology to the entire world, not just for the Iraqis, but also those nations originally opposed, and those allies dragged in, Oh, and put Blair on trial with them, then all of them can personally call round to beg for forgiveness to the widow of Dr David Kelly.
It won’t happen, because the pubs are so stuck up their own fucking arseholes to ever admit they were either lying cunts, or stupid bastards, and most likely both.
The next president may be able to. (And, yes, I believe that this mess will be left for the next president to clean up.) The current administration has burned all the bridges behind them.
Yeah, but then we could say, “they’re attacking each other over there so they won’t attack us here.” 
I think there’s some brilliant idea involving grabbing their balls and their hearts and minds will follow or something.
And we’re training Iraqi security and military forces so they’ll have plenty of combat experience once they get the religious and ethnic cleansing started.
-Joe
The right thing - the only right thing -is to never have started the war. At this point, anything we do is wrong.
What makes you think that a war won’t break out if we leave slowly ? Why would that make a difference ? Short of setting up Saddam 2.0 i can’t see anything that can stop it now.
Yes and no. Wrong to go there? Yes. But to say that anything we do is wrong isn’t necessarily accurate. That’s like saying setting up a decent empowered government isn’t that far off from just bombing all the cities into oblivion and starting over from the beginning. Just because the situation was wrong to get into doesn’t mean that there isn’t a right or wrong choice on how to proceed from here on out.
Is Miami “over there” now?
Bush has already made it clear that he isn’t going to do it himself,(March 22 2006):
Look on the bright side! Three more weeks, and we get a free throe! 