Reply #15: EWagner and Sybylla, have you read that essay in the Progressive [View All]

[AllyCat]

this month (June, 2005)? It's by Erik Gustafson stating exactly why we cannot just walk "out of Iraq tomorrow" and what we should do instead to ensure a more peaceful solution. There is a counter to his argument written by Norman Solomon, who says we are the cause of the trouble and if we leave, the insurgency will stop.

I sort of agree with both, but I think Gustafson is on to something. He outlines a number of points that include: ensuring that we actually intend to leave in the foreseeable future (not in 12 years); developing a jobs program for Iraqis with Iraqi-led reconstruction; ensuring the protection of human rights; building Iraq's capcity for security to avoid a power vacuum if we just up and leave; and increased political inclusion.

He asserts that all of these measures require the assistance and cooperation of other nations, largely including Iraq's neighbors, and the UN, EU, and Arab League. This, of course, requires that Bush allow involvement by others. He also feels Bush "must issue an unequivocal declaration that the US has no long-term interests in the territory or natural resources on Iraqi soil (something I'm not sure any of us believe is true...but it's needed).

Then we get out. I was all for just packing up leaving yesterday morning, but we cannot, in good conscience, leave the Iraqis to this mess of our own making. It would not be the human thing to do. We need to stop shooting at them, and figure out how to withdraw, while building up their own country.

This will, of course, require a new leader. All the more reason to work towards a more blue Congress and articles of Impeachment. Bush must go. Almost ANY of the other candidates in the 2004 election would have been able to do this. But then, we all knew that.