You want an Iraq withdrawal that makes sense?

[tkmorris]

Here's what you do.

Tell the world we are withdrawing, but ONLY to Kuwait.

Leave 20,000 troops in Baghdad to reinforce the fledgling Iraqi government.

Tell Turkey that if they cross the border into Northern Iraq we will fuck them up. Make em believe it.

Tell Iran that if they cross the border or attempt to interfere in any way we will fuck them up. Make em believe it.

Go to the United Nations with hat in hand, and ask them to assist the Iraqi government in securing the peace.

Withdraw to Kuwait and await developments. Let Iraq sort itself out, but enforce our interests from the air. Tell the Iraqi government we renounce any bases there, and downsize the embassy plans. Iraqi oil belongs to them, and any government they come up with is fine AS LONG AS THEY SHARE POWER AMONG ETHNIC/RELIGIOUS GROUPS.

Wipe hands on pants and smile broadly. You're done.

Speak softly and carry a big stick. That's the way.

Someone tell me why I'm wrong.

[sanskritwarrior]

1. How is the UN going to assist in securing the peace?

The UN has to beg for peacekeeping troops for African missions where no IED's go off, where are they gonna get the forces to do the Iraq mission?

Also if we renounce bases where are the 20,000 in Baghdad going to stay?

Also why we would tell the turks they can't go after the PKK as we are the source of intel for the Turks on PKK activities

Also given the centuries old animosity between Arab and Persian, Shia and Sunni, Christian and Muslim, how do we ensure they form a govt. that shares power.

Also what kind of force is the 20,000 in baghdad, what are their ROE's, are we allowed to shoot Iraqis that threaten us? Can we develop our own intel and sources or must we use the Iraqi ones. I've deployed to Iraq (will do so again in December, I see a lot of flaws) It sounds like a good plan, but you assume everyone will do what we want which is never the case, not now, not in 2003, not in 1999 in Kosovo, not in 1972, not in 1945 at Yalta........

[bluerum]

2. You make the case in your last sentence.

"you assume everyone will do what we want which is never the case, not now, not in 2003, not in 1999 in Kosovo, not in 1972, not in 1945 at Yalta........"

I would add Iraq 2003 through 2007 to that list.

Despite the best efforts of the military, the fact is that they cannot solve the problems in Iraq. Killing and jailing the entire population is not a solution. Turning Iraq into a police state is not a solution. Setting up a doomed system of government in order to provided political cover to a lynching and theft of natural resources is not a solution.

[dave_p]

3. It doesn't

20,000 US troops in Baghdad isn't withdrawal, it's a redeployment to an untenable enclave where they'll be a sitting duck for insurgents dominating much of the rest of the country. And the presence of those troops means that the insurgents will keep fighting the puppet regime to take back their capital.

The US can't fuck Turkey up. Its an ally. It's needed. Turkey will ultimately have a free hand. The only local counterweight to Turkey is a strong Iraq, which may opt to cooperate with Turkey at the expense of America's domestic pals. Tough, that's politics. The world doesn't act in accordance with US desires, especially when the US has demonstrated such mammoth incompetence.

The UN needs to tell Washington to fuck off if this isn't to happen again and again. The rest of the world isn't there to clean up Asmerica's mess. It unwisely tried in Somalia, and thirteen years later that unfortunate country's still paying the price of Washington's murderous assault on its people & their leaders.

Iraqis don't want to live under the permanent threat of re-invasion from Kuwait, why should they? The US needs to get out, and stay out. Out means Out.

And enough of the Big Stick. The rest of the world's had enough of threats, violence and destruction. Global cooperation works. US aggression doesn't.

[KharmaTrain]

4. And Where's The Arab League In This?

That's the best buffer this country could find...have them, rather than the U.N. provide "peace keepers"...let the Arabs take care of their own and sort it out. The U.N. should provide economic assistance and monitor the situation. The U.S. gets the hell out! No 20,000 left in Baghdad or in Kuwait or anywhere where they're not wanted.

We've spent billions on aircraft carriers that can launch any "lightning strike" or other punative action from the Persian Gulf...or if Iran or Pakistan starts rattling their nukes, all we do is surface one of our Trident Subs off the coast, tell them the second one of those missiles go off, expect the Trident to let loose as well, and it's a hell of a lot closer.

Carrying the big stick doesn't mean using it. If you keep beating the kid with the stick, eventually they get desensetized to the pain and greater contempt grows....but if you show the stick and only use it as the last resort, it carries a lot more whallop.

[Rydz777]

5. It's quite possible that we no longer have the power to tell

anybody to do anything. The American people are fed up with getting our troops killed in a ground war in the Middle East. Our troops and equipment are literally worn out, both Army and Marines on the verge of being "broken." We are financing this adventure on a big national credit card, and the bonds are payable to China and Japan. The "willing coalition" is shrinking fast.

[Javaman]

6. You put up some interesting concepts, however, sadly...

I think the reality will be this:

We will pull out and let Iraq to go to hell in a hand basket.

the US embassy castle will be secure until the insurgents get their hands on some tanks and anti tank weapons, at which point, the colossally expensive boondoggle will be the new residence of the next sultan of Iraq. Thus creating another Iran.

Once something is fucked up beyond all reality, it becomes impossible to unfuck it.

It's like trying to separate the red out of strawberry jello. It's impossible to do and all you end up with is a giant mess.