Washington File

Iraq is not comprised of three ethnically pure regions. Baghdad and major cities like Basra are ethnically mixed with much intermarriage. Partition will lead to a slaughter like we saw in the Balkans, that is already under way on a small scale and could spiral out of control. If the Maliki government collapses (he is allied with the Shia and Al-Sadr, and beginning to act independently like Diem in Vietnam) we will have a Balkan War scenario with three ethnic provisional governments. The Turks may enter the fighting because they would feel threatened by having a Kurdistan, real or de facto.

Creating three autonomous regions was discarded right out by the Bush administration. But I have not been able to find out why. Any idea where we can find arguments against this? And even if not the perfect solution, would it be worst than the other options?

It seems Kurds already can assure their own security in the North perhaps with a bit of help ... so that would be taken care of. Then Shia's are numerous in the army being trained and should be able to protect their own territory in the South. So we're left with the Sunni; well at least it's restricted to that area and perhaps if the Saoudi (and other Muslim states) accept the idea they could also support and try to contain the Sunnis on the centre grounds. It sounds too simple but, as of yet, I have not seen any extensive and convincing argument to dismiss the idea right from the start. It would be great to get Muslim states perspective on this option too.

With all due respect, Dubya's arugments for going into Iraq were NOT compelling - there are plenty of us who knew it was all B.S. from the start....also, the "cakewalk" in 1992 was very much tempered for the THINKING folk by the knowledge that the first President Bush had a damn good reason for not going after Saddam.

Why not pardon Saddam Hussein and restore him to the presidency? That would solve all the problems in Iraq. It was, after all, relatively peaceful and stable BEFORE those stupid Americans stuck their fat noses into the situation with their unprovoked, unsanctioned, illegal, and utterly useless invasion in the first place. Why George W Bush hasn't been tried - in absentia - for war crimes is beyond comprehension: he has consistently demonstrated that he is a "Clear and Present Danger" to world peace and stability.

Sorry, Mr. Champ, but I too am pretty much darked-out by the whole thing; like all my fellow respondents.

It doesn't matter which (of anyone's) options the Americans choose.

My prediction is that Iraq is going to fester for years, decades (if we all last that long). Just like the Israel/Palestine conflict.

ANOTHER Great Game is afoot in the Middle East. The forever perfect place to have one. For yet ANOTHER time in more than 4000 years, ANOTHER Pandora's Box has been opened. And they take so long to close, if ever! Some people NEVER Learn... "The best made plans..."

There are many different sides, both local and foriegn, now and for the future, opperating in Iraq. They have such varying agendas and goals, but they all have such fervently violent methods, and they will tug, yank, and spiral away from the center, and murder for murder's sake! And vengence will grow and mature in young Iraqi boys who live to become men. And then it will be their turn. Just like in the Israel/Palestine conflict.

The 21st century... not looking good.

What a mess: we all hope the Iraqi people achieve freedom and security and a normal life - that religious differences not prevent some sort of peace to evolve - that political power not be the only definition of success - that ordinary Iraqi's simply have a life and that neighboring countries back off. Surely Mohammed and Christ would both have agreed that the well-being of families should be the number one priority of government. It seems to me that it is families who are the main victims of the current situation and all sides should finally recognize that this stupid war must stop - asap!

Another solution would be to resettle the Iraqi people in America. They could all be given $100,000 each to start a new life and that would be the end of the problem.

Bang on Louise. You got it right. I`m afraid we could be in a similar mess in Afghanistan.

There will be no withdrawal as long as the Republicans are in power, with or without Bush as their figurehead. Go to "Project for a New American Century", http://www.newamericancentury.org read who the undersigned are, poke around and read some of the proposed policies and do some thinking. What you read there will wake you up to reality.

Then, when you're done with that, pick up the book "All The Shaw's Men: an American Coup and The Roots of Middle East Terror" by Stephen Kinzer. It will reveal to you what's been going on, why there's terrorism, and how US foreign policy works.

Then, when you're sufficiently depressed, go and do a good deed. Help your neighbour shovel snow from their driveway, or ask the homeless person who's standing at the entrance to the grocery store if they want to go shopping and buy them a barbequed chicken, a beverage and some cookies, or whatever they want. That might make you feel a bit better, and if we all do good things in our own back yards, maybe, over time, it will spread and we'll have a little more peace in the world.

When we speak of the cost of war, especially when so many billions have gone missing, somebody is running off with huge profits. And anybody with Haliburton shares, for example, feels the Iraq/Afgan debacle is a huge success and are happy to hear Bush talk about "Stay the course." Only a socio-path could care less about the loss of life and limb.

That these people are not on trial before the ICC is a criminal, too.

Big ears, screwing with things he dosen't know how to control, George W Bush or Mickey Mouse?
Sorcerers Apprentice, take your pick.

There is really no solution for Iraq. It doesn't really matter which option the president picks, the country is headed for a civil war. A gracious exit is now impossible for the Americans. But because of the oil interest in the country, there will be no withdrawl of troops from Iraq. Remember back to Vietnam and that outcome. The NATO meeting on the news at the moment proves that Iraq and Afghanistan are not popular wars, which makes the soliders in those two countries the victims.

I like # 2.

divide the country 3 ways & leave a central

gov for foreign affairs

warren

I humbly submit that there is yet another way out that would give America peace with honour and usher in a new age of understanding. The only right solution, though not one easily swallowed by the American people, would be for America and all coalition partners to announce an immediate withdrawl of forces, issue formal apologies to be followed by the prompt payment of war reperations (in the tens of billions of dollars), and the mobilization of an international reconstruction effort spearheaded by nations not involved in the agression against the Iraqi people. Only in this way can the west begin to make amends for it's agressive and illegal actions in Iraq. A good follow up would be a repeat performance in Afghansitan.

Once when I was a teenager, in a fit of stupidity, I threw a rock through a neighbours window. My parents found out it was me, and made me help the neighbour replace the glass in the wood frame. I learned a lot from that experience. Hopefully, the US has learned a lot from the Iraq experience as well. Now is not the time to get out, now is the time to help the Iraqi people fix the mess that's been created. To get the job done right, the US needs do everything in its power, and that includes sending in more troops to stabilize the country and train Iraqi troops and police. Once the country is stable, the US can leave and what ever the Iraqis do with it is then up to them.

As much as we often like to imagine governments primarily existing to serve the interests of western ideals and human justice, a simple fact of international affairs is the cost-benefit calculation. Considering that the US has expended huge amounts of financial, military and political resources in Iraq the odds of them just pulling out remain low unless it becomes a matter of holding a losing hand with no chance to draw another card.

Clearly, the American government hopes for an end to the continued violence, stable government(s) friendly to the US and perhaps profitable business deals that can be made between any new government and American corporate interests. These and other factors would allow for the regaining of at least some of the resources spent to date and help to justify their actions over the past years to both the American people and the rest of the world. But it's a gamble any way you shuffle the deck.

Whichever course is chosen in the near future, expect a definite departure from past efforts but a withdrawal announcement only in the face of a very cold economic/military reality. To military planners, at this point it is less important that the war is "winable" than it is that political/economic losses can be quickly eliminated and hopefully recouped over the coming years.