4 Options in Iraq

Superlative

Senior Member
Mar 13, 2007
1,382
109
48
“History suggests only there’s only a couple … ways to keep together a country driven by sectarian strife.
And it’s not to put American troops into a city of 6.2 million people to try to quell a civil war.

Throughout history four things have worked.

You occupy the country for a generation or more.
That’s not in our DNA—we’re not the Persian Empire or the British Empire.

You install a dictator. Wouldn’t that be the ultimate irony for the United States—to go back after taking one down and install another one?

You let them fight it out until one side massacres the other—that’s not an option in that tinderbox part of the world.

Or lastly, you make federalism work for the Iraqis. You give them control over the fabric of their daily lives. You separate the parties. You give them breathing room. Let them control their local police, their education, their religion and marriage.”



Who said this?

Anyone know?

Here's a hint: it wasn't a Republican.
 
Since hi sname was brought up, I actually think Joe Biden has the plan with best overall chance for success IF he is the one who wants to partition Iraq into thirds.

Not that it will stop those knuckleheads from killing each other.
 
Since hi sname was brought up, I actually think Joe Biden has the plan with best overall chance for success IF he is the one who wants to partition Iraq into thirds.

Not that it will stop those knuckleheads from killing each other.

I second that notion. Partitioning Iraq isn't going to stop the killing. Disputes will emerge on all sides as to who gets what, and these disputes will collapse into all out war.

Besides, how do you propose to forcibly relocate Sunni, Shitte, or Kurdish Iraqis who find themselves on the wrong side of these assuredly crooked and artificial lines of division? And let's not even begin to comprehend the difficulties inherent in compensating these people for lost income and destroyed ways of life.

Finally, I am deeply concerned that recognizing the ethnic and religious divides in Iraq will only serve in sharpening that divide which already exists. In addition, any "three state" or "federal" solution currently proposed would, if enacted, essentially override the progress made by the legitimate, democratically elected government of Iraq, further fueling critics of US policy who denounce our efforts as imperialistic while simultaneously weakening the credibility and power of the current Iraqi government.
 
I second that notion. Partitioning Iraq isn't going to stop the killing. Disputes will emerge on all sides as to who gets what, and these disputes will collapse into all out war.

Besides, how do you propose to forcibly relocate Sunni, Shitte, or Kurdish Iraqis who find themselves on the wrong side of these assuredly crooked and artificial lines of division? And let's not even begin to comprehend the difficulties inherent in compensating these people for lost income and destroyed ways of life.

Finally, I am deeply concerned that recognizing the ethnic and religious divides in Iraq will only serve in sharpening that divide which already exists. In addition, any "three state" or "federal" solution currently proposed would, if enacted, essentially override the progress made by the legitimate, democratically elected government of Iraq, further fueling critics of US policy who denounce our efforts as imperialistic while simultaneously weakening the credibility and power of the current Iraqi government.

All valid points, IMO.

It really doesn't matter where the lines are drawn. Arabs believe in settling their differences by the sword, and have done so for centuries. The government of Iraq needs to quit screwing around and step up to the plate.
 
much wisdom in this thread.

Cause RSR hasnt cut and posted some baloney to muddy it all up.

At least Biden is showing he has a thought and a stand point on the situation, more than I can say for alot of politicians.
 
He's still wrong though.

That may be, but those are four more options than Ive heard from Mr Bush.

Although im sure he is aware of them, and im sure he knows the whole world is aware of them, he doesnt want to insult everyones intelligence by reminding us.
 
Saying he's better than Bush ain't saying much...

Ha, true.

But what would be nice is if this bill from congress wasnt looked at like "if its passed we're leaving right away, immediately, and that will make everything worse", and thats what its turned into, because its been such a mess, it would appear that another YEAR isnt enough time.

Bush is making it seem like if the bill gets past then we will be packing up and leaving in a few days.

And that has everyone saying "Cut and Run" "Surrender Bill" which is stupid, I guess the knife cuts both ways when looking into the future, there is no way to tell if things will get better or worse, and Bush is playing it safe, by asking for patience.
 
Ha, true.

But what would be nice is if this bill from congress wasnt looked at like "if its passed we're leaving right away, immediately, and that will make everything worse", and thats what its turned into, because its been such a mess, it would appear that another YEAR isnt enough time.

Bush is making it seem like if the bill gets past then we will be packing up and leaving in a few days.

And that has everyone saying "Cut and Run" "Surrender Bill" which is stupid, I guess the knife cuts both ways when looking into the future, there is no way to tell if things will get better or worse, and Bush is playing it safe, by asking for patience.
Bush has to stay in Iraq. Iraq is now his Presidency. In all other areas he is now a lame duck. Iraq is also his place in history.

Of course, as the carnage continues and we learn more and more about the problems associated with the planning and the rebuilding projects in Iraq, it is increasingly obvious that we aren't going to win this war. All we can hope for now is a least bad situation. Bush is betting that the surge will be less bad then a surge, all we can do is hope he's right.
 
Bush has to stay in Iraq. Iraq is now his Presidency. In all other areas he is now a lame duck. Iraq is also his place in history.

Of course, as the carnage continues and we learn more and more about the problems associated with the planning and the rebuilding projects in Iraq, it is increasingly obvious that we aren't going to win this war. All we can hope for now is a least bad situation. Bush is betting that the surge will be less bad then a surge, all we can do is hope he's right.

While we exercise patience, things continue to explode.
People continue to die, which re-enforces the liberal agenda of withdrawal, while bolstering Bush's position of staying until its fixed.

Quite the pickle.
 
While we exercise patience, things continue to explode.
People continue to die, which re-enforces the liberal agenda of withdrawal, while bolstering Bush's position of staying until its fixed.

Quite the pickle.

Actually I think his legacy is 'answering the WOT'. May not have been successful, but answered it was.
 

Forum List

Back
Top