• If you are having problems logging in please use the Contact Us in the lower right hand corner of the forum page for assistance.

Republican Senator from Nebraska

Disagreeable

Well-known member
Chuck Hagel: "Leaving Iraq, Honorably". I support his call to get out of Iraq, but he's wrong on the honorable part. There's no way to get out of this quagmire with honor. Bush declared Mission Accomplised over two years ago. That's when we should have got out.

"There will be no victory or defeat for the United States in Iraq. These terms do not reflect the reality of what is going to happen there. The future of Iraq was always going to be determined by the Iraqis -- not the Americans.

Iraq is not a prize to be won or lost. It is part of the ongoing global struggle against instability, brutality, intolerance, extremism and terrorism. There will be no military victory or military solution for Iraq. Former secretary of state Henry Kissinger made this point last weekend.

The time for more U.S. troops in Iraq has passed. We do not have more troops to send and, even if we did, they would not bring a resolution to Iraq. Militaries are built to fight and win wars, not bind together failing nations. We are once again learning a very hard lesson in foreign affairs: America cannot impose a democracy on any nation -- regardless of our noble purpose.

We have misunderstood, misread, misplanned and mismanaged our honorable intentions in Iraq with an arrogant self-delusion reminiscent of Vietnam. Honorable intentions are not policies and plans. Iraq belongs to the 25 million Iraqis who live there. They will decide their fate and form of government.

It may take many years before there is a cohesive political center in Iraq. America's options on this point have always been limited. There will be a new center of gravity in the Middle East that will include Iraq. That process began over the past few days with the Syrians and Iraqis restoring diplomatic relations after 20 years of having no formal communication. The next installment would be this weekend's unprecedented meeting in Iran of the presidents of Iran, Syria and Iraq, if it takes place.

What does this tell us? It tells us that regional powers will fill regional vacuums, and they will move to work in their own self-interest -- without the United States. This is the most encouraging set of actions for the Middle East in years. The Middle East is more combustible today than ever before, and until we are able to lead a renewal of the Israeli-Palestinian peace process, mindless destruction and slaughter will continue in Lebanon, Israel and across the Middle East.

We are a long way from a sustained peaceful resolution to the anarchy in Iraq. But this latest set of events is moving the Middle East in the only direction it can go with any hope of lasting progress and peace. The movement will be imperfect, stuttering and difficult.

America finds itself in a dangerous and isolated position in the world. We are perceived as a nation at war with Muslims. Unfortunately, that perception is gaining credibility in the Muslim world and for many years will complicate America's global credibility, purpose and leadership. This debilitating and dangerous perception must be reversed as the world seeks a new geopolitical, trade and economic center that will accommodate the interests of billions of people over the next 25 years. The world will continue to require realistic, clear-headed American leadership -- not an American divine mission.

The United States must begin planning for a phased troop withdrawal from Iraq. The cost of combat in Iraq in terms of American lives, dollars and world standing has been devastating. We've already spent more than $300 billion there to prosecute an almost four-year-old war and are still spending $8 billion per month. The United States has spent more than $500 billion on our wars in Iraq and Afghanistan. And our effort in Afghanistan continues to deteriorate, partly because we took our focus off the real terrorist threat, which was there, and not in Iraq.

We are destroying our force structure, which took 30 years to build. We've been funding this war dishonestly, mainly through supplemental appropriations, which minimizes responsible congressional oversight and allows the administration to duck tough questions in defending its policies. Congress has abdicated its oversight responsibility in the past four years.

It is not too late. The United States can still extricate itself honorably from an impending disaster in Iraq. The Baker-Hamilton commission gives the president a new opportunity to form a bipartisan consensus to get out of Iraq. If the president fails to build a bipartisan foundation for an exit strategy, America will pay a high price for this blunder -- one that we will have difficulty recovering from in the years ahead.

To squander this moment would be to squander future possibilities for the Middle East and the world. That is what is at stake over the next few months."


This is the entire article, but here's the link: (my emphasis)

http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2006/11/24/AR2006112401104.html
 
A

Anonymous

Guest
Militaries are built to fight and win wars, not bind together failing nations. We are once again learning a very hard lesson in foreign affairs: America cannot impose a democracy on any nation -- regardless of our noble purpose.

Right there he said it all......We should have learned that it Vietnam...Our military is the finest in the world when it comes to fighting foreign invaders- like we did when we ran Iraq out of Kuwait- but they are not geared to be policemen and foreign diplomats....And I think we were/are reaching far beyond the impossible to believe we can impose our type democracy on a people that have known nothing but tribal law, kingdoms, and dictatorships....
 

Red Robin

Well-known member
I find another mode of action more appealing. We are already accused of going to war for oil, etc, etc. I say we raise an American flag and claim the ground. Drive out all those that don't want us there and put up a nice military base (which will certainly be handy sometime soon) . Start excising taxes from the newly acquired American citizens and selling our new found oil to pay off our war and lower the national debt. We can certainly win the war this way. We've paid a high price, we need to gain some ground because of it.
 

Econ101

Well-known member
Red Robin said:
I find another mode of action more appealing. We are already accused of going to war for oil, etc, etc. I say we raise an American flag and claim the ground. Drive out all those that don't want us there and put up a nice military base (which will certainly be handy sometime soon) . Start excising taxes from the newly acquired American citizens and selling our new found oil to pay off our war and lower the national debt. We can certainly win the war this way. We've paid a high price, we need to gain some ground because of it.

Sounds good but that is what we tried with Germany after the first World War. No one likes to be ruled by a foreign nation, no matter how it is set up.

That being said, I don't know what the solution is. None of the "solutions" seem too palatable. The Iranians exert such control over the Shiites through their religion and the Kurds will never be given pure statehood because of their perceived threat to a greater Kurdistan and the problems that makes for Turkey.

The Sunnis are just sh-- out of luck, and hence an intractable problem.

I hope the Baker Commission comes up with something that will work. Baker has had a lot of experience brokering peaceful solutions or coalitions that exert change.
 
Top