I have begun reading the report from the Iraq Study Group and am already disappointed. The "Baker" Report should contain possible strategies to win in Iraq. I couldn’t find a section on winning Iraq, or a section on victory in the entire report. I have heard reports today that the study group only took one trip to Iraq, and then only two of the members ever ventured out of the Green Zone. If this is true, how can we believe this is an accurate assessment of the state of Iraq? Why should the President or Congress put any faith in what is in essence a damage control report? The President and Congress should be examining ways to win in Iraq and not ways to look better to the world. War is hard. Sherman said that war is all hell. It is suppose to be ugly and brutal. But we as Americans must put that aside and look for real ways to win.
Iraq is still winnable. We must decide what we want to obtain from our involvement in Iraq, what conditions we are willing to define for victory, and how much we are willing to do to get it. That is what the debate between Republicans and Democrats really needs to be. I don’t believe that any Republican, Democrat, or American really wants to loose in Iraq. So how do we define Victory, and how do we get there?
If we look at Iraq as a front in the larger global war on Islamic Fundamentalism, then we can define victory. One possible definition: Victory is when Iraq is a fully self – reliant democratic government. We can get there by breaking the will of our enemies and the enemies of the Iraqi people. Anyone who has done any looking into the war knows Syria and Iran are both funneling fighters and materials into Iraq. Iran and Syria should be made to hurt enough that they stop supplying our enemies with aid. If Iran and Syria are willing to bleed American soldiers, we should do the same to them. We could target their terrorist as they come across the border, or we could take the war to their nations.
This is only a possible solution. We could limit the area of operation to within the borders of Iraq and step up military operations. We could decide we are willing to handle more civilian causalities in order to protect our troops and hit the terrorist harder. These are all possible strategies to win Iraq. The point is not whether or not they are the right strategies, but that they are strategies that could work in Iraq.
A real Iraq Study Group would have been able to find a few strategies for Victory. This Study Group appears to be looking for anything but Victory.
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
6 comments:
Gates said we are not winning in Iraq.
There would be some signs of possible victory if it were possible or is the Bush Admin. just incompetent totally?
No sign of victory, no way out.
Victory would be no more U.S. soldiers dying. We could accomplish that.
If you define victory as no more US soldiers dying, then you can never use the military. Soldiers die in training accidents. Our casulty rate has been (on a whole) extremely low. Look up the numbers of soldiers dying in previous wars (in WW II, I think we lost something like 8,000 soldiers a month). Victory is there if we want to go after it.
I found the quote I mentioned in my article on Bill Bennett's article for National Review Online:
“[T]ell me, why should the president give more weight to what you all have said given, as I understand, you went to Iraq once, with the exception of Senator Robb. None of you made it out of the Green Zone. Why should he give your recommendations any more weight than what he's hearing from his commanders on the ground in Iraq?”
This was a question I think deserved an answer from yesterday's news conference.
Interesting blog and discussion. I am interested to know more about what the people of Iraq think and what our soldiers think than what the Iraq Study Group thinks. It's not about big business, re-election, the 2008 elections-it's about the Iraqi people, the spread of peace worldwide and the and the rooting out of terrorists. Thinking has to change globally before we can win.
bilzor, thanks for the comments and I agree. We must decide what is best for our interest and how best to help the people of Iraq. We have to remember our actions in Iraq will have very long term and far reaching consequences. The correct course of action may very well not have a lot of support on a bipartisan level. Bush as a leader, and our next president, must have the resolve as leaders to do what may be unpopular, but what is right.
Hi andy d,
Your blog looks great. I am definitely going to be checking it out at length, as soon as I recover from my experience over at opinionnation :P I'm exhausted.
This looks like just the kind of place I'm looking for. I'm something of a newbie in the political discussion arena, though I do have some definite views on things. I've been looking for a blog where I can read well thought out opinions and questions that strive to find the truth instead of just yelling to make a point. I'll be back.
Welcome to the site familyman. I moderate the comments, but only to restrict the name calling.
Your welcome to express your opinions on anything I post here, or even ask about something I haven't posted on. I just enjoy talking politics and current events.
Post a Comment