Even with Rummy gone do people think there is any plan that could "save" Iraq?

There's every possibility that the early mistake of not having enough troops and/or destroying the Iraqi military/police apparatus doomed us to failure no matter what happens now since it allowed the militia culture to emerge.

Seems like to me the most positive outcome is we get out ASAP with as little loss of face as possible and Iraq divides itself along religious/ethnic lines with the weak federal government being a shiite based operation largely controlled by Iran while large parts of the country are basically independent and run by local Sunni/Kurd organizations.

Tom Friedman had an editorial in the nytimes a couple days ago, similar to your final paragraph. My concern is that he has been optimistic about Iraq from the get-go, and this was his best case scenario for the country. Weak fed gov. with semi-autonomous ethnic states...

I would be happy if we could get out relatively soon with that result. I don't really buy the troop shortage as the sole cause though. This is a country that was ready for a violent explosion, a serious change from the oppression of the last 25 years.

Silas

Not as one country..............

distasteful as it is, this appears to be what the Iraqi's want......breakup based on ethinic lines.

Len

Not as one country..............

distasteful as it is, this appears to be what the Iraqi's want......breakup based on ethinic lines.

Len

But they all want the part with the oil. :)

But they all want the part with the oil. :)


Isn't that the part we want too?




joe

Not as one country..............

distasteful as it is, this appears to be what the Iraqi's want......breakup based on ethinic lines.

Len


A United States of Iraq?

A United States of Iraq?

See the problem is...we had them write a constitution...when we really should have borrowed them our Articles of Confederation.:p

See the problem is...we had them write a constitution...when we really should have borrowed them our Articles of Confederation.:p

Maybe we should have imposed the US constitution on them for 20 years. After 20 years they can do what they want, but for that 20 years they have to try our way on for size. If we have such faith in it, why not put our system where our mouth is?

Imagine the irony if they agreed to do that, but then issued a signing statement saying they reserve the right to ignore certain parts.

Maybe we should have imposed the US constitution on them for 20 years. After 20 years they can do what they want, but for that 20 years they have to try our way on for size. If we have such faith in it, why not put our system where our mouth is?
I've been saying this all along (well, not the 20 year thing). What is so terrible about our Constitution that it doesn't work elsewhere?

Imagine the irony if they agreed to do that, but then issued a signing statement saying they reserve the right to ignore certain parts.LOL.

I've been saying this all along (well, not the 20 year thing). What is so terrible about our Constitution that it doesn't work elsewhere?Apart from the parts about counting slaves as a fraction of white men, nothing, but the document is just a piece of paper. What makes it work is the commitment of the populace to following it, and there is absolutely no such commitment, politically, socially, or culturally, in Iraq. (Or for that matter, IMO, in the White House, but that's another issue.)

I've been saying this all along (well, not the 20 year thing). What is so terrible about our Constitution that it doesn't work elsewhere?

Most people around the world don't believe in a separation of "church" and state?

Isn't that the part we want too?




joe

Yeah, we only went there to steal their oil.