Who has the course of action for Iraq?

Question

We have the ISG report, including comments by Meese and Baker.
We have Rumsfeld's comments, saying it isn't going well in Iraq.
We have the incoming SECDEF's comments, saying things aren't going well.

Who has the answer? Are we trying to make a silk purse out of a sow's ear?

Please - if you're going to say "Win the war," or "victory," or something like that, please describe what you think victory means. There are as many definitions of victory as there are ideas of what should happen next.

Answer 1

victory means quit being saudi arabias btch and let the people of our country influence our governments decision instead of the country that has its leaders sitting in gold thrones ,and is also the birthplace of Islam.Mecca is the muslim holy land,but yet all republicans seem to label muslims terrorists.they all need to get their head out of their azz and recognize that the leaders of the republicans have done nothing but lie about everything and their religion is the stock market.they have divided our country and done nothing to fix our own countries problems.

Answer 2

Understand that the term "Victory" has meaning that is farther reaching than just where it concerns Iraq. For my money, a victory would be locking the Iraqi borders, implementing Biometric Passports, monitoring who comes and goes with a fine toothed comb. NOT discussing our plans with Iran or Syria as they already know our plans (that's why they're so upset), and having enough manpower and hardware to crush the insurgency (not just spot check it).

The ISG is not a realistic approach on it's own, and setting a timeline is unreasonable at best. Thus far, we have not fought a war in Iraq. Our efforts have been what I believe to be half-hearted. Roots of this are in the fact that we do not view terrorism as an act of war but as a crime. When people describe this effort as not going well, they are correct. Think back to Gulf War 1. We initially threw all our best at it then came up short. Only former President Bush knows why we pulled up short but I suspect he knew that to depose Saddam would be an undertaking that would likely require his term and at least one other President's term(s). He also knew that to remove Saddam without serious consideration as to who/what would replace him/his government would open the door for Iran, the world leader in terrorism. Thus far, our efforts have been for all the right reasons. The level of our effort has been weak.

Anyone can look at a problem and comment but being critical without a serious alternative is worse than sitting quietly by and watching. Rumsfeld wanted to hammer the region and initially, I was hesitant but the more I learn and see, the more I wish we had just gone into this at 110% strength and really carried out a declaration of war. Victory will be achieved when Iran is slapped back into reality by an overwhelming force of violence. This, they understand.

My Father was a career lawman. He taught me that when I walked into a baroom brawl, my job was to find the "burr under the horse's blanket" and remove it. Well, in this case, the burr that is making the horse unridable is Iranian leadership.

Answer 3

I think we have no choice but to win. Defeat is not an option. We have changed the government there, and it is up to us to make sure the new one stands. How to go about this is the question? Start with bring some of their troops here for military training. Let them see how to train a soldier. Second, their borders need to be patrolled better. Stop the insurgents from coming in. Third, we have to quell the violence between rival factions. Pull back, let them have their civil war, then go in and mop up. The other option is to divide the country and that again is not an option. We could just pull out our troops and let the whole place turn into living hell, if that would make the left feel better. Then you can use it for political gain!

Answer 4

Nukes, man, NUKES. Those hairballs need to good "nuke-ler" butt kicking before they'll start showing Uncle Sam some respect again. They respect power. They didn't attack the troops when they initially stormed into Iraq, kicking ***, because they respected them. They have no respect the peace keeping mission over there now. I'd say you should move your troops out, let them do what ever they decide to do within their borders, but let them know they'll get another ****-kicking or maybe a few small nukes if they cause anyone else any problems.

Answer 5

You have to fix the hart of the Middle East conflict Israel VS Palestine to have any working resolution to Iraq war. Read what Baker-Hamilton report or Carter new book