Just read Wes Clarks solution to Iraq, and am convienced it won't work

[still_one]

http://securingamerica.com/articles/wapo/2005-08-26

He agrees it was a flawed policy and that we should not have done it in the first place, but says, we should NOT just leave.

His solution is to concentrate more on diplomatic efforts.

Sorry, but it is too late for that.

He argues that we should provide our troops proper resources.

Of course we should, but we should have done that two years ago. We are now immersed in the middle of a country, with an ill-equpied Army, trying to provide order to a divided country

He argues for allies help, but why should they? They have already been frozen out of any oil rights that were exclusively given to American companies, via Bremer.

Sorry, but it is too late for that. Paul Hackett said it correctly, claim victory, and bring our troops home. It is too late to recover from the disaster that these idiots got us into

[msongs]

1. how about "declare victory and leave"? nt

[still_one]

3. That is Paul Hacket's view, and I concur

It is too late to redeem the situation

[jonnyblitz]

7. I concur also and so does ex-CIA guy Larry Johnson

WHY WE MUST LEAVE IRAQ

by
Larry C. Johnson

Sometimes in life there are no good options. It is part of our nature to always assume that we can fix a problem. But in life there are many problems or situations where there is no pleasant solution. If you were at the Windows on the World Restaurant in the North Tower of the World Trade Center at 9 am on September 11, 2001 you had no good options. You could choose to jump or to burn to death. Some choice.

A hard, clear-eyed look at the current situation in Iraq reveals that we are confronted with equally bad choices. If we stay we are facilitating the creation of an Islamic state that will be a client of Iran. If we pull out we are likely to leave the various ethnic groups of Iraq to escalate the civil war already underway. In my judgment we have no alternative but to pull our forces out of Iraq. Like it or not, such a move will be viewed as a defeat of the United States and will create some very serious foreign policy and security problems for us for years to come. However, we are unwilling to make the sacrifices required to achieve something approximating victory. And, what would victory look like? At a minimum we should expect a secular society where the average Iraqi can move around the country without fear of being killed or kidnapped. That is not the case nor is it on the horizon.

We may even be past the point of no return where we could impose changes that would put Iraq back on course to be a secular, democratic nation without sparking a major Shiite counteroffensive. Therefore the time has come to minimize further unnecessary loss of life by our troops and re-craft a new foreign and security policy for the Middle East.

more...
http://noquarter.typepad.com/my_weblog/2005/08/why_we_must_lea.html#more

[slor]

20. Thanks for posting n/t

[Usrename]

23. Fire Rummy, hire Wesley

I don't know if he can do what he says he can do, or if I agree with it necessarily.

But I wholeheartedly support a change.

[me b zola]

22. Yes.

Paul Hackett said that if we withdraw tomorrow or five-ten years from now there will be some infighting, but the longer we are there will not change that fact. Please, I am going off of memory, so if someone has the quote from Hardball, please help me out.

Hell, they are fighting now. Are men & women are there protecting the contractors interests, nothing more.

[Nite Owl]

2. There isn't a chance that this

administration would do any of the things he is saying. Seems like he might be offering some cover to those dems who are still saying that we need more troops and can't pull out yet. They can then say that the administration missed their last chance and we must pull out.

[still_one]

5. I agree that this administration is too stubborn to do any of the

suggestions, but I also believe it is too late for diplomacy with the U.S. involved. We are a catalyst for violence there now

[ThoughtCriminal]

4. It would probably work with a different administration

The current one doesn't do diplomacy. Some people are actually GOOD at it.

[still_one]

6. We have too much blood on our hands now

someone else will need to deal with the diplomacy

[ThoughtCriminal]

10. "Regime change" would bring new credibilty

I think kicking the goons out of office - either impeachment or election will give us a cleaner possition to deal from. Bush and the neo-cons have earned a unique and personal hatred and lack of credibilty. A new administraton would find diplomatic opportunities that simply do not exist now.

[sandnsea]

8. Hackett never said that

Hackett supports stabilizing Iraq. The same as every other politician I've ever heard. Nobody supports immediate withdrawal and it's too bad the Iraq war debates always get framed as win or withdraw. We lose that argument every single time.

"And even though it's in a terrible condition today as a result of the insurgency phasing into civil war, perhaps, I don't think it's currently today as bad as it will be if we were to pull out tomorrow. I think that the administration has got to permit the American military over there to fight that fight and train the I.S.F., the Iraqi Security Forces, in a manner acceptable to our military, which I argue they're not -- the administration is not allowing that, so that the I.S.F. can be up to speed and we can get out of there."

http://www.democracynow.org/article.pl?sid=05/08/03/1419256

[still_one]

9. when I heard him on Bill Maher last week that is exactly what he said

He has changed his views

[jonnyblitz]

14. sounds like he has smartened up, UNLIKE the politicians. nt

[sandnsea]

15. We'll see

I've heard alot of people say "bring em' home", only to read their plans that call for training the troops, elections, reconstruction, etc.

[still_one]

16. I am skeptical too

but at least he re-evaluated, which is more than I can say for others in Congress

[still_one]

11. Here is the exact quote on Bill Maher:

Paul Hackett on Bill Maher:

"What now, more troops or less. Look It's not working, civil war, newsflash the war's over bring em home. "


http://onegoodmove.org/1gm/1gmarchive/002309.html

[delen]

18. American arrogance seems limitless

The ones that seem to be left out of all the "stay the course or pull out now" arguments are the Iraqi people. I think we all know the new government and constitution are a sham. The sad truth is that if we simply pick our "toys" and go home we will create another Cambodia, we the American people are morally responsible to help in the rebuilding and stabilizing of Iraq, however what shape that help takes must be made by a true consensus of the Iraqi people themselves.

[NNN0LHI]

21. Here is what Hackett said last night sandnsea

http://msnbc.msn.com/id/9085862/

MATTHEWS: OK, let‘s go to this question. It seems to me most Americans—and this is totally fair—know that we can‘t bug out of Iraq in the short run, because it will just be all our friends over there we have given hope to and the guys in the suits trying to write those constitutions will all get massacred and their throats cut and their heads thrown on the sidewalk. We know that. So, you can‘t do that.

But, also, you don‘t hear anybody who says, I see a bright light at the end of the tunnel. So, in the short run, we can‘t bug out. And yet, over the space of even two or three years, nobody says it‘s all going to get done. So, if you were commander in chief right now, knowing those two facts, we can‘t bug out now, but we can‘t stay forever or we won‘t get much done in the long run, what would do you?

(CROSSTALK)

HACKETT: I‘d tell the American people, the war is over. We gave them democracy. We freed them from a brutal dictator. We helped them draft a constitution and we helped set up and give a structure to their defense, and now is the time. Declare victory. Bring it home, because here is why.

MATTHEWS: Will they accept the fact that they‘re able to support themselves, our allies over there?

HACKETT: I don‘t think whether we leave, figuratively speaking, today or two years or three years or four years from now, that we are going to pull out of there.

Whenever we pull out of there, there‘s going to be an uptick in the terrorism. And there‘s going to be an uptick in the fighting, no matter when we leave. And they‘re going to have to sort that out among themselves. And I think the challenge now is to figure out how we begin to draw down the forces over there.

Look, we‘re already doing it. We‘re going to be at under 100,000 troops a year from today.

[damntexdem]

12. How about, don't cut and run ...

just run without cutting?

[tocqueville]

13. the only way is to pass the buck to the UN

- Make clear that the departure will be complete when the UN takes over

- Have a region conference with representatives from the neighbouring nations and other arab nations

- create a multinational "ISLAMIC" force with logistics provided by France, Russia, Germany

- let them take over

the insurgency will stop of itself, except the Al Quaeda people (but they are a tiny minority) and the Sunnis can stop them, having no use for them anymore

- leave

the Bush administration will of course never accept this, but the Democrats have to present such a plan. Because they can at least proclaim they worked for an honorable wa, realistic way out.

Being Republican-lite won't help

IMHO it won't take to the next election before the situation in Iraq gets out of controll.

[JDPriestly]

17. I have always liked Wes Clark,

but I would like to hear him speak about his relationship to and opinions on Halliburton. They did the construction/privatized contracting work in the war in the '90s in Kosovo. See Briody, The Halliburton Agenda, The Politics of Oil and Money (a must read). Having read that book, I think one of the main impetuses for the post WW-II wars has been the opportunities they provide for construction companies to make huge profits from government contracts.

Clark must have worked with Halliburton contractors in Kosovo. I wonder how close he is to them?

[Tierra_y_Libertad]

19. It's time to face the music and quit. America lost another war.

With a bloated military, a bungling bunch of clowns running intelligence, and a wannabee hero in the white house surrounded by imperialists, we were thrashed by a bunch of underarmed, raggedy, guerrillas who want their country back.

Get out of their country and get over it.

[Terran1212]

24. Wes Clark is a military policynik

Do you think he'd really sacrifice a military foothold in the ME for a little more peace for Iraq?