If there is no such thing as "Victory in Iraq"...

[Labors of Hercules]

Is there an achievable outcome that is anything less than disaster?

Administration officials and military analysts suggest that a U.S. victory in Iraq would mean leaving behind a country that can maintain a functioning democracy rather than serve as an incubator for terrorism.

NOT gonna happen... Okay, How about this?

Victory would be marked by helping to establish an Iraqi state that is at peace with itself and its neighbors, has a democratic government seen as legitimate by the overwhelming proportion of its people and is a reliable ally in the War on Terror

Riiiiiigggggghhhhtt! In whose drug-induced hallucination would THAT ever be a lasting reality?

So, what say lets shoot for a little more realism, Here's Colin Powell's current take on it...

The administration doesn't like me to say it, but it is a civil war... The troop surge, I wish it luck, but it is like putting a heavier lid on a boiling pot. There is a limit to how much we can do... There is no happy ending coming out of this situation.

DAMN.

So, to clarify, the Repuglicon Candidates believe we must have VICTORY and we can achieve "it" by continuing to do what we're doing, BUT NOT ONE OF THEM can tell me what "Victory" even means??? Far less show that "it" is even remotely achievable???

WILL SOMEONE PLEASE GIVE A SOLUTION TO THIS PROBLEM???
Is there a realistic best case scenario?
:patriot: :banghead:

[Fovea]

1. But the Surge!!111!

The surge is victory itself, more troops in harm's way is what Bush* masters want and need.

When you supply the troops with bad food and water on no bid contracts, you believe in the surge.

[Labors of Hercules]

6. so it's all about individual's immediate gains and a TOTAL FUTURE LOSS??

*nods* We've only begun to see the Iraq disaster unfold. :nuke:

[ninkasi]

2. Bush's invasion and occupation of Iraq

were, and are, criminal. The only solution is to leave. When the premise for going to war is false, i's impossible to find an acceptable solution. We can't solve a problem which didn't exist, such as the nonexistent WMDs. Bush and the neocons screwed up, and are waiting to hand the whole stinking mess off to the next president.

[Labors of Hercules]

10. question:

Bush created this mess, and his administration is responsible. Do we not owe it to the Iraqi people to try and make some positive result? I do NOT believe our military can do this, but the need is there all the same, and it pisses me off that the Repugs REFUSE to take ownership and talk of bullshit "victory" when THEY have brought Iraq to the brink of destruction and are dancing around it because in truth it makes them happy! :grr:

[ninkasi]

13. Yes, we need to help the Iraqi people

It is a disgrace that Bush illegally invaded another country, has demolished their infrastructure, killed hundreds of thousands of it's citizens,and driven the professionals, university teachers, doctors, etc., into exile. We bear responsibility to do what we can to help rebuild the country.

We will have to find a way to solve the crisis we have caused. I resent the deaths on both sides, the maiming, the trauma children growing up in a war torn country are subjected to, and while the enormous drain on the American taxpayer is appalling, we can raise taxes on the wealthy, and certain big business...Halliburton, KBR, and the oil companies who stand to make huge profits.

I am furious that, unless a Democratic president is elected who is willing to roll back the wealthy's tax cuts, we will end up footing the bill, as we are doing now, for the ones who wanted this war. We will also need to pay our veterans, and stop treating them like second class citizens.

[loyalsister]

16. Victory civil war democracy

They use this language as if they are talking about something that has happened in America.
Either Democracy or civil war?

Victory or Civil war?

Victory on our terms is for them to have a democracy.

What if we leave, they achieve peace under a government is that religiously tolerant but not the democracy we had in mind?

Who has achieved victory?
Would we try to go back in time and recapture "liberation" because they no longer have a mean dictator, even though they had to live through a war they didn't ask for?

As soon as we leave, the political machinery will begin to rewrite history.
We have to remember.

[Hart2008]

3. The best solution is to impeach the lying bastards who got us into this mess n/t

[MadMaddie]

4. No...and I will tell you why...because History dictates that it will

end in Disaster.....

Russia went into Afghanstan and it destroyed their military and may have led to their downfall at that time in history.

The region of Iraq has been mired in conflict for hundreds of years....when Churchill Cobbled the country together he created a situation that would eventually explode...he admitted it was a mistake

..because this Administration so foolishly thought that their imperial power and the misuse of American troops could destroy and rebuild Iraq, Messopatania....as it was called at one time....they Killed Sadam (I am not defending the guy by any means) but they pulled a scab off of festering wound....

What will happen? One way or another the US will leave and they will fight until another Thug like Saddam is able to establish himself as the new dictator....This is the real tradgedy....this administration had a Window of opportunity when they toppled the military and the statue...but they lost it within a week by not establishing security for the people of Iraq immedietly...

So no there is no good outcome...we have past that point.

One of the worst military and Civilian led blunders in the history of this world.

[Labors of Hercules]

5. So, now that it's time to declare a total disaster, pack up and go home...

I wonder what will happen to Iraq?

[MadMaddie]

8. I think History really tells us what will happen next..

We will withdraw and leave behind a qausi dictator.....
(another possibility) or Iran and Syria will make inroads and split the country...

http://www.britishempire.co.uk/maproom/iraq.htm

<snip>
Britain's withdrawal from Iraq was a swift one. It came with the overthrow of the Hashemite regime that Britain had so assidiously cultivated over the years. The Hashemites had never fully gained legitimacy as rulers in the eyes of the Iraqis. They were regarded as little more than foreign rulers who followed every beck and call of their British masters. Constant tribal bickerings and uprisings weakened the government in outlying areas of Iraq, whereas in the main cities, political dissatisfaction was expressed in the ballot boxes and the free press that Britain had expressly created for the country
<snip>

[Labors of Hercules]

11. Thank you for providing that link!

After reading a bit more, I just wonder what we are still doing there? Why is Congress still voting for funding this "war" if history is so obviously repeating itself? (not only in Iraq's history, but looking at the startling comparisons to Vietnam...)

Your thoughts Maddie?

[MadMaddie]

22. Oil, Oil, Oil....this Administration still thinks they have a chance

at controlling the oil. (of course we know that is past..because they are bumbling idiots they blew it)

Unfortunately I think that the Democratic leaders have been running
from the Vietnam comparisons for so long, especially after the Repugs kicked the shit out Kerry during the election and his Vietnam record(the Dems lost the Vietnam edge when they didn't protect and defend Kerry)

...they have not figured out a way to address the comparison.

I think the Democratic led Congress is doing their best to walk the line right now...the Media is obviously biased and still having a huge impact on public opinion..the media lables them defeatocrats etc...

Honestly, the Democratic Congress needs to find the best Advertisement minds in the world...whether they are in America or elsewhere and they need to start controlling the message...I believe this is their weakest link in trying to move ahead...Control the message...Control the war....and it's outcome...

just a few thoughts

[Monkeyman]

7. Well Said Couldn't done better

[MethuenProgressive]

9. There's no "best case" - our troops will come home, and Iraq will get more violent

Iran, Syria, and the Saudis will fill the void, dividing up the country Sunni/Shia/Kurd while fighting each other over the oil fields. Many tens of thousands will die, and gas will be $25 a gallon. The sooner we get out, the sooner the free-for-all can begin, and in a decade or so (if cool heads keep the Pakis and Israelis out of it) the cradle of civilization will return to tribal non-nation zones of relative non-war. Millions of people displaced, cities emptied, countries destroyed, and the world will hold us rightly responsible. The best we can do is get the hell out as soon as possible, so fewer Americans die in the conflict.

[youngdem]

12. Iraq is a self inflicted stab wound. You cannot unstab yourself

You can only carefully remove the implement and retreat to your bunk to recover and lick your wounds, and learn not to run with your sharpest knives next time.

[unkachuck]

14. agreed....

....but what the corporatists won't tell you, is what they really fear and why they're there trying to stomp out this fire....

....Islamic-extremist idealogy has limited world-wide appeal but their fighting techniques do not....what the extemists have developed fighting bushcos' war are new successful low-tech methods easily adapted by any individual or group disgruntled with global corporate power....

....extremist methods metastasized to anti-capitalist causes is what keeps the fascists up nights....not that they care about us, mind you; remember the Patriot Act, then remember Katrina....

....Iraq is a corporate war for oil; taken from the French and Russians and put into US big-oils pocket but done in a very sloppy way....

....there is only one solution, get out of Iraq now!!! before the whole region blows....Iraq will be what it was destined to be when bushco first invaded, a disaster....bad decisions can only produce bad outcomes....

[dave_p]

15. No way back

"Is there an achievable outcome that is anything less than disaster?"

No. It's a disaster, and there's no way back.

The US and Britain took a country whose administration and infrastructure had largely survived 12 years of crippling sanctions, and destroyed it.

They took a broadly secular state free of jihadist activity and turned it into a prime fundie recruitment ad & operational base.

They took the Arab world's principal bulwark against Iranian influence and handed it to Tehran lock, stock & barrel.

There's no solution that this debacle's perpetrators can offer.

The closest thing to a realistic best case scenario that I can foresee is early withdrawal and a recognition by the main parties that killing each other isn't getting them anywhere.

The best imaginable scenario for Iraq is that the US provokes all sides into uniting against it. But that would be costly in US lives unless withdrawal was accomplished ultra-fast. And reconciliation's the last thing this Administration wants.

[TheFarseer]

17. The best outcome

One side wins the civil war and imposes peace, leaving US troops free to leave and not promote an explosion into an even broader civil war which could spread to other nations. The oil keeps flowing and the US keeps a few troops behind to keep Al Queda out of Anbar and elsewhere and to back up the Kurds. That would be a descent outcome from my perspective.

[Labors of Hercules]

18. Wouldn't that require letting the civil war escalate and play itself out? n/t

[TheFarseer]

21. that would certainly expediate the process

I would prefer we adopt a position of hunting down Al Queda types in Anbar, protecting the oil and the Kurds and the rest of it can go to hell because it will anyway at some point no matter what we do.

[Tejanocrat]

19. Of course there is! We're going to win in Iraq just like Britain won our Civil War!

[MGKrebs]

20. Victory = a stable and relatively peaceful Iraq.

That is the outcome. The path to achieving that outcome, I think, will have to involve a multi-national effort to put in place a (probably) complicated set of conditions including job creation, economic stimulus, large security presence for a fairly long time (we're still in Kosovo), less than full democracy for that time, and minimal US involvment.

We are part of the problem. We have created the mess and the resulting resentment has made it impossible for us to achieve these goals. Our government will have to get on it's knees and beg other countries to handle this, and we'll probably have to pay them too. Of course, the current government isn't going to do that, and no one else is going to get involved as long as there is an idiot calling the shots, so I suspect everyone is just waiting and hoping that a Dem wins.

Complicating this is; who should be the countries to intervene? I think we would prefer countries in the Middle East but we don't trust any of them. I'm not sure sending a bunch of Europeans in there to straighten things out will be received well.

I still predict a partitioned country.