panel of experts convened by Rolling Stone agree that the war in Iraq is lost. The only question...

[helderheid]

Very interesting reading - three scenarios on Iraq by an interesting panel of experts - best, worst and most likely outcome.

panel of experts convened by Rolling Stone agree that the war in Iraq is lost. The only question now is: How bad will the coming explosion be?

TIM DICKINSON

How bad will it be? Tell us what you think here.

The war in Iraq isn't over yet, but -- surge or no surge -- the United States has already lost. That's the grim consensus of a panel of experts assembled by Rolling Stone to assess the future of Iraq. "Even if we had a million men to go in, it's too late now," says retired four-star Gen. Tony McPeak, who served on the Joint Chiefs of Staff during the Gulf War. "Humpty Dumpty can't be put back together again."

Those on the panel -- including diplomats, counterterror analysts and a former top military commander -- agree that President Bush's attempt to secure Baghdad will only succeed in dragging out the conflict, creating something far beyond any Vietnam-style "quagmire." The surge won't bring an end to the sectarian cleansing that has ravaged Iraq, as the newly empowered Shiite majority seeks to settle scores built up during centuries of oppressive rule by the Sunni minority. It will do nothing to defuse the powder keg that an independence-minded Kurdistan, in Iraq's northern provinces, poses to the governments of Turkey, Syria and Iran, which have long brutalized their own Kurdish separatists. And it will only worsen the global war on terror.

"Our invasion and occupation has created a cauldron that will continue to draw in the players in the Middle East for the foreseeable future," says Michael Scheuer, who led the CIA's hunt for Osama bin Laden. "By taking out Saddam, we have allowed the jihad to move 1,000 kilometers west, where it can project its power, its organizers, its theology into Turkey -- and from Turkey into Europe."

How bad will things get in Iraq -- and what price will the world ultimately pay for the president's decision to prolong the war? To answer those questions, we asked our panel to sketch out three distinct scenarios for Iraq: the best we can hope for, the most likely outcome and the worst that could happen.

Much more >>>>
http://www.rollingstone.com/politics/story/13710030/leaving_iraq_the_grim_truth/print

[Ianole]

1. This Party Needs to End This NOW

Why cant the party come up with a good strategy to neutralize the whole "cutting funding for the war will leave our troops stranded with no way to defend themselves or gat home" rhetoric? Why not try this.

Have congressional hearings on the new appropriations bill. Ask all of the generals and military experts how long it will take to get all of our troops home from the day the process begins. Then ask the million dollar question. . . "HOW MUCH WOULD IT COST TO TIMELY AND SAFELY REDEPLOY OUR TROOPS FROM IRAQ?"

Then you do the obvious. Pass an appropriations bill for that amount (plus a cushion) and mandate that those earmarked funds be used for redployment only, and that they not be used for any military action, excluding actions taken in self-defense, to stop an immeidate and impending attack against our troops or civilians, etc.

Then, if the administration does not begin the redeployment knowing that the funds for military action are gone, it is they who are endangering the troops.

This is how this needs to be explained the the American people. the American people who put this party in power for no other reason, and who will take this party out of power should they fail to act NOW!!!!!!

Enough already with trying to hedge all bets. this strategy is the best we can do and should do it NOW!!!!!

[helderheid]

3. The Lee Amendment was brilliant - I am so upset the leadership didn't embrace it.

[newyawker99]

4. Hi Ianole!!

Welcome to DU!! :toast:

[cspanlovr]

2. They just figured this out? I knew it was lost the second I saw the looting.