WP op-ed: Washington must decide now what to do about Iraq's civil war

[DeepModem Mom]

Iraq Runneth Over
What Next?
By Daniel L. Byman and Kenneth M. Pollack
Sunday, August 20, 2006; Page B01

The debate is over: By any definition, Iraq is in a state of civil war. Indeed, the only thing standing between Iraq and a descent into total Bosnia-like devastation is 135,000 U.S. troops -- and even they are merely slowing the fall. The internecine conflict could easily spiral into one that threatens not only Iraq but also its neighbors throughout the oil-rich Persian Gulf region with instability, turmoil and war.

The consequences of an all-out civil war in Iraq could be dire. Considering the experiences of recent such conflicts, hundreds of thousands of people may die. Refugees and displaced people could number in the millions. And with Iraqi insurgents, militias and organized crime rings wreaking havoc on Iraq's oil infrastructure, a full-scale civil war could send global oil prices soaring even higher.

However, the greatest threat that the United States would face from civil war in Iraq is from the spillover -- the burdens, the instability, the copycat secession attempts and even the follow-on wars that could emerge in neighboring countries. Welcome to the new "new Middle East" -- a region where civil wars could follow one after another, like so many Cold War dominoes....

***

Considering how many mistakes the United States has made in Iraq, how much time has been squandered, and how difficult the task is, even a serious course correction in Washington and Baghdad may only postpone the inevitable....

***

With an all-out civil war looming in Iraq, Washington must decide how to deal with the most common and dangerous ways such conflicts spill across national boundaries. Only by understanding the refugee crises, terrorism, radicalization of neighboring populations, copycat secessions and foreign interventions that such wars frequently spark can we begin to plan for how to cope with them in the months and years ahead....

(Daniel L. Byman is director of Georgetown University's Center for Peace and Security Studies. Kenneth M. Pollack is research director at the Saban Center for Middle East Policy at the Brookings Institution.)

http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2006/08/18/AR2006081800983_pf.html

[babylonsister]

1. Prove any statesmanship you might have, dimson, and call if off.

It's thwarted, done, ineffective, not working, zippo.
Keep it going, and your legacy is (more) assured, and how many more people might die because of it?

[WilliamPitt]

2. Notice he says "Washington" must decide, not Bush

He's basically telling Congress to get off their asses.

[creeksneakers2]

3. The editorial is very frightening

Any way we go its probably going to be a terrible disaster.

[Toots]

6. going to be a terrible disaster?????

:wtf: is it right now???

[DemReadingDU]

4. K&R

[magellan]

5. Give Bush** what he wants

Get the troops out...then send Bush** and his neocon thugs on a one-way trip to Abu Ghraib and let the Iraqis express their deep gratitude to them personally for "freeing" Iraq.

[spanone]

7. Too bad Chimpy doesn't read. He would now know the truth:Civil War.

If our dumb-fucking president read the papers, he might have a clue what's going on in the nation HE invaded.

[leftchick]

8. NOT SO!

John McCain was just on MTP and said that is not true. Iraq is NOT in a civil war. So there!
More repukes who refuse to acknowledge reality.

[DeepModem Mom]

9. a.m. kick