America has a moral duty to try and fix Iraq

I opposed this war, I believe it was not in America's interest, I think it was based on lies, and I believe that Bush should be impeached because of it, but I do not think we should abandon Iraq as soon as we can get the troops airlifted out. I firmly believe what Powell said, You break it, you own it.

Unlike Vietnam, America created this war all by itself. If we leave, without admitting our mistake to the world and asking her to join hands with us and attempt to fix the mess we made, we will forever have blood on our hands and lots of it. It will become an ethnic blood bath that will make Rwanda pale in comparison.

I will be deeply saddened and disappointed if the next Democratic President does not renounce Bush and call for a worldwide effort to fix America's mistakes in Iraq and Afghanistan.

Iraq is a mess, but it is a mess we created and if we walk away, it will only get worse. There IS hope, and even if there isn't we need to try, not in a blind deceitful way, like Bush has done, or we did in Vietnam, but in an open honest way in full engagement with the world.

There IS hope too. The Shia, despite the violence caused by their former oppressors have worked hard to try and include Sunnis. The Shia and the Kurds are working together. Of course it wouldn't be a perfect government, there would be corruption and torture, but the same can be said of America. I would rather a little corruption and torture instead of Iraq turning into a Lebanon.

There are lots of sane people in the military and the State Department who said we were going about things the wrong way, their predictions have proved out, and I believe the have the expertise to make things better IF we dump Bush and radically change what we are doing. It is NOT hopeless, there are a lot of Iraqis on all sides who DO want it fixed. Bush's policies are PREVENTING that.

I for one am not going to happy blaming Bush in 2009 for carnage in Iraq if I know America, all of America, didn't truly ask the world to help and we didn't step up and fix our mistakes.

How do you make Lebanon worse? Have an American invasion and occupation.

What a mess, we do have a moral responsibility. I have two quick points. First, they will probably want us just to leave, I mean seriously, "help" from us is something they've already experienced and it was/is a nightmare. Second, I think that money will be the main salve. Why not just pay for our mistakes by really paying. Find out the damage, pony up, and say we're sorry we let an asshole steal two elections.

Excellent post.

America staying behind to fix its mess in Iraq is like a rapist staying behind to repair the damage done to the victim.

Get the fuck out. Now.

It would be easier if the answers were so simple, but they're not.

the Iraqis want?

Yeah, they want their country destroyed just like we would be begging our military overlords to do.

first step: question any American news source. Is it confirmed by other sources, like the BBC?

There is a string of myths about what the Iraqis "wanted". Their actions do the talking.

The majority of the Iraqi people do not want all U.S. forces to leave tomorrow.

been there...saw that. Don't try to sell it again.

Very sickeningly astute metaphor. You want the infection to stop? You remove the irritant that's CAUSED the infection. THEN AND ONLY THEN, genuine healing can begin. But healing is not possible unless and until you remove the original irritant that keeps the wound infected. Otherwise, the infection will just root in deeper and more permanently, and spread.

How on earth are we going to get anything accomplished when we are constantly being shot at. WE CANT DO ANYTHING EXCEPT GET SHOT AT!!!

WE NEED TO LEAVE NOW.

I say those words with the greatest regret but they are true.

Americans can admit Iraq was a mistake all we want. Bush won't admit mistakes and Bush is the one who has the world's ear.

Americans can ask the world to help all we want. Bush won't and Bush is the one the world listens to.

If Bush were willing to go before the world, admit his mistakes, and ask for help, the world might be more open to helping. But he will not do that and I fear we may be past the point where the world is willing to help. Bush has squandered the goodwill of the world.

Bush believes he is right at all times; he believes his ideas are God-inspired and therefore infallible.

How does America speak through a man... like that?

And frankly, the ONLY way we can start "fixing" Iraq is by GETTING THE HELL OUT OF THERE.

Story after story after story after story I read, usually directly about the latest car bombing or suicide bombing or rising, out-of-control insurgency or some other atrocity that generates more carnage, INEVITABLY there's a paragraph or two, or more, quoting some Iraqi - either a police officer or civilian or military person - as saying that America brings death, and it's only grown worse since we got there and the evil is something WE brought in with us, and that things are bad because WE made them that way. There is almost inevitably also some version of the following statement: "as long as the Americans are here, this won't stop."

WE aren't in a position to "fix" ANY problem over there. We ARE the problem. The sooner we get out, the sooner we remove ourselves from the equation, the sooner the heat on the pressure cooker over there turns down several HUNDRED degrees. At THAT point, AND ONLY AT THAT POINT, something serious and positive and remedial might be undertaken. As long as we're there, we make the whole place an open wound.

We need to get out...let things cool down a bit ...(& they will when the US is gone)...THEN see what we & the rest of the world can and is willing to do...



edit clarity

because we fucked it up--more. I agree, we broke it, but fixing it will take a UN effort and with people like Bolton at the helm we're fucked.

A pie in the sky...

We bombed, poisoned, tortured, and murdered it wholesale.

You don't ask the thug who raped your sister to stay and paint the garage, you beat his brains out with a shovel. And that is what the Iraqis want to do to us.

What we did in Iraq is the difference between going in to a store and accidentaly knocking over a display, and going into a shop with baseball bats and breaking everything in it, intentionally, then deciding that because we broke everything, we now own the store.

Hello from Germany,

"Occasionally, an actual argument is produced to justify the occupation. Graham Fraser, for instance, borrowed a foreign policy slogan from one of the United States’ more prestigious propagandists: “to paraphrase New York Times columnist Thomas Friedman, there is a ‘you broke it, you own it’ principle.” (July 20, A7) That ownership should be conferred upon those who destroy a region will come as a welcome idea to violent, conquering powers the world over. (Should those who engineered the attacks on the World Trade Center then step forward to claim their prime piece of real estate?)"

http://www.en-camino.org/sept62003mediaalert.htm


The USA should immediately leave Iraq, being replaced by the UN. They should pay reperations - they have murdered more than 100.000 Iraqis. 3 million dollar for every single one of them would be a start - that's what they have offered every single victim of the WTC-attacks. Besides, the USA should pay for rebuilding every little bit of infrastructure they have destroyed. The US corporations, who were involved in the war, should be expropriated and the money should be given to Iraq. The whole criminal PNAC gang with Clinton and Albright (who are responsible for killing more than 500.000 Iraqis) on top should be delivered to Iraq.

And before everything else is happening: throw the U.S. corporations out of Iraq. Let the Iraqi people own THEIR oil.
If the Americans stay in the USA and solve THEIR problems and get rid of their SADDAMS: this would be the greatest imaginable gift to the world and Iraq.
Noone needs stupid american Nintendo-soldiers, who shoot first and ask then.

Dirk

I agree with everything you have said.

Let them have their civil war first. Don't even begin to delude yourself about 'democracy'- it's a waste of time.

Pack up and get out, maybe letting the UN occupy parts, and commit some set amount for a future date, say $50 billion or $100 billion, for a kind of reparations when the civil war ends. Money for infrastructure, international debts, scholarships, disability pensions, some property compensation.

immediately

Iraqis are smart and educated enough to build bridges and houses and pipelines. And politics and government are 3000 years old there. They don't need your boys. They need the money. And they need to be free of occupation.

-------------------

Remember Fallujah

Bush to The Hague!

America has the financial responsibility to fix the problem, but the presence of American troops IS THE PROBLEM.

American tax payers should pay through their nose to fix the problem after the Iraqis and the international world sans "the coalition of the bribed" get the hell out of Iraq!!

Jacob Matthan
http://jmpolitics.blogspot.com
Oulu, Finland

American taxpayers who voted for Bush** should pay through their noses to fix Iraq. I understand being penalized by the world because I'm an American -- it's the simplistic view -- but I will NOT put up with further abuse from my own country when I never voted for this mal-administration, never accepted it, and have fought its every criminal connivance with my very being.

We could also fine the corporations who support Bush** and his reign of terror. Say, 10 X their contributions to the Repukes plus 100 X their profits that can in any way be traced to the war.

Let's start by making an example of Halliburton and GE.

If you could figure out a way to charge people, perhaps by how much FOX news they watched or on a "stupid meter" of the things they said about the IRaq war, that would be GREAT justice!

1. "You break it you own it" - NO, you don't own Iraq or anything in it.

2. "America created this war all by itself." - No, the UK, Australia, Spain and Poland helped in a major way.

3. "admitting our mistake to the world and asking her to join hands with us and attempt to fix the mess we made" - I suppose you mean UN troops. That won't happen unless two sides in a dispute invite them in because they both want peace. It also assumes Iraqis want the rest of the world involved. That's quite an arrogant assumption.

4. "If we leave, without...attempt to fix the mess we made, we will forever have blood on our hands and lots of it." - You already have that. Nothing will ever change that.

5. "Of course it wouldn't be a perfect government, there would be corruption and torture" - You don't know that. You have no right to say that.

6. "I would rather a little corruption and torture instead of Iraq turning into a Lebanon." - and what bothers you so much about Lebanon today?

7. "There are lots of sane people in the military and the State Department" - questionable

As to # 7, I believe those 'sane people' have already been replaced.

1. I quoted Powell about "owning" Iraq because what he was referring to was "owning" the MESS, not the assets, not the country, the DISASTER created by Bush. I don't believe ANY of the their assets should be sold off until they have a legitimate government who can decide what is best for their country

2. Give me a break, Poland? This is Georges war, pure and simple, those countries, with the possible exception of Blair, were NOT involved in actually creating the intelligence, the propaganda, pushing the UN, etc. You could take all of those out and the war would still have occurred, take the US out and it wouldn't have.

3. We either recognize the government they have or not. If you want to pretend it doesn't exist, or want to discount it that it is entirely a US puppet then there is nobody to "ask' for help. The government that IS there has made it clear they do not want us to leave. We didn't want many of the people who ended up IN that Parliament there, I am NOT saying it is perfect but it is all three is.

4. I agree that nothing we do will wash this blood off our hands. However, if we leave, without doing the things we should have done from day one, Iraq is going to decent into ugly chaos, and it is THAT decent that will be on our hands if we do not at least try.

5. So I am "insulting" the very government that in statement 3 you question its legitimacy to give us permission to stay. One or the other but you can't have both.

6. I was speaking of ethnic violence, clearly I was speaking of Lebanon in the 1980s when it was an ethnic war zone and the resultant carnage.

7. If it is questionable that there are sane people (Rice is of course, nuts) in the State Department, then those who complain that Bush did not listen to Powell, or listen to those who wrote the voluminous State Department plan are just as silly as you are claiming that statement to be.

1. "We own it". I know what you mean, but I also know what Powell and the rest of the administration meant. "We control it, since the Iraqis are too XXX to look after themselves. And of course we need those bases." Racist, bigoted, ignorant, greedy people, those neocons.

2. "George's war, pure and simple" - Again I know what you mean and generally agree, but the war wouldn't have happened without support from countries like England and Australia. And Poland made a pretty significant contribution. And at least were honest enough to admit that they were there for the oil.

3. "Asking the world to join hands and help us fix the mess." Never happen. Never happen. The UN sends in peacekeepers when both sides to a dispute invite them in, not when a govt asks them to come in and police their country. The UN was responsibly for sanctions during the 90s that resulted in the early death of a million Iraqis, half of them children. I wonder how welcome they would be there.

4. "Must fix our mess" - There's nothing you can do. Except kill and be killed. I'm sure you know that. I applaud your good thoughts, but you know it is hopeless. The US must leave.

5. "Of course...there would be corruption and torture" - Do you mean like the kind of corruption and torture the US engages in or some other kind?

6. "less than perfect govt" - Whatever govt they choose, it's the decision of Iraqis. No one else.

7. It was a joke, sarcasm, but you know that.

that what exactly is broken in Iraq is totally obscured and perhaps even created by our blatant desire to make an oil colony with military bases there as the FIRST objective. Signs that we will forever get rid of those objectives are a first step to even stepping out and seeing what the mess is in the first place.

In so many circular arguments that STILL have us there unredeemed and de facto irritants you first have to break the circle or there will just be a new regime doing the same old thing, pretending to be more responsible and fair.

What would really happen in any different US administration would be to responsibly consider the ways to stabilize the situation. But a peace administration determined to exit would not be committed to staying in the trap, would be more trusted and have to live up to that priority. The pragmatic excuses put forward as THE topline policy would be universally distrusted by everyone and not get anywhere at all nor have any movement out.

A colony until we drain the last drop of their oil and their state is a totally divisive basketcase, their land a desert. THAT is the real policy. The spoken goals sometimes seem actually much worse as they appeal to empire and glory or democracy or security against terrorism. The lies are more irritating. Trying to fix George's crime maybe another obfuscation and I hardly expect those type of people to bring the war criminals to ANY degree of accountability, much less justice. Which would be another reason to distrust the pragmatist who would have us paternally hovering over the rape victim. I would be inclined to distrust even my favorite candidate if he(she) vocalized a "new" Iraq policy that way. So how effective and smart would that be?

How many times do we have to learn the same lesson the hard way again? And how many will have to pay the price for it?

My fear, if we just up and leave (which I too have espoused from time to time) is that we will create a failed state at civil war. To contain the resulting possibly terrorism, we will reimposed the blockade (sanctions).

How many Iraqis will die under those circumstances?

Americans are very ambivalent at best about the war, but harbor a deep fear that premature withdrawal from Iraq will only spawn more terrorism. Nine-elelven did change some things forever. This is not 1972, and there are much more direct consequences to a unilateral withdrawal than there were in Vietnam.

is to impose a proxy force (install a police state)to kill Iraqis who would resist the Occupation.

Today's threat of terrorism is yesterday's boogieman of communism.

The Occupation is the problem. Removing the problem fixes it.

How arrogant it is for the US--new kid on the block, to treat (and destroy) the "cradle of civilization" as if they were incapable of running their own affairs.

It is not a question of doing it better--it is ultimately a question about not doing it at all. Sure, we owe them and should make financial restitution, but military occupation for oil and US corp carpetbagging is what we prolong when we buy into this "fix it" fantasy.

for the insurgency. How many insurgents did we make by killing the child today? How many will we make tomorrow? It is time to get out FAST!

All your talk about hope and fixing things is very noble, but the point of the matter is - we are not wanted in Iraq and nothing will change that.

Democracy cannot be forced upon a people, it has to come from within. Period.

Oh - BTW - how do we radically change what we are doing? I'd love to hear your plan.

Withdraw gradually over a period of six months, pay reparations, try to get UN peacekeepers and other ME nations involved.

The Shia and Kurds both want us there, at least till they have secured power. If we were not wanted, there would be attacks by Kurds in the North which there have not been and the Southern part of Iraq would be seeing a great deal more violence.

Iraq HAD a functioning democracy which WE overthrew, they ARE capable of it. We didn't want these elections, Sistani forced them upon us. They have a fairly decent Parliment, they are actually seeking to include the Sunnis they are genuinely trying to make it work. Look at the recent visit of the Iranians, THAT was not designed to make Bush happy and they may just vote to have VERY friendly relations with the Iranians which would be an interesting turn of events.

As for my plan, I have to jet off to the cabinet shop but I will lay out some time worn things that SHOULD have been done from day one, many of which could still be done. Thanks for responding.

... that Americans cannot fix. Iraq is one of them. The fact that we are there at all is the problem. How can you fix a problem when you are the problem?

As for the rest of the world doing our clean up, well maybe. But let me ask you, if you were the rest of the world, would you do it?

to Iraq, but staying there is not part of the equation.

The first thing that needs to happen is for America to admit it was wrong, and not just wrong, but evilly wrong, to admit that the invasion was not based on "mistakes," but was cold-blooded and intentional. That's not going to happen any time soon, not so long as we are looking for other asses to stick our boots into, and certainly not with the main perpetrators still in control of our country.

is collapsing. Should we go bankrupt trying to do our duty in Iraq. Besides i don't believe we can fix Iraq if we stay there forever. Our presence is part of the problem.

And then contribute large sums to reparations & rebuilding. Let the Iraqis & whatever NGO's want to participate do the work.

The money paid to "fix" Iraq would be a better bargain to the American taxpayer than the endless sums sucked up by the war & occupation. Not to mention the people who would continue to live.

they are fighting. Our presence will only cause more problems. The only thing the US can do is face the truth, get out and pay reparations for the next hundred years to make up for our illegal, immoral war.

Our soldiers are targets from a hidden enemy and the longer they are there, the more insurgents we attack, both from within Iraq and beyond. There is no clear definition of victory, therefore no viable exit stategy. We need to leave.

Message removed by moderator. Click here to review the message board rules.

come in and 'fix' the problems so, seeing as the US is building PERMANENT bases, that option isn't viable, imo. The bush cabal has NO intention of leaving Iraq, quite the opposite, the intent is to use Iraq as a staging location to begin trying to control the Middle East as per PNAC.

I did NOT mean under Bush, I meant either after Bush is impeached or when the Dems sweep into office in 2008. I am assuming we will still be there, since as you say, we are building permanent bases there.

am i to understand then, that you think we should not call for withdrawal (and subsequent reparations to Iraq) now and we should willingly acquiesce to 4 more years of occupation ?????

and what if the Dems don't "sweep into office in 2008" ??? should we just go along with more occupation until 2012 or even 2016 ???

the occupation of Iraq is a tragically wrong policy ... whether Dems can, or cannot, effect a change in that policy remains to be seen ... but to continue their mush-mouthed non-position of silent acquiescence is dead wrong ... it's bad politics, it fails to show any leadership whatsoever, and it is tragically bad policy ...

i commend your call for recognizing our obligation to rebuild Iraq (under the auspices of the international community) but to not call for near-term withdrawal when it is our very presence that is causing much of the violence and instability makes no sense at all ...

We are doing absolutely nothing to help Iraq now. Our troops on the ground are occupiers stoking rage wherever they go by their mere presence and sometimes by committing atrocities. Halliburton is stealing billions of dollars from the American taxpayers, doing nothing that is helping Iraqis (unless you call construction of permanent military bases for occupation military forces 'helping').

Just what do you 'think' our continued presence is doing to 'help'?

Gyre

those who sincerely believe in the "pottery barn" justification for continued US occupation in Iraq believe, and i'm stating the case as well as i can, that the US messed up Iraq and we now have an obligation to help the Iraqi people regain some stability and rebuild their infrastructure ... many "pottery barners" did not support the initial invasion of Iraq (some did though) but now believe "we're stuck there" ... fair enough ???

the problem with the "pottery barn" justification, though, is that bush and the neo-cons are controlling what the US does in Iraq ... if Democrats controlled the government, calls for "tidying up a little before we left" would not be met with nearly as much skepticism for our motivations in Iraq ... perhaps many would still not agree with continued US occupation but I, for one, would at least consider the possibility that the intent from those Democrats who thought we needed to stay a while longer was credible ... but Democrats control nothing; bush does ...

the REALLY BIG problem is that i don't believe bush has any interest whatsoever in helping the Iraqi people and i believe he is intentionally prolonging the occupation ... why? because he has not yet been able to establish a puppet regime (e.g. Chalabi) and because his oil buddies are making billions as long as the region remains unstable ... to agree with Dean, and those who subscribe to the "pottery barn" nonsense", only makes any sense if you trust that bush will "do the right thing" in Iraq ... folks, it just doesn't make any sense ... as long as bush is in office, staying is just plain wrong ...

your objectives may be noble; investing your hopes in the actions of the bush administration, and like it or not that's exactly what the "pottery barn" theory does, is NOT !!

it is time for Democrats to push for a "near-term" withdrawal from Iraq ...

plan is for withdrawal. I think the Bush plan is to hold on for three more years then it is someone else's problem. Our Congresspeople need to demand a plan from the White House. WHAT'S THE PLAN STAN?

occupiers and we dont belong there. The insurency will grow and they will eventully kick our ass out of there. Then we will have to deal with our own civil war like in the 60s. That is fine with me and it can start by putting the chimp and rummy on trial for war crimes.

I hesitate to buy the argument that we created the chaos, so we need to stay until a functioning government can regain control of the country. We know that isn't the true agenda, and I can't support turning Iraq into a military pushing-off point while we allow huge American corporations to siphon off the spoils of war. That's wrong, no matter how you view the current political stability in Iraq.

I think the reason you're seeing the public turn against this misadventure is that the goalposts keep getting pushed back. The "mission accomplished" nonsense made them think the war was over, when the real killing fields were just beginning, and they were given the soothing lie that the Iraqi elections would provide for a stable government. That's passed, and despite the insurgency, I think most people are wondering why we're still there and dying in such large numbers. "Defending Freedom", as they drone continuously, looks suspect when stories of torture and atrocities appear even in our censored press. This administration has failed utterly to define the mission, because they can't - the American people won't support a permanent military and economic empire in Iraq when the lives lost are ours and the money being spent comes from our pockets and goes directly to Halliburton et al. So, this "defending freedom" nonsense and the pottery barn argument become straw men for what's really happening.

The pottery barn argument also carries with it the colonial overtones of the British Raj - that these people somehow need us to civilize them. That's beneath contempt.

"..Iraq is a mess, but it is a mess we created and if we walk away, it will only get worse..."

How do you know that it will get "worse"? I think that is the only way it is going to get better. They will have to work it out themselves.

If we leave, without admitting our mistake to the world and asking her to join hands with us and attempt to fix the mess we made, we will forever have blood on our hands and lots of it.

Here is another way of looking at your argument: A man rapes a woman. When the authorities try to arrest the man for his crime his only defense is that he should be allowed to continue to rape his victim to help her "get over it!"

America raped Iraq! Why should we let the rapist continue to rape?

The healthiest thing we can do for Iraq is to withdraw all of our troops at once, and to prosecute and punish those American officials responsible for this war, from George Bush to General Tommy Franks. Then we must pay war reparations to Iraq and we must compensate all of the victims of our cruel occupation.

Enough of this "white man's burden" neo-colonialism!

government, their infrastructure, their entire legal system, their financial system, their economy, and more.

For those who missed it, Bush and his cronies should be impeached, Halliburton and its execs should be charged with war profiteering and any Iraqi "assets" they own should be returned to the Iraqi people, and whatever else is needed to be done to fix THOSE wrongs.

Now, back to Iraq, it has no functioning economy other than the money we are pumping in because their oil industry is in shambles due to us, their financial system is the same, and the power and water grids are still in shambles.

We are not talking about walking away from a functioning Iraqi nation and simply taking our boots off their neck, we would be leaving them in a mess of our making, one that will be difficult if not impossible for them to dig their way out of without massive help.

Now some have mentioned a "temporary withdrawal" which is an interesting concept. However, both Iran and Syria have opposing stakes in the outcome in Iraq, even Saudi Arabia has a stake, the first two are well known for interfering in other nations, Saudi less so but they don't mind paying someone else to do it. Perhaps a gradual or even rapid hand off to the UN but since the Security Council is divided, their efforts are often muddled.

What a damn mess!

problems is that this cabal has intentionally done untold and tragic damage to iraq - and our very own country

they have no conscience. they will not see what complete destruction they have created because it is exactly as they want it to be - in shambles as you mention in your op.
so while it would be sheer decency to own up to the the moral carnage they have created there that is completely impossible. at this point they are not capable of any kind of decency. they are not capable of the morality it truly takes to see - let alone admit - what they have done

so in other words they are exactly the absolute WRONG people to clean up anything. period

the only thing they want to clean up is the filthy and bloodsoaked evidence that leads directly to their guilt

Good luck.

What I am advocating is putting the rapist in jail (bush) and instead of leaving the bloody ravaged victim to die of infection, that the country that elected the rapist step up and repair the damage

We, meaning Democrats, ARE distinct from Republicans HERE. However, we are NOT distinct on an international basis. AMERICA raped Iraq while being LED by Bush, AMERICA needs to jail Bush, and deal with the crime its leader, committed.

A more apt analogy would be parent and child, the parent is responsible for the acts of the child, although not guilty of them. We Democrats are NOT guilty of raping Iraq, but our (meaning THIS nation's) government DID rape Iraq.

Someone mentioned paying restitution to the victims. Will we only count those that died before we left, or all those that die in the ethnic and sectarian violence that occurs after we leave.

one is the US obligation to make reparations in Iraq ... if that's the crux of your argument, i'm in total agreement ...

but the other issue is continued occupation ... there will be no reconstruction until bush decides to stop the "war" ... the military instability in Iraq is being totally engineered by the US ... we have met the enemy and they are US ... your earlier theme that we have to stay in Iraq until 2008 when the Democrats win (hopefully) is totally unacceptable ...

so, YES on reparations with international oversight ... and a great big NO to continued occupation ... we are not in Iraq to make things nice for the Iraqis; we're there to make things nice for bush's corporate friends and that is making life a living, and dying, hell for the Iraqi people and for our expendable soldier pawns as well ... it's time to withdraw ...

I am curious how people see things going after our withdrawal. Syria's Baath party is supporting the Sunni's, the Iranians are supporting the Shia, the Kurds are working their butts off to ensure if they have to they are ready to declare independence and defend themselves against a Turkish invasion. The Saudis are probably funding the Kurds and are definitely helping Sunnis and perhaps even helping Syria support the Sunni.

So, what scenarios do people think might happen?

they think if we leave irresponsibly, nothing that happens after is our fault. (completely untrue of course)

Out of sight, out of mind.

It will never happen, but imagine historically how brave and fair it would be to stop the war and perform a Marshall Plan that would repair the damage we did and thus make them our allies after a few years.

(and I hate to use the term "oil" har har har), then using your very logic, America has a moral duty to withdraw as soon as practicable. The problem with "fixing it" is that we assume "fixing it" requires our continued presence and influence. The opposite seems to be the case. The more we hang around, the worse it gets. That leads me to believe that America can only "fix it" by letting it go. Stepping up, sir, means stepping out.

OP, I have to agree and thank you for your thoughts. However, if the blivet/*shrub is gone, how will things change? How should we withdraw that might be acceptable to the people in Iraq, and how many will feel like we created their problems to begin with? America's name is mud and that really sucks in my opinion.

..but I'm not sure we could do it if we tried. The people there are so angry at us that they will not accept our help. The country is also in such a degree of chaos that no country, not even the United States, could bring the warring powers to heel. We have created a disaster of ungodly proportions, one Iraqis must sort out for themselves. It is a horrible thing to leave such a mess behind, but the Iraqis will never accept the foxes being the ones to manage the henhouse.

the PNAC & Halliburton have a moral duty to try and fix Iraq.

...but I believe that the only thing that is going to satisfy the world that current US policy is not the policy of the majority of its' citizens is to do what is right and impeach Bush for his crimes as President.
We are viewed as a criminal nation because Bush has committed so many international crimes, not to mention Federal crimes. Until he, Cheney, and Rove are put in prison where they belong, we are guilty by association. And rightly so, if we do nothing with the evidence we now have of the crimes committed.

http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=view_all&address=104x3733249

"When you break something in a store you don't sit there with crazy glue trying to piece it back together. And you most certainly don't run around with a bat breaking more things. What you do is apologize, write them a check, and get out before you do anymore damage."

http://www.counterpunch.org/zeese05052005.html

I understand why many people want to leave immediately. We had no business being there in the first place, and we are doing a lot of destructive, harmful things in that country.

We liberals face a choice in regards to iraq

1. Stay long enough to build the infrasturcture and organize an army loyal to the central government. We should immediately dispense with building permanent bases, harassing locals, and abu-ghraib-style abuses. Create a power strong enough that it will hold for at least a little while on its own (hopefully longer). Then we can leave. While we remain the insurgency will attack us as well as the Iraqis working with us.

2. Leave immediately, and claim the consequences are not our fault because we are not there anymore. Instead of an insurgency, you have anarchy as the government cannot defend itself without a military. The high Iraqi officials would probably be dead in a week. Then you have a bloody civil war as various groups vie for power. this war may be joined by enterprising outside forces such as Iran, or Turkey (should Kurdistan try to split off). the result is massive death and destabilization that would make the insurgency look like a walk in the park.

We cannot leave immediately. However, I do agree with the recent Woolsey amendment that required Bush to put forth a plan for removing troops. We do need to plan for our near term exit. We also need to stop building permanent bases and violating human rights. We need to spend our time making sure the government can stand on its legs and prevent civil war.

On edit: check out this NYT article. It shows how Iraqi violence is becoming more directed toward those of other religious sects.
http://www.nytimes.com/2005/05/27/international/middleeast/27sectarian.html?hp&ex=1117252800&en=a46fca2805716859&ei=5094&partner=homepage

The call for force Bush to create a public plan, that can be openly debated IS what is needed until we can impeach/replace him.

The Marshal plan required for Europe to work together if they were going to get aid, it in may was is what started the move towards the EU. We need something similar in Iraq, providing financial gains to those willing to participate. We need jobs to put people to work. Imagine how many could be put to work with sledge hammers destroying the bases we have built there. Idle hands are the devils workshop, keep them busy, keep them pain, and wifey will keep them at work. It is after all, women who will make the changes work, they have a lot of control, it is just unseen. Start dangling money in front of the Mullahs, give them money if they are supportive, and let them restore their mosques, therefore killing two birds with one stone.

As for "everyone" hating us, I have seen no evidence of that. The South is relatively calm, same goes for the North, it is Baghdad and the surrounding regions that are full of people who hate us. If they all started hating us, the death toll would be far worse. Occupying a land that you were dumb enough to let strip the ammo dumps of explosives before you started oppressing them is a recipe for disaster and I guess our is about ready to come out of the oven.