Is there any way out of Bush's Folly?

The thing that seems to be missing in all of our discussions is a realistic scenario in which the United States is not completely screwed by Bush's Folly, the Iraq war. The reality of a screw-up this bad is that there may not be a way out. You get your arm caught in a wood chipper, and there's not really much you can do to fix things. It's Humpty-Dumpty time.

Bush's secret dream of a U.S.-friendly democratic regime in the middle of the Middle East was so ridiculous that even his people didn't use it when the war was ginned up. People would have told Rumsfeld, Cheney, and Bush that they were nuts if those three wonder-boys had tried to sell us on going in to Iraq to create a new democratic oil-producing utopia. That's why they had to lie us into the war in the first place.

Rumsfeld and Cheney's dreams are now amply exposed as the grandiose schemes of old has-beens. My question: Is there any way out of the mess they have made? Every scenario I run through has the United States well and truly screwed. Maybe C-student Bush was put in a position where he could make the worst mistake in history -- and he did.

1. We stay in Iraq until Iraq is "stable." But it never becomes stable. If it stays democratic, it's just going to be a global headquarters for international terrorists. Civil liberties combined with a mass of well-armed, highly disgruntled religious fanatics doesn't sound too good for the United States.

2. We pull out of Iraq. It promptly descends into civil war and quickly reverts to Sunni rule. We have betrayed the Iraqis again.

3. We mend our ways and start building an Iraqi infrastructure that allows the country's people to live on their oil revenues while they diversify. We stop the Halliburton profiteering. We make Iraqi oil off-limits to oil company exploitation. Trouble is, you still have all kinds of oil money going into a democratic country deeply infiltrated by terrorists.

I'm not saying all is lost here, but I am saying that it is high time the American people broke out in a cold sweat over this. It's white knuckle time in history thanks to the incompetent bunch of disgruntled lunatics the Republicans put in office.

we have a hell of a mess on our hands to clean up. I think the public is beginning to understand that as well. There are some mighty big chickens coming home to roost, about now.

by hiring Iraqi contractors to put Iraqis back to work immediately on rebuilding their own infrastructure. There's nothing like a hopeless, occupied population with a 70% unemployment rate to wreck the Utopian dreams of an overgrown twelve year old!

Alas, the rest of his cronies had a better idea: use Iraq as a feeding trough to loot the US taxpayer. Yes! That's the ticket! To hell with the Iraqis, they're far, far away. We're getting RICHER!!

Assholes.

until we "finish the job"?

That means writing off Bush's investment as a deep loss to the United States. It seems to be pretty clear now that it was a bad investment. Bush sold us a salted gold mine. However, if we leave "too soon" (before the vast majority of American people demand it and see Bush's foolishness), the United States might sustain more damage than necessary, internally and externally. Bush may yet unite the country once we all see what he has done.

IMO, the Bushies could not have chosen a worse place to screw up. The PNACers picked a country with great political, economic, and geographic leverage. As a Utopian, U.S.-friendly "oil democracy," Iraq would have been a fantastic asset. But that turns out to be a foolish mirage. There is no known example of that vision -- maybe because it is ridiculous. Now, for the very same reasons Iraq would have been a good asset, it is a major liability.

Even if we leave, we're screwed. We're not getting out of this without some seriously wise leadership, IMO. I don't see how it can be done. Just like Neil Bush et ilk got us all soaked in the savings and loan scandals, George W. Bush has run the country into a ditch -- a deep one.

There is no plan to leave. There never was.
We are currently building huge bases
to defend the shiny new oil pumps
(that all belong to friends of Dubya).
Leave? There's no way they're leaving.
According to the Reich, Oil is mightier than Blood.
Our Blood.

I don't know about the cold sweat part. But Americans, on both sides of the argument, at this point limit all the options they propose in a certain way. What they have in common is an idea that American pride- manifested as control of events- has to be preserved above all else.

The basic reality of Iraqi society, as I see it, is all the fuel and desire and perceived need for a civil war. It might even be pretty minor, as these things go. But two societies have some historical grievances to settle and violence is the path they insist upon taking.

The problem I see is that Americans either fear this inordinately or imagine they can prevent it, or they deny that it is real.

It's going to take real American humility to step back, admit that the American role is merely to help Iraqis and it's the Iraqi role to dictate the course of events. That doesn't mean flight from the country, it means withdrawing the troops from the regions in dispute and setting up military safe zones for refugees, and giving up overlord status. It means acting as the UN does in civil wars, protecting victims and civilians and ready to take temporary control of the country again once the war itself settles.

The present American politics is all about managing this grind-down of the pridefulness in the face of realities. It's an argument about egos and selfcongratulatory White Man's Burden behavior.

Or "Mission Accomplished" if you prefer.

That's a fairly good description.

I'm serious. This option has a lot of benefits and little drawbacks. We'd have someone else brutally smackdown international terrorists in ways we could not, and we'd attain our economic and strategic interests.

A Sunni leader would have been optimal, but given Bush's decision to go after them, a Kurdish despot seems preferable to a Shi'ite one. Turkey may have a problem with it, but big deal.

One. You set a timetable for HOW long it takes to train Iraqi troops, and it shoudl approximate a basic boot camp training in the US that American soldiers get.

Two. You set up a National Islamic police force and get Arabs into Iraq running the police force as opposed to the US.

Three. You make a giant gesture of withdrawing a masive amount of troops. 50,000 after the boot camp training.

Four. You tell the government to write their constitution NOW. They can set up a way to create amendments later.

Five. You drop the rhetoric of creating a Mid-East democracy, and you make a speech about respecting the soverign rights of other nations to make decisions about what system of goverment they choose.

Six. You state that the American mission is to return to seeking out Bin Laden and completing the mission of revenging the perpetrators of 911.

And you get the Hell out of Iraq. It is unwinnable long term no matter what Chimp says. We've got a bigger problem with Pakistan if Musharraf goes, and he eventually will. The young Islam population there is being groomed as tomorrow's terrorists.

with the exception of those required to guard the embassy. To be completed within 90 days. Ceasefire agreement sought until such time as warring parties can be separated.

2) In preparation for unilateral withdrawal, a convening of the UN General Assembly and Security Council to discuss implementation of a transition UN peacekeeping force, who are to have joint command with parties in Iraq, including Sunni tribal leaders and Shi'a clergy in the main provinces affected by the insurgency. At least 2/3 of said force should come from Arab and other non-aligned states. US/UK/Coalition forces will be barred from participation in said force, and any NATO participants must pledge to keep force separate from any alliance-based military cooperation. The UN force is to determine the status of all insurgent/ political prisoners currently held in US/UK facilities in Iraq in accordance with the Geneva Convention, regardless of their previous status.

3) Amnesty for insurgents and all US/UK/Colation military personnel. Establishment of a Truth Commission similar to that established in South Africa, whose findings shall be published but non-binding.

4) Establishment of a third party state location for trial of previous Iraqi regime, who will immediately be turned over to international monitors and removed from US/UK/Colonizing forces. Investigation of conduct of US/UK administrations in their prosecution of the war, to be completed within 1 year and submitted to the International Criminal Court for adjudication (US/UK need not comply, but investigation results will be openly published).

5) Third party assessment of financial status of Iraq, and audit of all transactions and agreements reached during the CPA/Occupation. US/UK/Coalition forces to make reparations for any discrepancies in contracts entered into by CPA or Occupation government. Special attention to be paid to all financial arrangements entered into by any Party who entered Iraq after March 2003, regardless of declared nationality.

6) Dissolution of current Iraqi puppet regime within 120 days. Renegotiation of all contracts exceeding 30 million euro entered into by CPA or Occupation Government. Conveening of national assembly with a view towards a) establishing a government or b) calling for new boundaries and establishing separate governments.

That's a start.

I would recommend partitioning the country temporarily, into three parts. Most of the problems, up to this point, have been centered around Baghdad and the "Sunni Triangle". However, that has been spreading to other areas of Iraq lately.

But, the first step is to withdraw from the Baghdad area, including the airport, and let the people in Baghdad choose a government or representatives to represent them. We could offer monetary incentives to help them establish order. However, they would be independent to choose what kind of government they prefer.

After the three parts of the country were stabilized, then it might be possible to sit down and form a government of one country. The key ingredient to anything working is stability. But, in order to get stability in that area, the US would need to withdraw. That would be the concession that the US would need to make. The Iraqis would see that as a victory but let them have their "victory". That is the key to finding a settlement, in my opinion.