Democratic Underground Latest Greatest Lobby Journals Search Options Help Login
Google

How the Bush Administration destroyed any chance for peace in Iraq

Printer-friendly format Printer-friendly format
Printer-friendly format Email this thread to a friend
Printer-friendly format Bookmark this thread
This topic is archived.
Home » Discuss » Archives » General Discussion (01/01/06 through 01/22/2007) Donate to DU
 
beachmom Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Jun-26-06 09:19 AM
Original message
How the Bush Administration destroyed any chance for peace in Iraq
I am so outraged by the actions of the Bush administration that I can only surmise that all Bush wants and loves is war, and what Iraq is about is oil and permanent bases. And I am the biggest skeptic around these parts about "ulterior motives" for Iraq. Based on his actions these last two days, it is obvious that he doesn't give a damn about democracy or the sovereignty of the government in Iraq. Had he, then he wouldn't have torpedoed a plan that may have had a chance of working in Iraq. As Karynnj mentioned in the John Kerry forum, Bush and the Sunni insurgents killed the peace plan together. All they love is violence as it serves them well to stay in power.

Meteor Blades discusses the political ramifications here on DailyKos:

http://www.dailykos.com/story/2006/6/25/232917/330#c119

But I myself can't get past the ramifications in Iraqi politics. Here is the awful truth, per the New York Times:

http://www.nytimes.com/2006/06/26/world/middleeast/26iraq.html?_r=1&oref=login

Mr. Maliki's plan, intended to reduce insurgent attacks through dialogue and amnesty, was weeks in the making, with all of Iraq's religious and ethnic political blocs participating. He opted for a version that did not stake out any new ground, but simply repackaged previous pronouncements. The decision appeared to have been influenced by religious Shiites who form his base and by the American military command.

snip

Another point that Sunni Arabs say needs to be addressed is how long American troops will remain in Iraq. They say insurgents are looking for a timetable for withdrawal.

Mr. Khalilzad said he and the American commander in Iraq, Gen. George W. Casey Jr., would began talks with the Iraqis in the coming weeks on the topic, but reiterated that any reduction would depend on progress in Iraq. "We will adjust our forces, but we'll do it based on conditions, and the condition is that Iraqis can take care of themselves," he said. "The next five to six months are critical for this government."


When the Sunni insurgents rejected the plan on Saturday, they listed some demands of their own. At that point, it was not the end of negotiations but the beginning. However, now that the teeth from the Iraq Peace Plan have been deleted, I fear that peace negotiations are dead. The Americans are JUST AS responsible for the death of peace in Iraq as the Sunni insurgents, and I will NOT forgive them for this any time soon.

So when you watch the news and hear about the nonstop carnage of American troops and Iraqis, know that there was a way out of this, but the Bush administration chose NOT to do so. I can only surmise that war is what they love, and peace is what they fear the most.

Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
karynnj Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Jun-26-06 09:40 AM
Response to Original message
1. The Bush administration consistently
refused to do the diplomacy. What's amazing is that from Kerry to Casey to Khliazhad, everyone really working on the problem has said that a political solution is the only thing that can resolve this. You are correct that the Sunni rejection should have led to continued negotiations - there is no other sane solution. Stopping the negotiations on the political solution, leaves only military solutions - which everyone says won't work.

Even though Kerry is getting everything but the kitchen sink thrown at him, I am glad he and Feingold had the courage and the concern to do the work of trying to develop a real plan that would facilitate a solution rather than avoid one.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
beachmom Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Jun-26-06 09:43 AM
Response to Reply #1
2. Yes, and what was missing was what Kerry says we need to do
And that is an international summit. Had he been sworn in in January 2005, who KNOWS what would have happened. Had the Sunnis/Shiites/Kurds ironed out there differences, and had Iran also gotten involved in the summit, then ALL we would have had to deal with was al Qaeda. Instead, all we can look forward to is neverending war, because Karl Rove says THAT is what is best for the Republicans to stay in power.

Okay, today is a bitter day for me.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
DU AdBot (1000+ posts) Click to send private message to this author Click to view 
this author's profile Click to add 
this author to your buddy list Click to add 
this author to your Ignore list Mon May 06th 2024, 10:53 AM
Response to Original message
Advertisements [?]
 Top

Home » Discuss » Archives » General Discussion (01/01/06 through 01/22/2007) Donate to DU

Powered by DCForum+ Version 1.1 Copyright 1997-2002 DCScripts.com
Software has been extensively modified by the DU administrators


Important Notices: By participating on this discussion board, visitors agree to abide by the rules outlined on our Rules page. Messages posted on the Democratic Underground Discussion Forums are the opinions of the individuals who post them, and do not necessarily represent the opinions of Democratic Underground, LLC.

Home  |  Discussion Forums  |  Journals |  Store  |  Donate

About DU  |  Contact Us  |  Privacy Policy

Got a message for Democratic Underground? Click here to send us a message.

© 2001 - 2011 Democratic Underground, LLC