The Iraq war, once again is going backwards..Is it about time we own up to the fact that politically they're hopeless?

Recent dispatches from the middle east report that during the recent "battles", the Iraqi Army instantly took sides and half fought for the Sunnis, and the other half for the Shiites. As a last resort Maliki called in the U. S troops to restore order..Is it about time that the U.

S merely steps back and supervises an all out civil war/genocide and lets the chips fall where they may? Asked by kymlor 45 months ago Similar questions: Iraq war backwards time fact politically hopeless Politics & Law > War.

Similar questions: Iraq war backwards time fact politically hopeless.

If we are going to step back, we need to do so completely and withdraw. There are only a couple of possible outcomes for Iraq, and none of them include democracy, and all depend on when the US withdraws (and this depends on how long it takes the average citizen to understand we have lost, and we are just losing more as we go). The first possibility is to divide the country up into three autonomus regions, perhaps with UN peace keeping troops in place.

What sucks about this is that the resources (aka oil) and infrastructure get divided unfairly. The second possibility is that a heavy handed dicatator get put in place and stabilizes the entire region at the expense of two out of the three factions (sound familiar) or three a religious thoecracy comes into power (this *will* happen as soon as the US leaves and a coup happens) - this was the original will of the Iraqi people to start with once the US "liberated" them. There are no other choices.

The region will never be stable under a western style "democracy".

And it just left al-Sadr and his Iranian allies all the stronger. Maybe, politically we're hopeless. Al-Sadr's militia remains in control of Basra.

And clearly, the only reason Bush's surge had the illusion of success was because the Sunnis switched sides from the insurgents to the US so that they could get trained and rearmed (happened before the surge, incidentally) , and because al-Sadr declared a truce that coincided with the surge. What this latest event proves is that the Iraqis are very good fighters when they are fighting for a cause that they believe in. Unfortunately, our cause is not their cause.

The training and the weapons are just being soaked up by the Iraqis as they prepare for the main event. As you say, let's step back and supervise, and let the chips fall where they may. There is no clean solution to Bush's folly..

1 We may never know why the central government went after the militias in Basra, but everyone knew it would have to do something. After a few days of fighting they negotiated a cease fire. That may have been the objective in the start.

Otherwise, the government now has more control and time to train its forces from the lessons they learned. They can fix what did not go well and have trained forces the next time they need to fight. I would not call that hopeless.

Your description is different, but I read the Washington Post. I am closer to Thomas Ricks assessment. I am not sure about the degree of US forces in the mix - most were special forces who train the Iraqi army.

Right now ther is a report in the Pentagon listing all the units involved and how well they did and what they need to learn to do better. They also know who to get rid of if they helped the other side. But they can do that.

We cut a deal with Sadr some time ago and have to remind him now and then tht we have a deal. But he wants to be the next PM - after they have more stability. That can be done.So we are on thee right track.

The future depends on the next President, but a lot can happen in six months. I will have to wait and see. You could be right.

We may never know why the central government went after the militias in Basra, but everyone knew it would have to do something. After a few days of fighting they negotiated a cease fire. That may have been the objective in the start.

Otherwise, the government now has more control and time to train its forces from the lessons they learned. They can fix what did not go well and have trained forces the next time they need to fight. I would not call that hopeless.

Your description is different, but I read the Washington Post. I am closer to Thomas Ricks assessment. I am not sure about the degree of US forces in the mix - most were special forces who train the Iraqi army.

Right now ther is a report in the Pentagon listing all the units involved and how well they did and what they need to learn to do better. They also know who to get rid of if they helped the other side. But they can do that.

We cut a deal with Sadr some time ago and have to remind him now and then tht we have a deal. But he wants to be the next PM - after they have more stability. That can be done.So we are on thee right track.

The future depends on the next President, but a lot can happen in six months. I will have to wait and see. You could be right.

2 kymlor:This is not too different, except it scope, from the constant turmoil that used to exist in Northern Ireland before the IRA finally agreed to a long term cease fire. It can happen in Iraq as well, and we don't need our military there to make it happen. People eventually learn that killing each other doesn't lead to anything good.

They can learn it the hard way, or the easy way. But we can't be standing there in every instance to point this out to them...

Kymlor:This is not too different, except it scope, from the constant turmoil that used to exist in Northern Ireland before the IRA finally agreed to a long term cease fire. It can happen in Iraq as well, and we don't need our military there to make it happen. People eventually learn that killing each other doesn't lead to anything good.

They can learn it the hard way, or the easy way. But we can't be standing there in every instance to point this out to them...

3 Six months ago this would have been all USA on our side. Six months from now - it could be all Iraqi. I call tha that progress of a sort.

Six months ago this would have been all USA on our side. Six months from now - it could be all Iraqi. I call tha that progress of a sort.

" "Does the fact that J. McCain has a son serving in Iraq affect how you view him and his statements about the war in Iraq? " "Come here and rant about the Iraq War- good or bad" "Would this video alter your perception of the war in Iraq?

" "The war.

Do you feel that America needs the Iraq war.

Does the fact that J. McCain has a son serving in Iraq affect how you view him and his statements about the war in Iraq?

Come here and rant about the Iraq War- good or bad.

I cant really gove you an answer,but what I can give you is a way to a solution, that is you have to find the anglde that you relate to or peaks your interest. A good paper is one that people get drawn into because it reaches them ln some way.As for me WW11 to me, I think of the holocaust and the effect it had on the survivors, their families and those who stood by and did nothing until it was too late.