Andrew at Obsidian Wings.
If the Iraqi Army cannot be built up to the degree necessary to restore order, there aren’t any particularly good alternatives available to us. Staying in Iraq may help to keep a ceiling on the violence, but that is a ticket to an indefinite presence in Iraq that will not only mean neverending losses for both our forces and Iraqi civilians, but an ongoing goad to Islamists who will seek to strike us in the United States in retribution for our occupation of Iraq. Leaving Iraq may open the floodgates to a level of violence that would make the current carnage a fond memory.
Ultimately, we have no good choices unless there’s a way I’m not aware of to create a national consciousness in the Iraqi Army. As such, while I hate to say it, I think that withdrawal may be the best available option.
Andrew is an experienced military officer and, as far as can be determined without siccing the datamining hounds on him, not a hippie. Keep an eye out as credible people one by one acknowledge that the choice between the undesirable and the impossible isn’t a choice at all.
101st Fighting Keyboarders
We’ll be the judge of that. Rev up the Swiftboats!
srv
You know, if the propaganda about Ahmadinejad being in trouble for reelection were true, we’d be bombing them this week.
Let’s see. Maliki to be deposed. Iranians getting more aggresive and the Saudis have just freaked out (the day the 80% solution gets leaked, the Saudi ambassador resigns – note, he was head of their intelligence services for two decades). So now we have the other two 900 lb gorillas really standing up in the ring, and our troops are sitting in the middle as GW fiddles about whatever non-policy we aren’t in fact moving to.
I wager Baghdad is going to be burning by March. These people aren’t going to wait around any longer while GW figures out legacy maximizing strategies.
ThymeZone
Exactly, that expresses what it is that these idiots don’t get: Our presence in Iraq is largely irrelevant at this point. Militarily.
The sensible questions are tethered to that basic fact. Any “pondering” that isn’t tethered to that reality is just a waste of time … and American lives.
These morons persist in thinking that their little machinations are steering the outcome here. They aren’t. They haven’t been for a long time.
Nikolay
Guys, I just can’t understand you. You seriuosly discuss that “Cheney’s 80% solution” as if it was reality, when in fact it’s just some rumor from Washington Post, with as much credibility as “Pelosi is going to make Hastings Chair of House Intelligence Committee”.
At the same time you don’t seem to notice the new law for fair oil revenues distribution, the fact that they are in the process of throwing Al-Sadr out of political proccess, the fact that Bush just had Shia and Sunni leaders in White House. The Sunni VP’s visit was, BTW, three weeks ahead of the schedule.
Don’t you agree that the only possible solution is political? Don’t you see that Iraqis are trying to find this solution? Don’t you see that Bush is, at last, not just staying the course? Don’t you think that there’s a possibility that Iraqis just stopped at the brink of the abyss and are about to start saving themselves? (Because if Iraq explodes it won’t be good for anyone). Don’t you see any signs of progress? Don’t you wish it to turn out well?
Of course, it’s easy just to talk about car bombs exploding.
Tim F.
Um, no. None of the developments that you mentioned seems very promising at all. Of course Iraq’s government wants us to stay – when we leave their lives won’t be worth ten dinars. The insurgents have made clear what they plan to do with collaborators and senior government figures. The Sunnis know that the conflagration will burn them the worst and President Talabani has his Kurdish interests primarily in mind.
Throwing Sadr out of politics? Sadr wasn’t thrown out, he walked out after Maliki decided to meet with Bush. Since Maliki’s coalition depends in large part on Sadr’s faction a good part of Maliki’s political credibility walked with him. To whom do you think that the Shiites in the Baghdad police/army are truly loyal – Sadr or the central government? I honestly wonder what you think the answer is.
I feel for you if talking about car bombs, among many other things, makes you queasy. That is a good thing, it shows some humanity on your part. The rest of us feel it too. But if you want to talk about Iraq that is the reality in which you need to ground yourself.
Steve
This caught my eye. You casually toss out this “fact” like it’s something everyone in the world knows about. Are you referring to this? Seems like more of a “hope” than a “fact” at this particular moment in time, but hey, doesn’t mean it’s not something I’ll root for. Still, hope is not a plan.
There’s this tendency among the “we’ve turned a corner” crowd to focus on political events to the exclusion of all else. Yes, bombs are going off, people are dying, but we set a date for the election! we wrote a constitution! we held a referendum! look at all the purple fingers! All these things happened and it’s great and all, but more bombs are going off than before, and more people are dying than before. And all we hear is “wait, here’s another political event! maybe this will be the turning point!” And of course, if you express any doubt that it’s going to be a turning point, you’re rooting for failure in Iraq.
What’s your next suggestion? “The next 6 months will be make or break”?
pie
We’ve turned the corner. Six months from now, we’ll be looking back on all this carnage and allowing ourselves a laugh of relief that it’s just a bad memory.
pie
Damn. You beat me to the joke. Oh, well, doesn’t matter. We’re arguing with a spoof.
chopper
a watched pot never boils.
grumpy realist
Yeah, we’re all sort of wondering about that scamper home on the part of the Saudi Ambassador.
And being between two very large gorillas is not exactly where I think the US wants to be right now.
(I have the image of two large behemoths, labled “Iraq Sunnis and their helpers” and “Iraq Shi’ites and their helpers” facing off on a map of Iraq, with a US soldier between the two, holding a rifle, saying “Um….President Bush, we’d really really like to come home now…”)
pie
Looks like a couple of Sunni insurgent groups have a new BFF!
Mike
Well, I can only answer this with a resounding DUH!!! Of course we want this things to turn out well. What kind of human being are you that you could have spent ANY time reading some of the regular posters here and think that our humanity would allow us to feel otherwise? Or did you simply come in to throw a grenade?
Past experience with W indicates the probability that they WON’T work out well however, and we like to be realists, which means hope for the best, but plan for the worst. Now we see that Bush went out of his way NOT to plan for the worst.
Nikolay
You probably don’t follow the news. Sadr “sort of” walked out, but then “sort of” pretented that this didn’t really happen. And Al-Hakim, who recently visited Washington, is the main Sadr’s rival. The situation now is, as far as I understand, something like this — they give Maliki ultimatum: you either just forget about Sadr and work with the realigned government or you both go to hell.
I think they are most likely to be loyal to SCIRI and Al-Hakim. He’s a pro-Iranian thug, but seems to be interested in restoring order at the moment. And they say that his army is much better organized than Sadr’s, that is, they do horrible things when they are ordered to, but they can also stop when ordered.
BTW, where do you get your idea of Sadr? There’s a good post about “Newsweek” article — the author is obviosly biased, but the way he rips Newsweek apart is convincing.
It probably takes some five people to do a single car bombing. This is just that, a terror act, and they will go on and on. But this doesn’t make a war. Did they report the same numer of people killed in reprisals? If not, then this is a good sign and a proof that there’s no civil war there yet.
You know, they way BushCo ignored reality for so long is a horrible joke. But to ignore reality to say “all is totally lost” is no better.
hilzoy
I’ve met Andrew — one of the many good results of asking him to join ObWi. He is most definitely not a hippie.
I mean, the very thought of Andrew as a hippie will keep me in giggles for the next week.
Steve
Matt Yglesias ably addresses the whole “Hakim the Dream” meme:
Andrew
What if we carpet bomb Iraq with tofu? It will turn them all gay and they’ll be more interested in home decor and fashion than fighting each other.
CaseyL
Ah, but you’re assuming they’ll become Westernized gays.
Is there something about tofu that not only turns people gay, but specifically turns them in Queer Eye for the Straight Guy gay? If not, it’s more likely they’ll become gay a la the Sacred Band, the warrior lovers of ancient Greece, who never lost a battle until they fought Alexander the FABulous.
Krista
Isn’t it fun when you have an amusing mental image like that, that you can draw upon for a good chuckle for about a week (or more) afterwards?
Andrew
Look it, you’re going to have to provide solid evidence if you make some sort of outrageous claim that it doesn’t turn them Queer Eye gay.
SeesThroughIt
This damn near made me snarf chicken soup.
The Other Steve
But but! There’s progress.
If only the evil news media wouldn’t report about all the bad things.
Why don’t they talk about all the schools and hospitals being built?
WHAAAAAAAA!!!! If you don’t stop it, I’m going to tell my mommy!
The Other Steve
Funny, that sounds like the French plan in Algeria.
And odd thing, they pull the same bullshit when talking about the US involvement. “But but if we get rid of Rumsfeld, even though he’s doing a shitty job, it’ll signal to them that we’re easy to defeat! WHAAAAAA! Mommy!”
The Other Steve
And, Nikolay… it’s not that I’m a cranky old man. I’m just so tired of Operation Enduring Bullshit.
It’s always excuse after excuse after excuse, with no realization that the problem started when the decision was made.
TenguPhule
Proof you must be a spoof. No sane person in their right mind would make that absurd claim.
I rest my case.
srv
Maliki is out. He won’t last until March. We’re playing games with the parties there and trying to find an “acceptable” Sunni (hence the rush). When we find him, he’ll likely have no credibility with the Baathists. Which means he matters as much as Donald Duck.
No, I’ve never thought that. I’ve never believed (even before the war) that the Sunni Baathists would accept status as a political minority. There is no political solution vis-a-vis the Baathists without either:
1) Enough Shia with guns, institutional structures and training (10 years from whenver you decide that’s your plan)
2) The Sunni being in charge
I see a bunch of politicians who wouldn’t last a day if someone left the gate to Green Zone open. They, GW, and the US Military don’t amount to squat in Iraq right now. We haven’t for a long time. We aren’t in the drivers seat. We aren’t even in the back seat. We’re in the trunk, screaming.
Wow. There’s the nut of your problem. Like our collective wishes should matter.
Since I’ve said:
1) Getting Saddam won’t matter
2) Nuking Fallujah won’t matter
3) Elections won’t matter
4) Getting Zarqawi won’t matter
5) A really, really weak Constitution is a disaster
I’ll make my prediction now:
5) Nothing matters now. The Sunni/Baathist will fight until they rule again. The House of Saud will bankroll.
If they were patient, they’d play along and pretend until we got out and then take over. But now that GW is completely impotent, they’ve got no reason to be nice about it.
MNPundit
Well it’s nice they’ve come around to the Standard “Non-Serious” Liberal Position agreed on by the end of 2005.
Welcome aboard let’s try to get out of this with as little damage as possible but remember there is going to be damage and it’s going to suck for everyone.
TenguPhule
Corrected.
Tsulagi
All of the so-called plans for victory or at least stabilization in Iraq are dependent on one contingency: An ISF committed to a unified, democratic Iraq. Forget secular, no chance there, but not using weapons to mediate a 1400 year-old Sunni/Shia blood feud or get payback for perceived fresh grievances would suffice. With the ISF under the leadership of a like-minded central government.
Yeah, right. Hasn’t happened. Isn’t happening. And nothing proposed to address that for the future. Everything proposed focuses on simply increasing the ISF numbers. Increasing the numbers of the IA for example where 60-70% of the soldiers are on leave at any given time. Where they can decide which operations they participate in or not. How far they get from home. Plus they can quit at any time leaving with their weapons and other gear. An army which our own trainers have estimated the overwhelming majority are aligned with the goals of their favorite imam, militia, tribe or anything else rather than a unified Iraq.
Point is, these forces already have a culture developed that doesn’t have the national interests of their country as a priority. Adding to these forces is going to bring security to Iraq and ensure its democratic future? Let’s look at the past few years for clues. As they’ve stood up, so has the violence and our casualties. Yeah, let’s add more of those guys, it hasn’t gotten fucked up quite enough. If you were serious, you’d start over with the Iraqi security forces, but that’s not going to happen. Stay the course.
Tulkinghorn
There used to be such an Iraqi army. They were demoralized, contained to their barracks, and possibly ready for new leadership. In spite of rebuilding this standing army, the soldiers were summarily cashiered, and they went home with their weapons. That is the point we lost this war, when some clueless hack decided to make policy, and left us with no winning long-term strategy.
wilfred
Agreed, but we still don’t know who that hack was. Rumsfield denies it was him, was it Feith? That decision and the total de-baathification policy have contributed to this mess. What is essential is to avoid thinking that nothing would have mattered, as if it were all some noble, Quixotic effort doomed to failure. Bullshit. Decisions were made that have resulted in the deaths of tens of thousands of people – the uncertainty over who made them suggests that some people know that things could have and should have gone differently and are desperately covering their asses.
Two things – disbanding the Army and total de-baathification. Who made those decisions and why? I’d like to see a Democratic congress ask those questions.
Create a national consciousness in the Iraqi Army/State? I’m all for it. But what if that national consciousness was Arab nationalist, or pro-Iranian, or non-secular or, gasp!, pro-Palestinian? Estimated life expectancy of said Army? Ask Lebanon.
The Iraqis know they’ve been had, any more bullshit from Bush et al. is treated exactly for what it is.
Faux News
Everyone here on Balloon Juice KEEP CLAPPING or Tinkerbell, oops I mean Nikolay, will die!
Nikolay
I wasn’t talking about schools and hospitals being built. I was talking about Iraq being on the verge of total chaos and about the chance that this could be prevented.
demimondian
No — you were talking about why we focus on the bad stuff that’s happening, not on the “good stuff”. That your definition of “good stuff” has changed reflects the fact that *the good stuff has been exaggerated*.
Dress left
Some things can be fucked-up beyond unfuckability.
Generally by incompetent ideologues in positions of great power.
“Bush’s War” may well become the Gold Standard.
Mr. L. Jerry Bremer on line 2.
Nikolay
What do you mean, my definition of good stuff changed? I don’t live in USA, so you can’t call me a Democrat or Republican, but I certainly lean left, and, of course, I see, and always saw, “schools and hospitals” for an empty rhetoric it is, and would never use it.
Nevertheless, I think that the political realignment is important for the real dynamics of the situation, whereas car bombings, as horrible as they are, are not.