U.S. Troop Surge in Iraq: Over to You Al-Maliki…

Posted: Wednesday, January 10, 2007 10:20 AM by Hardball

By Lt. Col. Rick Francona

President Bush is expected to announce tonight that he will order an increase in the level of U.S. forces in Iraq by as many as 20,000 troops. Most analysts believe that the bulk of these forces will likely be assigned the mission of establishing security in Baghdad, and some tasked with putting increased pressure on the Sunni insurgents in Anbar province. While there is a need to continue operations against the insurgents in the western part of the country, the major focus of these forces should be resolution of the abysmal security situation in Baghdad.

Security in Baghdad is mostly a sectarian issue – Sunni versus Shia. Although there has always been some level of sectarian violence in the capital, it was somewhat held in check by the moral authority exercised by the “moderate” Shia clerics, Grand Ayatollah Ali Al-Sistani and Ayatollah Abd Al-Aziz Al-Hakim. That discipline evaporated in February 2006 with the destruction of Shia Islam’s fourth holiest site, the Al-Askari (or Golden) mosque in Samarra at the hands of al-Qaeda in Iraq. Since then, Shia militias have been waging a murderous – and effective - campaign against Sunnis, with the center of their operations in Baghdad.

The main culprit in the expanding sectarian violence is the Shia militia of Muqtada Al-Sadr, known as the Mahdi Army. Muqtada Al-Sadr, despite his relatively low standing in the Shia religious hierarchy as a hawjat al-islam (scholar of Islam), has eclipsed all other Shia leaders in terms of influence among rank and file Shiites. The cries of “Muqtada, Muqtada, Muqtada” from many of those present at the execution of Saddam Hussein are testament to that fact.

The security situation in Baghdad is an Iraqi problem that requires an Iraqi solution. It is absolutely essential that Al-Sadr’s militia be either abolished or neutralized. This should be a condition for the deployment of additional American forces. The question is how that happens. Is the Iraqi government led by Prime Minister Nuri Al-Maliki capable enough - or willing - to take on the Mahdi Army?

Up until now, there has been no indication, despite verbal assurances to the contrary, that the Al-Maliki government has the willpower to marginalize Al-Sadr. When American forces attempted to stop operations of the Mahdi Army in its stronghold of Sadr City, the prime minister stepped in to resist or refute those efforts.

It is time for the Al-Maliki government to act as the government of Iraq, not the government of the Shia. If Al-Maliki does not move against Al-Sadr, why should we?

EMAIL THIS

Comments

WMD,Al Quaeda,Sadaam's A criminal to his own people, can't leave because it will be a haven for terrorist training camps. What's next ? Bring our men and women home, ADMIT this was ill-conceived and pray that what you've done Mr. Bush has not endangered Americans for many generations to come.

Jay West, Stratford, NJ (Sent Thursday, January 11, 2007 9:08 AM)

I think pulling out now would be disastrous, so if Bush sends the 21,000+ troops, they should be deployed to the borders of the country. There they should set up camps (stock piled with food and supplies) to house all American troops, and the women and children of Iraq. As they are doing this (over next few months), our troops already inside country should give the Iraqi's a "final" three months of training. They should get them to understand that American troops are backing off, then our troops should ALL move out to the borders -- and let the fighting begin. Also, the Iraqi (leader?) should issue a "No Fly Zone" into / out of Iraq for an indefinite time. If Iran (or others that have been fueling this war) attempt to fly in, they will be escorted out -- or shot down (wounded) -- their choice. Our troops would also be guarding all ground borders to the country, keeping all outside invaders away the battles being fought within. This may be a better way -- to let them "sink or swim" and, our casualties would be minimal.

Barb, STL, Mo (Sent Thursday, January 11, 2007 9:09 AM)

No one studies history anymore. That's the reason we keep making the same mistakes over and over. Until you take religion out of the equaision you will not have peace in that region.

myles smith scott depot wv (Sent Thursday, January 11, 2007 9:12 AM)

Some of the opinions from people from the South are so funny. One of the compared Valley Forge with Iraq. First of all, The Americans than were supported by the French military, and the Spanish navy that defeated the British in the Gulf of Mexico. Second, if anybody would take the Valley Forge example that would be the insurgents, since George Washington was an insurgent and was the underdog fighting the empire.

Marcus Aurelius (Sent Thursday, January 11, 2007 9:32 AM)

Drop the MOAB a 25-ton conventional bomb. It will demoralize and get everyone’s attention that we are serious in restoring order and reducing ground forces.

J. Turner, Colorado Springs, CO (Sent Thursday, January 11, 2007 9:38 AM)

Bush went to war with Iraq because saddam tried to have his father Bush sr. killed.Bush thought it would be short and sweet and make him look good but it turned into a killing field where Americans die each day.Bush needs to pull all of our troops and let the middle east settle their own problems. Use our American troops to protect America and let the other nations protect themselves. Vietnam same war just in Iraq.

Tom Moleterno Prescott Valley AZ (Sent Thursday, January 11, 2007 10:18 AM)

Reply to Kevin Quail, Shamburg, IL. Do yu have any proof that Bush wanted to invade Iraq before 911? Is this really about OIL and Govt contracts? No, well then pls be quiet and bring evidence to the debate. I do beleive that Reps & Dems rcvd poor intel about Iraq, but @ that time everyone voted to go to IRAQ including yur Democratic elected officials. 70-80 % of the public 3-4 yrs ago also wanted to got to Iraq. So now that we are there, lets get some real rules of engagement, kill anyone with a weapon, secure the Iraqi border, kill the insurgents form of communication, ban militias and help the Iraqis END the Civil WAR. Francis D.; Dallas, TX

Francis D. (Sent Thursday, January 11, 2007 10:39 AM)

Ed in Prattville, AL. Your qoute on George Washington in Valley Forge, if we stopped the American Revolution where would we be. We'd be an English colony on the East Coast and a Spanish Colony on the West Coast. Most non military, ie civilians are weak. Ask the troops, ask most of the generals in Iraq if weshould pull out, they'll say not all at once, and they need clear rulse of engagement, and some social-public works engineering projects in iraq to win the support of the Iraqi people. We also need to stop the propaganda machine to all the uneducated muslims that the WEST is the NEW evil empire.

Francis D., Dallas, TX (Sent Thursday, January 11, 2007 10:46 AM)

It is not a question of how many troops we send there. The question is how long will this President continue to lie to us. We are paying the price of our own ignorance. We elected a President who was a "D" grade, made for TV politician. A pretty face neo-cons needed to push heir agenda. Our congress is full of cowards including the Dems who instead of asking tough questions, played along in this lie in the post 9/11, political expediency. Inferior leaders produce poor results. In the future we will not be debating as to how much damage GWB inflicted on Iraq and the ME. The subject will be more like how much he destroyed a century that could truly have been American. Will he be held responsible for destroying this country's postion, economic, political and military, in the world?

Sal Akbani, O'Fallon, Illinois (Sent Thursday, January 11, 2007 10:58 AM)

It is ironic how W spent YEARS denying that more troops would be beneficial (and yes, I will acknowledge that some Dems called for more troops and now they're against it b/c W's for it) but now W is simply stalling. I don't know if I can be any clearer: WE'VE ALREADY LOST THIS WAR!!!! It was over before it started. We don't have a clue what we're doing, now or then. While this situation is OUR fault, we can't do everything for the Iraqis. W simply wants to drop back for the next two years so he can punt this giant pile of feces to the next guy. He has the blood of thousands of Americans and Iraqis all over him. If he has any integrity, he will resign. And ultra-passive statements like- "where mistakes have been made, the responsibility rests with me." Does that make anyone feel better? Does anybody believe that, when forced to make a choice, George W. Bush will do what is right or what Karl Rove thinks will result in less political damage to his already non-existent reputation?

James Alexander, Winston-Salem, NC (Sent Thursday, January 11, 2007 10:58 AM)

I am baffled as to how many could still stand behind a president who only cares about himself, lies, and getting richer from oil and big corporation. Firstly, why are we at “War” has the president really given an answer? Are we at war because of Saddam or Osama? Why are we still at War, it can not be because of Saddam, he’s dead, so what about Osama? Secondly, why are Katrina Evacuees still living in rat infested trailers? There were no bid contracts, Halburton, and mottos for Bush and Cheney, more money, no problem, how much do you want? We’ll clean up New Orleans when we are up to it, say contractors? Ok, says President Bush and Dick Cheney. New Orleans still looks as if it had a bomb hit its town Thirdly, why was he in photo with someone he said he did not know, *hints* (Jack Abramoff)? Bush says, I take pictures with a lot folks I do not know. When he leaves office, he will have this country in an uproar leaving the next president to clean up his mess while he is getting richer with (Shell, Chevron, and BP) and many of his tycoon friends. President Bush is a dictator in his own right. He listen’s to no one, but his Ace of Spade (Dick Cheney), Ace of Club, (Condi Rice). Moreover, he does not listen to his the highest of all cards “(THE PEOPLE) “. He invaded their country with War and now he wants democracy for the Iraqi people while our brave troops fight for his lies. In closing, the rich get richer and poor get poorer. There is no balance, fairness or truthfulness or integrity in the present administration. We need answers, I pray the new congress will get him to finally tell the truth.

Jessica (Sent Thursday, January 11, 2007 11:05 AM)

Two more years? Twenty one thousand more troops? Billions of billions of dollars more? When is enough enough? We have a president who will NOT follow the mandate of the majority of his country men and women. He will continue to waste both American lives and funds needed to supply Americans with health care, and other domestic needs. When this president leaves office he won't worry about the bill that comes due later for all the foolish spending in Iraq. In his statement to the American public he said "we will send talented civilians to Iraq to assist in the rebuilding of the infastructure". I guess that means more "no bid" contracts to companies that are on the "in" list. When we leave Iraq, we will have done more damage than good, and the cost will have been too great to measure.

Bruce Fulda, Manahawkin, NJ (Sent Thursday, January 11, 2007 11:06 AM)

How come the people who love "dumbush" aren't speaking out as eagerly as those who have doubts about his honesty and/or intelligence? Is the public debate truly over? Have his supporters quietly accepted that "dumbush" played them for fools? How come he is so stupid compared to his Dad? Is it becase he has only half his genes from his Dad?

Chitta N. (Sent Thursday, January 11, 2007 11:09 AM)

This country was founded on rebelion, let the Iraqis do the same. GET OUT !!!!!!!!!

Joan Lombard, IL (Sent Thursday, January 11, 2007 11:55 AM)

Lets pull out of Iraq now and give the terrorist a safe place to plan the destruction of the free world. If you are not Muslim then you must die. That is what the terrorist want. Why not give it to them! WAKE UP people!!

Allan Hallock, Lexington NC (Sent Thursday, January 11, 2007 11:57 AM)

We must give the Iraqi forces a time table when they must manage the whole country. Forget all this impeach Bush nonsense, all intelligence is a guessing game, regardless of time period or what party controls the gov't. Give our military the tools to win. Stop Iran from inflaming the situation. The Dems need to come with with real solutions, not just pat themselves on the back when the US suffers a setback.

Eric, Columbus, OH (Sent Thursday, January 11, 2007 12:05 PM)

I'm still trying to figure out what the "mission" is that Bush keeps talking about...and if we "win" this war, what exactly is it that we win?

susan ferro eau claire wi. (Sent Thursday, January 11, 2007 12:09 PM)

Al-Maliki Government has said it will act against Al-Sadr. He should be told to proceed. If he does, send additional troops, if he doesn't start bringing others home. No additional troops should be sent until we see significant action by him.

Tom Clarke (Sent Thursday, January 11, 2007 12:27 PM)

The only way to win a war, whether it is against a nation or terrorists, is to be more brutal and deadly in battle than they are. You must expect casualties among your forces, and collateral damage among the population in which the terrorists reside. If this is not acceptable to you, stay at home and hope you can defeat them when they arrive on your shores. The American people had better realize this struggle against the terrorists is going to last for at least three generations and if we don't win it, our descendants will be adhering to Sharia law. Had the current Mainstream American attitude been prevalent at the outset of WWII, German would now be our native language. Wake up America, you are about to loose more than the war in Iraq. You are going to loose you entire way of life. .

Norm Conant (Sent Thursday, January 11, 2007 12:32 PM)

Will al-Maliki ( a leader of Iraqi shias ) leave Iran behind and become a poodle of USA. He has very clerly trapped US in sending more troops to destroy sunnies. All that we will see now is an exodus of sunnies from shia dominated areas. We will also see an increase in sectarian violence. Our troops will also be the target of the cross fire. How many more troops must die before we wake up.

DV Sikka, Bellevue Wa (Sent Thursday, January 11, 2007 12:42 PM)

First of all, I have been opposed to this INSANE war from the beginning. I believe that Bush has been a puppet of the neocons all along, and that includes not only Ken Adelman and Richard Perle (look him up on Wikipedia), and all the other "sickos" on the "Defense Policy Board Advisory Committee", but also Cheney and Rumsfeld. By the way, why the hell does the United States government even need a "defense policy board advisory committee, especially one that once claimed, and maybe still has, Dan Quale (of all people) as a member? But it has been well documented that Bush was obsessed with Iraq from the day he entered office, if not before, because (look up the quote for yourself), Bush stated on camera (after going to war), "And after all, he (Saddam) tried to kill my daddy" (referring to the failed plot against Bush #1.) And I unfortunately disagree with the person who said that we should work to become oil independent and leave the whole Middle East alone. That would be great except for a few important things: (1) We are committed to supporting Israel against the Arab nations, (2) at this point, we still need the oil, and most importantly, (3) we cannot let this area of the world continue to expand the training ground for the millions of people who want to destroy the United States. So, as much as I hate this war for more reasons than I can list here, but primarily due to: spending the lives of at least 3,000 soldiers and billions of dollars, as well as physically and mentally (or both), causing over 20,000 soldiers to be wounded (along with, if you trust studies by Johns Hopkins School of Public Health), causing the "excess" deaths of over 650,000 Iraqis, we are going to have to do whatever is necessary to get Iraq to the point where it is, at least, stable over the long haul. I grew up with Vietnam (mostly via TV). That war ended just a few months after I got my Vietnam draft card. This is NOT Vietnam; that is, we can't just leave and let the North Vietnamese Communist government take over. If we leave Iraq before it is stable and somewhat of an U.S ally, it will be taken over by Iran, the Taliban, Al-Qaeda, and God knows who else. A previous poster got it right-we have a tiger by the tail and can't let go, as painful as it all is, and will probably continue to be for the foreseeable future.

Frank, Maryville, Tennessee (Sent Thursday, January 11, 2007 12:44 PM)

The American people have submitted and surrendered to the petroleum-industrial complex. We're all vested with a year or so's income in a vehicle that is a boat anchor without petroleum. The elites are vested even more. Alternatives development has gotten lip service but little more. It's like taking a contract out on our soldiers and everyone who wants to live free in the Middle East. To dodge the guilt, everyone wants to heap all blame on the President, who is basically trying to triage the situation while sharing our axiom that The Addiction is not really touchable. The result is that the region's autocrats see salvation for their anti-democratic way of life in fanning mayhem in Iraq. Especially the Iranian mullahcrats, especially through Al-Sadr. Both by bringing fat oil profits to the regime and by chastening Americans. If we changed our attitude, we could save Iraq and a lot more.

P Schager, Los Angeles, California (Sent Thursday, January 11, 2007 12:49 PM)

Well, our fearless leader is at it again. He keeps coming up with schemes that he assures us will lead to victory in Iraq. If he is serious about winning, then he should take a page from his hero's book and just bomb the heck out of Iraq. It will show we mean business. Yes, innocent people will die, but aren't they now? If that is to severe, here's another suggestion. Why doesn't he put his job on the line. If the surge doesn't work within four months, then he and his followers should all step down. That's the least he could do after asking our military men and women to put their lives on the line for him time and time again. It was pretty sneaky of him to start sending troops to Iraq before his speech, tying the hands of Congress who vowed not to monetarily support an increase. Now Congress will look like they don't support the troops. This man is on an ego trip, and taking the U.S. down with him. He couldn't even rebuild New Orleans, how can we believe him to rebuild Iraq?????

Alice Loeffler, Hurricane, UT (Sent Thursday, January 11, 2007 12:49 PM)

I can not understand or even comprehend, how this president has hoodwinked the American Public and the Senate and the Congress, in allowing the misuse of the office of the President for so long. Are we all just a bunch of Conics or/and Robots that follow along without using are God given brains to distinguish what is right and what is wrong. To allow this President to destroy our international image, to destruct another county and to almost, if not already, place our county in Bankruptcy. How long will it now take, to recover from this Fiasco. It appears we did nothing more than trade SADDAM and his REPUBLICAN GUARD, for PRESIDENT BUSH and his REPUBLICAN GUARD. God Save America!!!

Dean Pyper, Murray, Utah (Sent Thursday, January 11, 2007 12:51 PM)

You Bush haters should go to your rooms for always sounding like the kid who's toy was taken away. Bush is doing the best job he knows how to do in a not so fun situation. Like you could do better! He did not start this war the Muslums did when they attacked us on 9/11. Do you want to fight them in LA or Iraq? The war in Iraq does make sence if you look at the bigger picture and put aside your hippie liberial whines. Terrorrist do not want peace, they only want Death to America and they have wanted this long before Bush was President so stop blaming the man that is protecting your right to whine! PS having spent a year in the Army does not make you a leader so sending the Bush team over to fight is about as smart as giving Al Gore a movie camera and a case of donuts.

William Clinton, Minneapolis MN (Sent Thursday, January 11, 2007 1:02 PM)

Its still all about oil and revenge...bushys lust for oil and revenge for his dayaddy...how stupid can the american public be for raising this jerk into a position where he could play soldier and shout out the commands to kill whoever he wants to...the word hate is not harsh enough...now are we going to let him wreak havoc again before he is gone for good..on to paraquay

jeanne johnson, tucson, az (Sent Thursday, January 11, 2007 1:04 PM)

Join the BUSH PUSH, and push him out of office! Bush is not going to do anything that the neo-cons do not support. His plan is right out of the American Enterprise Institute playbook. He does not give a hoot about the opinion or support of the American people, he only cares that the AEI plans for dominance in the mid east and control of the almighty oil interests prevail. He has no plan, he has no clue. His is an embarrassment and a danger to this country and should be impeached. Any responsible republican should wake up and realize that this man must be escorted out of office now. There should be a concerted bipartisan effort to force both he and Cheney to resign and rescue this country from certain further disaster.

Nancy Gallagher, Novato, CA (Sent Thursday, January 11, 2007 1:04 PM)

When I served in Vietnam with the 3rd Marine Division, 3rd Tank Bn., the enemy (Insergents) would redeploy to another area to continue their resistance. Their goal was not to win an outright victory but to cause us mounting casualties and create the sense of fustraition and failure. As with any urban or jungle guerilla warfare the only chancce for a negoiated preace is to have open negiations. This was done in Korea and in Vietnam. The only other options for victory are to become a Saddam Huessin or level the country as we did with Germany at the end of World War II. Our Joint Chiefs must surely know this. We know the President doesn't. We can not win the Iraqi War with 'Surges'of additional troops. We will only lose the lives of brave men and women for the sole purpose of Bush 43's legecy,

Richard Carey, Mattapoisett,MA (Sent Thursday, January 11, 2007 1:06 PM)

When American big oil companies have locked up the rights to Iraqi oil then and only then will our troops be allowed to come home. This administration is big oil! Bush, big oil. Cheney, big oil. Condolezza Rice has an oil tanker named after her for crying out loud. Wake up America.

N.S. Boydston (Sent Thursday, January 11, 2007 1:09 PM)

Richard Carey, Mattapoisett,MA (Sent Thursday, January 11, 2007 1:10 PM)

Democrats and Republicans have plenty to fight about; taxes, social security, etc. In this time of war we should stand together as a country and put our differences aside. We need to support our President and most importantly, our troops.

Susan Brown, Alexandria, VA (Sent Thursday, January 11, 2007 1:12 PM)

We won't be leaving until Bush leaves office. Get real people. He'll never back down.

Kathy Reaves, Carrollton,Texas (Sent Thursday, January 11, 2007 1:23 PM)

I think some are missing an important point. If we don't keep the war over there, they (Al Quaida)will bring the war over here. Keep Al Quaida busy in the middle east. They've been fighting for thousands of years over there. I don't believe we'll be able to stop it, and I don't want us involved in their squabbles. However, they've involved us whether we like it or not. It's time to decide--do we want their religion, government and culture to become ours? If the answer is no, we have no choice. We must continue our fight until they no longer can or want to destroy us and our culture.

Dodson (Sent Thursday, January 11, 2007 1:23 PM)

The clueless fool that declared several months ago "mission accomplished" from the deck of an American aircraft carrier is the same fool in charge of this ill concieved war today. Need I say more?

Robert Harvey, East Berlin, PA (Sent Thursday, January 11, 2007 1:27 PM)

BAD INTEL/ BUSH LIED/CHEAP OIL OR WHAT OTHER REASON'S THE POINT IS WE'ER THERE I do think this war can be won but there need's to be alot more pressure on the rest of the mid east goverments to control the fighters from coming in to iraq and some help with rebuiling iraq and it's military . these other goverments (iran) for one are playing the usa just as we played russia when they invaded afganistan with ossama. Iran need's to realize they really don't want a war with the usa and if they want the wmd's so bad maybe we should help them figure what's in there best interest. there also need's to be more pressure on al-maliki to stop the sunni/shia conflict. the american military are doing the best they can to hold ground and they can fight and train every one over there/ but if the politican's and al-maliki don't do there part THEN THEY MYSWELL BRING THEM TROOPS HOME

m. roberts campton, ky (Sent Thursday, January 11, 2007 1:31 PM)

I am amazed at the things I'm hearing about whining to get out of Iraq. After 9-11-2001 the overwhelmingly vast majority of Americans(none were hyphenated at the time) were all for going after the perpetrators and backed our president almost unanimously, as well they should have. At that time, as we were gearing up to strike back at those who struck at us Mr. Bush and others told the American people this would be a long and bloody fight, that lives would be lost and that it would take years, not months to fight this to the end. All of America said basically "Go get 'em, we'll back you all the way!". So with the overwhelming support of the American people President Bush took action after fully warning the people of the costs and sacrifices involved in proceeding. Now the American people with what I call the "Microwave Mentality" (Meaning we don't have the patience to wait for anything.)because it isn't happening soon enough, want to just give up and come home. Not our troops mind you, the people, or at least some of them. To those who whine it's taking too long I'd like to say this. We as Americans made a commitment to get this job done and see it through til it is done right. So keep your whining to yourself and stick to the commitment we all as Americans made. What if the WWII generation had done what you people are doing? We'd all be speaking Japanese and driving VW's saluting either the swastika or rising sun flag. That generation had it a whole lot tougher then than we do now. They had shortages and rationing to deal with and they rolled up their sleeves and produced more, worked longer, bought bonds, and supported our president, our troops, and our country. I don't like war either, but sometimes it's the thing that needs to be done. I want our troops home too, but to pull out now would just mean we'd have to go back again and start from scratch. I feel I have a right to voice this opinion because my son enlisted in the Army, specifically requested to be in the infantry hoping to go to Iraq and help make a difference. He will get his wish in August(Maybe sooner now). Am I scared for him ? Yes I am. Will I be a wreck until he gets back home safely? You know I will. Am I proud of him? You're damn right I am ! He's a fine young man and a true American.

Tim,Dayton,Ohio (Sent Thursday, January 11, 2007 1:41 PM)

What all this has been about, from the beginning, is war profiteering. Sacrifice? Now tell me what Bush and his cronies have sacrificed? Why they don't even want to help pay for this mass murder, much less expose their own children to danger. Tax cuts and egomania, far more important than human lives to these Satanic Christianists. And the endless lying - can someone remind fundamentalists that the father of lies is Satan? These supposed God-fearing people must bear much of the responsibility for putting these people in power. When are they going to step up and do something about it? I'm praying for the day when Cheney, Bush, Rove, Kindasleazy etc. are dragged in chains before a real court of justice to anwer for their crimes.

Jeanne Schneider, Pasadena (Sent Thursday, January 11, 2007 1:42 PM)

It seems our country is in that fracas in iraq for the long haul. Pelosi and her gang want to cut all the funds, that includes payroll for the troops(didn't know about that one did ya!). No equipment, no pay, the troops will want to rebel that is what that ***** pelosi and her gang wants. How can one fight a war with no equipment? Of course her little dream probably won't happen because her neck would be on the chopping block and most all the troops will be in line 'cause the ***** endangered them by cutting off supplies. I think it best that we load her and her gang up and send them over and let them use their pansy ways to fight the war(oh yea, don,t forget carter). They won't last a couple hours. Of course, with carter whining & trying to be a dumblomat, they might all get tired of the whining and forget why they were fighting....

eyeofwarrior, lenawee county Mi (Sent Thursday, January 11, 2007 1:43 PM)

Up until now, I was generally in favor of the increased troop idea. But now that you explain it this way, I agree with you that we should NOT step in unless we have Al-Maliki's support to take on Muqtada, which is unlikely. Wow, I can't believe I just did a 180 (degree) flip, but you make a very convincing argument.

Steven Daniels, New York, NY (Sent Thursday, January 11, 2007 1:53 PM)

The incompetence of Bush invading Iraq and his Middle East policies will bring about a sectarian war between the Shia and the Sunni's throughout the Middle East. The shia out number the Sunni's in Iraq and have significant Shia populations in Iran and Syria. The Shia factions in the Middle East will consolidate and destroy all Sunni power in the Middle East including Saudi Arabia and thereafter control all the oil resources in the Reigon. Iraq is forever broken by strong sectarain hatred between the Shia and the Sunni's. The Shia will never negotiate away their new found power. The Sunni's of Saudi Arabia need to move their stockpile of U.S. Greenback's to Swiss Banks soon and get their U.S. Passports to Vagas current. Lets not mess with the Shia Militia's in Iraq, pay back is hell, we will need their oil resources for a long time to come. I vote to put our troops on the boarders of Iran,Syra,Saudi Arabia and to protect the oil fields and let the Shia and Sunni's have their full blown Civil War. May the best man win. Best of luck to all for the New Year.

Jack l Henning (Sent Thursday, January 11, 2007 2:09 PM)

I believe if you take a look back in our History. America and Americans have always been hated or at least disliked. We can't place all the blame on President Bush. I can't remember a time that other countries wrote or spoke favorably about the United States unless we were doing something specifically for them. Even then, it was only a short time until we became the "Ugly Americans" to them again. Let us all face facts as long as we're the most powerful kid on the block, we're going to sometimes make mistakes and sometimes do it right. But we'll never make everybody happy.

L.D. McMasters (Sent Thursday, January 11, 2007 2:16 PM)

Apparently people here believe anything they read in the paper (even when it turns out the NYT was taking their comments for months from a "policeman" that wasn't really a policeman and based their claims of "civil war" on that). I'm still waiting for a sizable uprising and not a few dozen idiots who set off some bombs in a market. Doves think the choice is between fighting or not fighting. Hawks think the choice is between fighting now or fighting later. I'd bet most of the people who post here have never been the victim of an unprovoked random act of violence. They think everyone is just like them and can't understand the nature of aggression. If everyone was soooo against the war as everyone here thinks Bush would have lost the election, Lieberman would have lost in CT and we would see a REAL civil war. The Iraqi people have shown their support by their nonviolent direct action. There is no civil war despite how much people here want there to be (Americans who refer to America as "they")

Ivan Ivanovich (Sent Thursday, January 11, 2007 2:25 PM)

The loudest lesson learned from Vietnam were when politicians interfere in the war, we can't possibly win. It’s sad that these same politicians hide behind our fighting men and women who keep us safe...all Americans. Americans got a taste of Iraq here September 11, 2001. Let the Generals lead and our troops fight to win like other “non-political” wars and then our troops can come home safely and with the honor and respect they deserve.

Luis Mendoza Houston, Texas (Sent Thursday, January 11, 2007 2:33 PM)

.Help may come from learning how to think inside of the box! The President’s mother admitted George W. Bush was a slow learner; therefore, she was forced to use Help With Phonics to try to get her son be on par with his fellow pre-schoolers. I guess we should thank the former First Lady for our current situation, i.e. if she had not intervened, we could be worse off than we really are. It has taken more than three years for our President to learn war is much more than ‘Shock and Awe.” The only one shocked was our Commander in Chief when he realized his strategy to democratize to Middle East was not awed by those in Iraq, who were more than willing to fight to the death—if it were a choice between marginalization by a Shia controlled government and unlimited arms from the overlooked arms depots and help from Iran and Al-Queeda, whose own existence had been encouraged by a president lacking diplomatic acumen and full of Texas-Sized-Hubris. The only wars that always go as planned have John Wayne and Clint Eastwood leading the charge; maybe, if our President had gone to Vietnam, instead of a safe National Guard unit stateside and seen first-hand the horrors of war, he would have known some people are not afraid to die for what they believe in. Tonight, George W. Bush sang for the nation his Swan-Song, which will probably be his last opportunity to waged war unfettered by Congress. Short of a Constitutional Amendment, Democrats are powerless to stop ‘The Surge,’ but they have to look like they are doing what they promised during the campaign. Furthermore, even if we wanted to leave today, we would probably need the additional troops to make a safe exit from an enemy who is more than willing to shoot our soldiers in-the-back as they retreat. Anyone who thinks otherwise may not have considered the logistics of removing an army. If you still have the box of Help With Phonics sitting in your attic—send them to 1600 Pennsylvania Avenue. It may help to bring our troops sooner. York Van Nixon III 1/11/07 York@YorkVanNixonIII.Com

York Van Nixon III Washington, D.C. (Sent Thursday, January 11, 2007 2:38 PM)

Everything that was said about this war by the administration is now inoperative. We were told it was not about oil, now we're told we can't allow the extremists get their hands on the oil. We were told "Mission Accomplished" that "major combat operations" were complete, now look at the situation. This "surge" is "stay the course" in spades. A regular army has never been able to beat an irregular army throughout history,

Larry Hansen, Charlotte, NC (Sent Thursday, January 11, 2007 2:49 PM)

The question of "security" was addressed by President Ford in his interview with Bob Woodward. By unilaterally invading a sovereign country, something we have never done, we have marginalized the security of Americans both here and abroad for many generations. The security of Americans should be the the first priority, and somewhere down the list is the priority for the security of Iraq. It was a mistake to go into Iraq (70% of Americans have spoken), and throwing gasoline on the fire will not put it out. We need Congress to say "NO MORE MONEY" or those people who are now in Congress will also lose their seats next time around.

Bob Goss, North Palm Beach,FL (Sent Thursday, January 11, 2007 2:58 PM)

I don't hate America, I just hate Americans. While this extreme statement is false, it might not be for many other parts of the world, nor an uncommon conclusion from any practical person who might risk reading the plethora of ingenious american opinions. Some Ideas I read and thoughts: 1)Pull out,it's not our war, let them fight their own war,et al. = So we don't have any fault in the condition of Iraq today? What do you mean to say? If we make big decisions (I do consider attacking another country a large dicision) we have to accept the responsiblity and duty to leave a country no worse than we found out, at the very least! 2)Bush is at fault, the world hates us, bush is soley to blame, et al. It would be nice to blame one person for all the worlds problems wouldn't it? I'm sure various south american countries blame bush too right? (it's funny b/c they do) Since WWII we have frequently gone above and beyond to wreak havoc in other countries. There should be a class on this in high schools seriously. Alas I have to go..but keep blogging...intelligently! I good friend once told me, 'I want to be a Cosmopolitan, but I am hopelessly American.' So sad because it's true. Are not we all citizens of the world?

Jason, Fort Collins, CO (Sent Friday, January 12, 2007 1:55 PM)

The only way to get Iraq in check is to: 1) Convince the majority of the Iraqi Parliment that it is in their best interests to quell the sectarian violence, because if they don't we are leaving. Then the government and the country would surely collapse and they won't be in power any way, because there will be some sort of bloody takeover. Anyone not on board with this after a few days can be asked to leave government and if found to be doing anything against the interests of the government, they will be quickly eliminated. 2) Then have the remaining Iraqi Parliment members convince their respective religous leaders that unless they get on board with "the program" the Iraqi government (ala the U.S. military) is going to wipe out all Religious leaders who fail to get their followers in line. 3) Then the Iraqi government and military will only be left fighting the insurgents (i.e. the radical muslims who don't want Iraq to succeed, i.e. Al-Queda, Iran, etc...). Something which I think they can handle because it is somewhat more straightforward and requires far fewer troops than fighting a civil war. I know this sounds somewhat radical to our American way of thinking, but I can assure you it is the only way that this will get resolved in the timetable that the American people will stand for. If we aren't making progress (significant progress) in 3 - 6 months(i.e. U.S. military clears an area of insurgents and the Iraqi Army takes control and keeps it safe), I believe you will see a call for the impeachment of Bush. A country who has lived under a dictator, never has had the opportunity to live in and execercise a democracy, cannot learn to immediately live in a full democracy. They need baby steps and that is a government that helps them to succeed, by applying pressure where it is needed. Bush has indicated that he has impressed upon Maliki the importance of disarming the militias, but they will not be able to do it one militia at a time. Using the "one at a time" method, Religous leaders and militias will only behave while they are the focus of attention. Then they will return to their sectarian ways. A more permanent solution is a "one strike and you are out" rule that means they will be held accountable for their actions and words by being eliminated.

Jeff, Evansville, IN. (Sent Friday, January 12, 2007 4:54 PM)

I like what Hillary Clinton had to say today and she finely hit the Iraqi issues right on the money. Hillary Clinton came out and said to stop all funding to the Shiite Government if they didn’t show willingness to improve the sectarian violence. Al-Maliki Spoke today and stated that US needed to finish arming their government so we can withdraw from Iraq. I tell you do not continue to arm this Shiites Islamic extremist it would be a big mistake if we do. The Iraqi army has enough equipment to do the job they need to do and all we be doing by arming them to the teeth is for them to carry a long campaign against the Sunni citizens of Iraq.

Eric Oregon (Sent Thursday, January 18, 2007 6:39 AM)

What is wrong with the Democrats? They won and gained the majority in Congress because people voted based on their platform to withdraw our troops and support in Iraq. I have yet to hear from any Democrat with strong advocacy or a resolution that "is binding" to withdraw both troops and support, and be responsible for its consquences!

RHKokoodan (Sent Monday, January 29, 2007 11:40 AM)

<< Previous

Next >>

SEND A COMMENT

PLEASE READ: All comments must be approved before appearing in the thread; time and space constraints prevent all comments from appearing. We will only approve comments that are directly related to the blog, use appropriate language and are not attacking the comments of others.

Message (please, no HTML tags. Web addresses will be hyperlinked):

Your name, city and state (John Doe, Seattle, Wash.):

Your e-mail address (jdoe@msnbc.com):

Your website (it's okay if you don't have one):

Remember me? (We'll keep it private) Remember me?

TRACKBACKS

Trackbacks are links to weblogs that reference this post. Like comments, trackbacks do not appear until approved by us. The trackback URL for this post is: http://hardblogger.msnbc.msn.com/trackback.aspx?PostID=29301

The Essentials

More Hardblogger

Recent Posts:

Archives:

Authors:

Syndicate This Site

Add Hardblogger to your news reader:

ABOUT HARDBLOGGER