Abandoning Iraq (1. Declare victory: 2. Cut; 3. Run)

RealClearPolitics ^ | November 8, 2006 | David Warren

[quidnunc]

Regardless of its final composition, and regardless of other pressing issues or its mandate, the leading item of business for the new U.S. Congress will be Iraq.

It didn't matter who won control of each house — the fix was already in. Look at the composition of the Baker-Hamilton commission, which the outgoing Congress had already appointed to "find a way out of Iraq" — a bipartisan commission, representing the foreign-policy opponents of President Bush in both the Republican and Democratic parties. Soon it will formally report.

James Baker, secretary of state under President Bush's father, was the man who, in 1989, secured an American exit from Lebanon by effectively surrendering the country to Assad's Syria. Lee Hamilton, former Democrat chairman of the House Committee on Foreign Affairs, joined him in stacking the Commission's study groups with men and women representing the pre-9/11 foreign policy consensus, which could be summarized in the phrase, "stability through disengagement". On the Baker-Hamilton plan, Congress will take the war in Iraq out of President Bush's hands, as Congress took the Vietnam War out of President Nixon's. Iraq will then be delivered into the hands of Iran's ayatollahs.

-snip-

[Man of the Right]

Nobody would believe a victory claim.

The U.S. will try to negotiatve Iraq partitition into Shiite, Kurd and Sunni states with shared oil revenues, followed by immediate U.S. withrawal to Kurdistan and Kuwait. If it can't negotiate a deal, it will withdraw anyway.

[Don Carlos]

We can't. Not after all that's been achieved.

We can't, but I'm afraid they can and will!

[The_Reader_David]

At one level your analysis is right. At another it matters. Muslim culture is a 'shame' culture, and as such cares about appearence of weakness. The election will be seen by them through the lens summed up in one of the popular abusive names for Democrats here at FR: 'Dhimmicrats'.

Like sharks scenting blood in the water, they will redouble their efforts to attack up, even before the new Congress and hobble the war effort and security measures with funding cuts.

[Uncle Miltie]

Extreme lead poisoning is a terrible thing. But with luck, there will be a couple fewer rats with hooves roaming the forests after this weekend. :-)

[Chili Girl]

Brilliant title - I give them 9 months to hatch this egg.

[pollyannaish]

How are folks out your way taking all of this?

There are so MANY of us who still absolutely, positively believe in this mission. Please tell anyone who will listen. PLEASE.

[the invisib1e hand]

To have a war, there must be two opposing sides....

un hunh. next slide please.

[TechnicalEcstacy]

There is nothing we can do, short of total all-out war, that will keep this conflict from being longterm. Is this acceptable? Was it acceptable that the Cold War lasted over 50 years? As hard as we try, Democrats will have the White House at some point. They will pull back and allow our enemies to get stronger. Does that mean we as Republicans sit back and allow it to happen? No. We should fight every step of the way to keep the pressure on the enemy.

And what you say about WE Americans is more of a reflection on human nature rather than Americans. Humans almost always wait until the problem hits them over the head.

Islamofacists were at war with us for decades and we ignored them until 9/11. And we're still not sure whether we should confront them. Either way, it will take generations to win this.