The Smart Way Out of a Foolish War

[CRH911S]

Here's an interesting take on the war and a constructive way to end our involvement and the requirement to clean up the mess we created; that also requires peace between Israel and Palestine. Without it we can't expect stability in the region. Some here will assuridly freek at the mention of Zbigniew Brzezinski but hopefully we're grown up enough to look beyond our prejudices and political affiliations for the greater good and the future of America. The link: http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2008/03/27/AR2008032702405.html?hpid=opinionsbox1

[Flatbutt1]

While I agree in part with the "premise' of this article it is sufficiently nebulous to qualify as a presidential candidates stumping speech.

[Porsche-O-Phile]

To me the only "smart" course of action is to pull out and let the area descend into the bloody chaos it so desperately wants. I know it might sound "politically incorrect" but if the various factions over there are busy killing each other in a power squabble that will undoubtedly go on for decades or longer, it (1) means they don't build the resources to come over here and kill us and (2) it does our dirty work for us.

So far as I'm concerned, let them blow each other up. It's obviously what they want - a barbaric, violent existence rooted in centuries of bloody barbaric violence. It's part of the culture of that region. Fine, let them have it. Far as I'm concerned the U.S. should be adopting a more isolationist policy anyway - we can only benefit from it. Get our men & women the hell home and back to doing the job of DEFENDING AMERICA - not being USED by a corrupt administration with no vision and no morals to do their imperialist dirty work.

We are not the world's police force and it's time to reject the whole "New World Order" concept that Bush is so obviously in love with. Get us out now.

[Rearden]

Originally Posted by Porsche-O-Phile

To me the only "smart" course of action is to pull out and let the area descend into the bloody chaos it so desperately wants. I know it might sound "politically incorrect" but if the various factions over there are busy killing each other in a power squabble that will undoubtedly go on for decades or longer, it (1) means they don't build the resources to come over here and kill us and (2) it does our dirty work for us.

You write like you're not aware that the economies of the West are linked to being able to purchase Middle East oil at a reasonable price.

[svandamme]

So what Rearden,
at some point somebody will be in power, and that somebody will sell it to whever want's to buy it... you know why?
because they can't drink or eat crude, and they cannot convert it into other raw materials,

whatever they want to do, they'll need to import goods, and they'll need money for that
so they'll export the oil, just like everybody else in the region does...

What do you think, they'll just opt out on the basis of morals & principles?
You think they'll sell to China for 50 bucks a barrel instead of getting 100 bucks a barrel on the open market???

"NO , we will not sell it at western infidels at full price, we will sell it to the Chinese infidels for 50 bucks in stead!"

That'll be the day

If i were you, i'de be more concerned about the value of the Dollar, or the risk that Oil currency might become Euro instead of the Dollar
That would be a whole different kind of story

[fintstone]

Actually, there seem to be leaders who would glady return their countries to the stone age...or use their oil wealth to buy weapons of mass destruction to threaten or destroy the rest of the world...either scenario nullifies your market-driven argument.

[Rearden]

Originally Posted by svandamme

So what Rearden,
at some point somebody will be in power, and that somebody will sell it to whever want's to buy it... you know why?
because they can't drink or eat crude, and they cannot convert it into other raw materials,

whatever they want to do, they'll need to import goods, and they'll need money for that
so they'll export the oil, just like everybody else in the region does...

What do you think, they'll just opt out on the basis of morals & principles?
You think they'll sell to China for 50 bucks a barrel instead of getting 100 bucks a barrel on the open market???

"NO , we will not sell it at western infidels at full price, we will sell it to the Chinese infidels for 50 bucks in stead!"

That'll be the day

If i were you, i'de be more concerned about the value of the Dollar, or the risk that Oil currency might become Euro instead of the Dollar
That would be a whole different kind of story

Did you ever consider that the first thing these countries would do in the Big Battle that some of you wish for is to cripple or destroy each others' petroleum infrastructures? Duh.

[fintstone]

Originally Posted by svandamme

...What do you think, they'll just opt out on the basis of morals & principles?
You think they'll sell to China for 50 bucks a barrel instead of getting 100 bucks a barrel on the open market???

"NO , we will not sell it at western infidels at full price, we will sell it to the Chinese infidels for 50 bucks in stead!"

That'll be the day...

So you think people that would not hesitate to stap a bomb on their children to kill a few westerners would not be sufficiently idealistic to stop selling oil in order to destroy the economies of the entire western world? Think again.

[Porsche-O-Phile]

Originally Posted by Rearden

You write like you're not aware that the economies of the West are linked to being able to purchase Middle East oil at a reasonable price.

So Iraq IS a "war for oil" then?

I thought all the war apologists were so fond of saying "Iraqi oil doesn't even come to the U.S., so it can't be a 'war for oil'". So, which is it? Is the war in Iraq about oil or not? If it is, then it's theirs and they deserve to be able to export/sell it to whomever they want. If not, then we need to get the F out and stop this pointless waste of lives, money, time, etc.

[Rearden]

It's not a "war for oil" (as you state, the oil belongs to Iraq). In what should be obvious to any sentient being, the only reason the West gives a ***** about the region is to assure that the oil flows and is available at a reasonable price. Nobody is out to steal it. We are more than willing to buy it. But the Sunni vs Shia war you fantasize about would disrupt the supply.

I hope everything I just typed is glaringly obvious to you.

[Porsche-O-Phile]

So what? The motive for creating change in a free-market economy is pricing. If the people that own the oil (Iraqis) are locked in violent conflicts over the stuff and therefore making supply unstable, it'll drive price up. What's the problem? Let the price go up. They won't be able to sell it (benefit #1) and it'll be motivation for people here to change their consumption habits and begin pursuing alternatives (benefit #2).

Either they will realize that they have to work together in order to ensure their mutual benefit (a stable country with stable supply/output so they can sell the one resource they have) or they'll kill each other off. Frankly, it doesn't matter to me which. If gas goes to $10 a gallon, I really don't give a schit. In adversity lies opportunity and frankly our economy needs a bit of motivation for change/opportunity instead of "more of the same old". Hell, it might even serve as the stimulus for us to become more self-reliant and lift ourselves out of the recessionary quagmire we're in (economically speaking).

Short-term pain, long-term gain. We (in theory) didn't import Iraqi oil before the war so why should it matter if we can after the war (due to unstable supply or whatever other reason there is)?

[Rearden]

First, the war wouldn't be confined within Iraq's borders. Iran would muscle in to Iraq, then the Sunni neighbors would enter the space. It would be a regional conflict with all the major oil producers involved.

Second, one doesn't switch from oil to something else overnight. The economic shock in the world's economies would be devastating. Nearly every product we consume has a petroleum element in its cost.

[Red Baron]

We shouldn't pull out at all. We should get serious about defeating the enemy and lay the smack down.

[GDSOB]

How do you know if you've won?

[CRH911S]

Just curious but who is the enemy? Sunni or ****e? Or is it the country that wants a stable oil supply? Or is it the country that wants to take over Iraq so it can sell the oil to the country that wants a stable oil supply?
The US needs to get serious about a plan for the region and putting off for one hundred years for what can be done today seems pretty stupid to me. Especially considering that the rag heads aren't going to let up. Not today, tomorrow or a hundred years from now. It isn't about being victors or being defeated. It's about accepting the reality of the culture, the history of the region, cleaning up the mess we made and moving on.

[ZOA NOM]

Originally Posted by Red Baron

We shouldn't pull out at all. We should get serious about defeating the enemy and lay the smack down.

+1

The only way we could abandon the region is if we were to actually use the oil fields that we have on American soil. Although I like the idea of using theirs first, the time is approaching for us to be energy independent. Once we are, the middle east will have a whole new attitude towards us. Until we do, we should hunker down and stay for the long haul. It'll take a generation for the Iraqi children who just witnessed their mothers vote for the first time to grow up and start getting involved in their destiny. We're still in Germany, for Christ's sake. Why is it any different for us to stay in Iraq until it can get on it's feet? Isn't that what we train our military for? Bring them home for what? Training? Exercises? They're military folks, and they are currently involved in what they are supposed to do.

[Red Baron]

Originally Posted by GDSOB

How do you know if you've won?

When you've inflicted enough pain on your enemy that they no longer have the will to continue.

[Hugh R]

I read the article and I see nothing new. In fact, I don't even see a solution put on the table other than we should talk to the Iraqi leaders.

[Rearden]

Originally Posted by Hugh R

I read the article and I see nothing new. In fact, I don't even see a solution put on the table other than we should talk to the Iraqi leaders.

I agree. I hope the Post didn't pay too much for this gem: "Real progress in the badly stalled Israeli-Palestinian peace process would also help soothe the region's religious and nationalist passions.". It's almost like Zbig doesn't realize that the Arab governments want the Israel-Palestinian problem solved about as much as Jesse Jackson wants racism in America to disappear.

[kach22i]

Originally Posted by Rearden

It's almost like Zbig doesn't realize that the Arab governments want the Israel-Palestinian problem solved about as much as Jesse Jackson wants racism in America to disappear.

Or the neo-cons (like Bush/Cheney) want Osama bin Laden captured.

http://politicalhumor.about.com/library/images/blosamacapture.htm