Solving the Iraq War Crisis
US Political Discord: My niece, Ali is writing a paper on the Civil War and asked for my help. The issue to discuss related to whether the Westward expansion of slavery caused the war.
I remembered most of this from my days with Mr. Ross Wagner at Kirkwood HS in AP American History. Despite the hype, slavery had nothing to do with the War at all. No one cared abut black people. That is evidenced by the fact that it took over 100 years for them to gain even the most basic rights of citizenship, like voting and land ownership. What caused the Civil War was years of economic and political discord between the North and South on a myriad of issues and the retirements of three great Statesmen from Congress who held this country together, Daniel Webster of Mass., John C. Calhoun of S.C. and the Great Compromisor, Henry Clay or Ky. The lack of Congressional statesmanship and presidential leadership resulted in the near downfall of our country.
I certainly see that lack of Statesmanship, compromise and executive leadership today. Perhaps we are heading down a similar path. Not, of course, civil war, but perhaps to some form of political melt down.
Oil: I sat through a presentation by a renowned economist last week on the reliance of our country on oil. Our economy relies less than half as much on oil than it did 25 years ago, and that reliance is dropping. We get very little of our oil from the Middle East and so long as they continue to sell it to someone, we will be able to purchase oil at market rates, even if Iran does not like us. They have to sell their oil. No matter what anyone tells you, like slavery, we are not fighting for oil.
Easy-to-get oil is gone. Prices are rising and will not stop. Alternatives are growing in leaps and bounds because the economics work. We are the Saudi Arabia of coal and wind. As the oil minister of Saudi Arabia warned OPEC in 1972, "The Stone Age did not end for want of stone and so the oil age will not end for want of oil." He is right. This is and will happen.
Fundamentalist Fanatics: From the moment the religion was created formally, some 300 years after the death of Mohamed, Muslims have used religion to terrorize and take control of nearby countries.
From the moment the religion was created formally, some 300 years after the death of Jesus, Christians have used religion to terrorize and take control of nearby countries.
From the moment the religion was created formally, some 300 years after the death of Abraham or Israel, Jews have used religion to terrorize and take control of nearby countries. Other than Canaan, they just weren't as successful.
Jerks will use religion to control the weak of mind and spirit to their advantage. Get used to it.
Political Control of the Middle East: What western people do not understand is that Baghdad is the jewel of the Middle East. It is the historic center of civilization. It is coveted and has been fought over for millennia. We opened the door for another great fight for its control and that is mostly what the current military event is about. Very little is happening in other parts of the country.
Iran will never dominate the Middle East. There are multiple sects of Muslim in the Middle East, all of whom hate each other. The Sunnis of Saudi Arabia, and the Turks in Turkey will never let the Shiites of Iran control the Middle East. Put that one to rest.
Note, this inter-nation conflict is not about oil either. Like the Balkans and other regions of the world, this battle for control of the Middle East is centuries old. The Huns, the Ottomans, the Persians, the Romans, and others have fought for and ruled this area way before oil was found (that was in the 1920s). This is not about oil even as between them.
Note that this is not about religion. Same argument. The Muslim religion began in the late first millennia. These folks had been fighting way before that. Who is dying now. Not Americans. Middle Easterners are killing other Middle Easterners. Religion is just the latest in a long line of motivators by leaders bent on domination.
These peoples simply do not like one another very much and it did not start in 2002 and will not end with our departure.
Is this a "War?" Technically it is not a war. We won the war and defeated our enemy, Saddam Hussein's regime. We won and we did that with a coalition of forces. We are now defending an ally from incursions from foreign countries and from revolutionaries within. We would certainly do this for our other allies, for example Israel. George Bush has failed miserably in communicating this to the population.
Why did we go in?: That is the dead horse. We may never know the reasons, but it no longer matters. Now we have to figure out how to get out.
What if we don't win? I have suggested to Hilary Clinton's campaign that the answer to that is to change the definition of winning. Why does President Bush get to define it. If Hilary is presidential material, she should define it and drive toward that victory. We have to "win" as a country. Don't ever doubt that.
So the only option is to convince the American population that we have won by defining winning in a way we can be comfortable with.
What if we leave and don't stabilize Baghdad? Lets say we leave. If we leave now, we could create a vacuum that launches World War III. I think people care about the people of Iraq and do not want to leave them in a disastrous civil war loaded up by foreigners.
Sunni countries and leaders hate Shiite countries and leaders. They all want Baghdad. Kurds hate the Turks. India hates Pakistan. Palestinians want independence. Lebanon is a split country. Saudi Arabia is a split country. Oil is everywhere and dwindling in world power value as costs and prices rise. Middle Eastern economies are seeing this. Russia needs Iran economically. The French and Germans are very tied in to the region. Qaddafi would love to be unleashed. Italy and France are very tied in to Northern Africa. Al Qiadah would love to add turmoil and dispair to their recruitment arsenal. Everyone hates Israel. We have to defend Israel. So we would be back in anyway. Is that the side we want to be on???
I would hate to be the President who makes that decision. Talk about rising oil costs.
What was the gravest error in Vietnam? First we went in for the wrong reasons in an area that did not really matter in the grand scheme of things, allied with a corrupt non-democratic regime. OK, so that is pretty much the same.
Why did we lose? We failed to kick the North Vietnamese butts. You certainly cannot tell me that if we had really gotten after it we could not have blown North Vietnam off the map until they said uncle? We never sent in the forces necessary to win. It is in all the history books analyzing that war. We did not send our "A" game. Mostly because we did not care if we won. History has proven that the stakes were very low. Who cared.
So, what are we doing in Iraq? Fewer people are fighting this war for the US than even in Vietnam. It is a bigger area. It is more relevant. The enemy is harder to find. And the stakes are very high!
Why don't we consider learning from history and going in to truly win this war? Remember it matters not why we went in, only that we are there and need to get out. The "Surge" seems to be working, shock of the week.
I suggest sending our "A" game. 12 month plan. A large aggressive surge with 400,000 troops (institute a brief draft if necessary), our full air, naval and tactical support. Establish marshall law. Take and hold what we take. No one goes anywhere except through US troops. No news reporters. No private mercenaries. No civilians. No allies. No Iraqi troops. Not until we are ready.
Stabilize the country, lock down the borders tight, control the oil fields and take over the oil trade for this period (see below), give rewards for turning in bad guys, root out all insurgents and kill them dead. Let the Iraqis handle all prisoners. Three months tops.
Stay there six months, control every street corner, highway and transportation hub day and night. Add Iraqi military. Turn over policing the cities gradually to Iraqi police, but only on teams with US military. Bring in negotiators to work with the factions, union leaders to rally and organize workers, business people to restart the economy and help the Iraqis rebuild everything. We should not need to blow much stuff up at this point.
Most important, find a true leader with charisma to run for President, have new elections. Iraq needs a leader who the people will follow. If we don't find him, someone else will.
On day one, privatize the oil industry. (this is what the big internal fight is about). Create at least five corporations and divide the oil up logically. Create pipeline companies the oil industries have to pay to get their oil to the ports. Create refining companies the oil is first sold to. Create distribution companies to deliver the oil from the refineries to the ships. Etc. Privatize the whole system and let it run. Allow the creation of new companies. The buying and selling of assets, etc. Pass strict reporting and anti-corruption laws, like Sarbanes Oxley, and enforce them, thus creating a growing accounting and legal profession.
Give every Iraqi equal shares of stock in all new oil-related corporations, that way it does not have to be perfectly even. Put them on the NYSE so that they trade and can be bought and sold easily. Let this play out for the first six months while the US runs these corporations for the benefit of the Iraqi people. Build an Iraqi management team in each and train them on corporate governance. Name a president of each corporation and create boards of directors, etc. Get Transparency International or some other international player in the good governance game to oversee this. At six months, turn them over to the management team and get out. One year later, hold corporate elections just like any corporation.
Three months after the political elections begin to withdraw first from the cities turning controlled environments over to the Iraqis and still controlling the borders and Baghdad. One year later, we should be 80% out. Retain a couple of military bases in Iraq for strategic purposes in the Middle East. Be a strong ally. My plan.
