• Quick note - the problem with Youtube videos not embedding on the forum appears to have been fixed, thanks to ZiprHead. If you do still see problems let me know.

What next for Iraq? Poll time

What is the best policy decision for Iraq?


  • Total voters
    31

andyandy

anthropomorphic ape
Joined
Apr 30, 2006
Messages
8,377
ok poll time ;)

Which policy would you pursue?


The eight options: what Washington and London are discussing

1 British out now

One of the British diplomats involved in talks on Iraq policy said the UK, which has responsibility for the south of Iraq, "could go tomorrow almost ... It would not look pretty, but it is doable".


Likelihood Not being seriously considered yet. Halving British forces next summer, with further reductions later on, is still the likeliest outcome.

2 US coalition out now

"We could pull out now and leave them to their fate," a Foreign Office official said. "But the place could implode." The advantage of this option would be to cut short the agony.

Likelihood Such an early exit is unlikely. It would be an unpalatable humiliation for the Bush administration and most of its critics agree that a hasty withdrawal could ultimately oblige the troops to go back.

3 Phased withdrawal

This is the present policy, but any pull-out is contingent on Iraq developing its own security forces. But there are increasing calls in Washington and London for a timetable. A Foreign Office official said: "The date might possibly have to be secret." Otherwise it could encourage insurgents to step up attacks. During this stage, the US could pour in money for employment programmes.

Likelihood Still the likeliest option.

4 Talk to Iran and Syria


There appears to have been virtual consensus in the Baker commission for talks with Iraq's two most difficult neighbours on the grounds that they must ultimately want stability but will not pursue it while excluded from negotiations. The FCO, which has an embassy in Tehran, is pushing for engagement too.

Likelihood There may be too much resistance in the Bush administration to direct talks, but the US could well give the nod to negotiations between a sovereign Iraq and its powerful neighbours.

5 Iraqi strongman

The US and British governments have been disappointed so far with Nuri al-Maliki, Iraq's elected prime minister who took over earlier this year, mainly over the reluctance of his Shia-dominated coalition to tackle Shia death squads. Washington and London could press for his replacement with a strongman at the head of a junta, such as Ayad Allawi, the interim prime minister from 2004-05 - and roll back democracy.

Likelihood Not likely.

6 Break-up of Iraq

Iraq is moving towards a federal model that could result in its break-up. The Kurdish area to the north is virtually autonomous anyway. The Shia-dominated area stretching from Basra in the south to the holy cities of Kerbala and Najaf further north could form another bloc, leaving the Sunnis with much of the west and centre - mostly oil-free desert. Advocates of such partition talk about using coalition forces to escort minority populations across the ethnic divides to streamline the partition and working out a fair revenue-sharing formula for oil.

Likelihood Events on the ground may make it inevitable.

7 Redeploy & contain

There are two variations. One is for US forces to leave populated areas and retreat to "super-bases" in the desert from where they could support Iraqi forces - something the army has already begun. An alternative would be for the US forces to move out of Iraq altogether and use bases in nearby countries.

Likelihood Quite possible in the short term as the US tries to stem its casualties, but unlikely as a lasting solution.

8 One last push
This would involve an increase of troops in the short term in the hope of creating sufficient security to deliver economic gains and create confidence in the Iraqi government. This roughly is Senator John McCain's preferred option, but might also appeal to Mr Bush as it would not immediately require a policy U-turn.

Likelihood A final gamble by Mr Bush is not to be discounted. Senator McCain is a presidential frontrunner for 2008, but by then Iraq may look very different.

http://www.guardian.co.uk/guardianpolitics/story/0,,1927944,00.html
 
i voted for breaking up Iraq - i think it's got huge potential for problems over land distribution/oil wealth/inter-regional instability but it seems more plausible and preferable to the other options......

eg. phased withdrawl would of course be better but with the passing years that seems ever more optimistic.......
 
How about, you broke it, you bought it, so stop your whining because a lot of people told you this before you went in? The chances of any of these plans resulting in any kind of decent result is very low. Breakup is probably the best of a bad lot.

What it would take is a generations-long commitment, with the intent of teaching an entire generation of Iraqis how to live without a dictatorship of some sort. Of course, this will never happen....
 
Last edited:
I voted "redeploy and contain", but I'm no expert.

It seems to me a good in between strategy, between "stay the course" and "change tactics" ("good" in the Bush administration POV, that is).

It's obvious they won't want to withdraw, not right now, they would loose credibility and give the Democrats the upper hand, especially so close to mid term elections. A drastic change would be surprising. A big "last push" would mean alot more deaths, which I'm sure the US want to avoid now, at all costs. If they fail at this one, they'll lose big, and I'm sure they know it. All this will eventually lead to a gradual draw back anyways, but not anytime soon, and probably the Brits will do so before the US, and maybe very soon. That's just a feeling tho.

As for partition of Iraq and the influence of Syria-Iran, I'm afraid I don't have enough knowledge of the situation to make such predictions.
 
I voted "redeploy and contain", but I'm no expert.
Redeploy is in the plan, the trouble is "when?" The answer is "when the conditions are met." The question is "what conditions" and the answer is "a stable Iraq." The question is "what is stable" the answer is "I'll know it when I see it, or when January 2009 hits, at which point I will have declared victory and begun the withdrawal."

That is as close to any sense as I can make of the situation. The folk in Iraq are, however, doing what they can to position themselves to best advantage when the US finally realizes "we can't do more good than harm" and leaves. They do that at the expense of each other, and wishing won't stop their chosen method of resolving the disputes.

One of the risks of the operation was that it would turn into a mess that risks sundering the country once known as Iraq. That seems to be coming true.

DR
 
Transportation to Australia for everyone, then give the land to Israel just to piss off the Arabs.

Or better, revive the ancient kingdom of Babylonia, and begin sacrifices to Ishtar and Tiamat in the hopes that they can sort out the mess. At least bring back the sacred prostitution. The unholy kind is fun, too.

The third and most practical option, create a race of sexy robots and put them in charge of the place. Sure, they might pull out a few eyeballs, but it's worth it to see Xena with a decent haircut for once.
 
I wonder how much different a poll on what you think will really happen would be from this poll? I would think we would need at least some different options.
 
I wonder how much different a poll on what you think will really happen would be from this poll? I would think we would need at least some different options.
Disney annexes Iraq as it did Central Florida, and we get Babylon Disney in a few short years.

DR
 
I've answered more with my "ideal world" hat on. So I've gone for phased withdrawal and break-up of Iraq along federated lines.

What do I think will happen? Withdrawal as quickly as possible from and years and years if not decades of sectarian violence.
 
Overlaying an outline of baseball great Stan Musial onto a map of Iraq shows all oil-producing regions somehow fall easily within these confines...

I will propose to Congress this entity to be known as Stan-the-Man-istan.
 
Phased withdrawl
Talk to Iran and Syria.
Failing that I would think the only other alternative would be to invoke the planet x option
 
Partition and you've just created Palestine #2, a huge refugee situation.

Leave and you've just started Armageddon.

Talk to Syria and Iran and let them know any interference will result in massive air strikes.

Vote a Democrat into office in '08. Nothing will change, but the network news will suddenly become a lot more encouraging.

My plan:
I vote to pull back to bases and stop using small patrols. Go out in large forces to take out whatever militias form. I call the plan "unnatural selection."
 
Overlaying an outline of baseball great Stan Musial onto a map of Iraq shows all oil-producing regions somehow fall easily within these confines...

I will propose to Congress this entity to be known as Stan-the-Man-istan.
I've been thinking about the Stanthemanistan national anthem.

Maybe Palestine, Texas by T-Bone Burnett?

Besides rhyming, it has a Middle Eastern theme while mentioning Texas. Superb guitar for the troops.
 
I think it's time to tell the Iraqi's to take on the militias or tell them we're out of there. Right now they can make the coalition do the dirty work and take the fall for the bloodshed, this option shouldn't be available to the Iraqi gov't any longer. This is something only the Iraqis themselves can resolve.

BTW, can someone please explain the difference between "redeploy" and "withdraw"?
 
I think it's time to tell the Iraqi's to take on the militias or tell them we're out of there. Right now they can make the coalition do the dirty work and take the fall for the bloodshed, this option shouldn't be available to the Iraqi gov't any longer. This is something only the Iraqis themselves can resolve.
Agreed, with the provision we back them up with firepower when they need it.

BTW, can someone please explain the difference between "redeploy" and "withdraw"?
It depends on who is using the terms.
 

Back
Top Bottom