One of the questions to be asked is how many Iraqi troops loyal to the centralized government are necessary to keep the peace and establish governance? This milestone must be reached. Another milestone is to bring Sunnis/Shia/Kurds together in a unified government (this does not exist right now). It is apparent that the Iraqi As my post says, the Sunnis must be given an equal share in the government and oil profits. Then they have a stake in the country's success. Without this, it won't matter how long we stay. Also, every poll I have seen shows most Iraqis do not want the country split up, but want a unified central government. This requires a political solution, not endless sweeps by US soldiers through Iraqi neighborhoods. ==================== I agree with this...the government of Iraq is at a precipice and needs to be adjusted. As you have suggested, each faction should be given equal representation or equal number of seats in their parliament. The Kurds should get 200 seats, Sunnis 200 seats and Shia 200 seats so there is equal representation for all sects in their government, regardless population numbers. Rotate between sects each election as to who becomes President or Prime Minister. I think it is important to not set unrealistic timelines on departure of U.S. forces before these objectives are met; in fact, it is not realistic to set a timeline at all when the time it takes is an unknown factor...it takes as long as it will take.

...it takes as long as it will take. ==================================== One thing that needs to be taken care of in all of this is Iranian involvement in their undeclared war with the U.S. and Sunnis. Much of the continued violence in Iraq is along sectarian lines, meaning a greater Shia/Sunni conflict in the region is forthcoming. Many articles from various press are saying the same things. Here is one from ABCNEWS about Iran providing muntions and training to Iraqi Shia: http://abcnews.go.com/International/wireStory?id=3029889 ABCNEWS is calling it "Iran May Be Helping Iraqis Build Bombs" but, it is actually Iran helping Shia Iraqis build bombs. It seems these two Groups in Iraq and their supporting nations (Shia/Sunni nations in the M.E.) all want the U.S. out of the way...but for what reason?

DC, I don't necessarily disagree with your predictions, and I agree with you that more thought should have been given to the ramifications of toppling Saddam. However, what indication do you have that democracy in Iraq would preclude the apocalypse you portend?

The point I am trying to make here Abbra, is that Iraq is a very fragile democracy at present. We leave now, these little skirmishes that are known as ?sectarian violence? will explode into full blown civil war?that will engulf the entire Middle East ? (Shia vs. Sunni), which WILL affect us here at home. What message will we be sending to M.E. nations if we leave before the elected government in Iraq is strong enough to handle their own security issues?go ahead and fight it out and may the best Muslim win??? Whether we believe the War in Iraq was justified or not is irrelevant now, we have a responsibility to the nation of Iraq to finish the job; we leave now, we will almost certainly have to return to finish what we started and at much greater cost both of lives and resources.

You?re absolutely right, DC, that the justification for (or against) the Iraqi invasion is entirely irrelevant now. There is no sense in rehashing the justification for historical events that we can?t change. I agree that like it or not we own it, we have a responsibility to ?finish the job? (whatever that means) and we cannot afford to fail. Bringing stability to Iraq is highly relevant, and vitally important. But I?ve yet to be convinced that our presence in Iraq will forestall a civil war, although I don't believe (as others here have postulated) that our presence can cause it. Nor am I convinced that democracy, per se, can bring about stability. To the contrary, I believe that stability is a necessary precursor to democracy. Democracy works best in societies where it is preceded by the rule of law, individual rights and personal freedoms. This hasn?t been the case in Iraq. The fundamental precondition for democracy to work is a consensus among major ethnic, regional, or religious groups. However, in Iraq the Shia, Sunnis and Kurds operate along purely sectarian lines. Questions remain as to how best to stabilize Iraq, and one thing that?s certain is that our current strategies have failed in that endeavor. So ?staying the course? just doesn?t make a lot of sense to me. I?m not a proponent of ?cutting and running,? but realistically speaking I think we have to reevaluate our strategies, redefine our objectives, and redelineate our role in the Middle East.

Turning towards co-operation, resource sharing, compromise and consensus, ethnic mixing and cultural exchanges, global natural disasters, and soccer! ---------------- we have a responsibility to ?finish the job? (whatever that means) and we cannot afford to fail. Bringing stability to Iraq is highly relevant, and vitally important. ^^^^^^^ A, please try to define what "finish the job" is. That is the main and maybe only question left. I think it is all about economics and pigmentation, for what's that worth, but I want your perspectives. --------------- However, in Iraq the Shia, Sunnis and Kurds operate along purely sectarian lines. ^^^^^^^^ Have they been that way when Saddam was in control? Were there many areas where they got along very well, loyal to the same G_d? ------------ I think we have to reevaluate our strategies, redefine our objectives, and redelineate our role in the Middle East. ^^^^^^^ What would happen if we gradually left the Middle East, including all of our military bases, and stopped giving any kind of financial and other aid?

...reevaluate our strategies, redefine our objectives, and redelineate our role in the Middle East. ================ I agree there has to be a "road map" or plan that would expedite a solution to Iraqi security and the eventual democratic self rule...this is the goal. MS has a program that is called MSProject. This program is used as a management tool to set goals and milestones. After each set of goals is reached, a milestone is achieved. After a serious of milestones is achieved, the project comes to fruition and project close out can commence (Iraqi self rule)...the shortest route is defined by the critical path, regardless of how many tasks or objectives there are in each milestone. If our goal in keeping troops on the ground is to bring fruition to Iraqi independence and democratic self rule, the question to ask is where we are in relation to the timeline on the critical path. Are Iraqi security forces able to handle their own security issues without help from U.S. soldiers? One of the questions to be asked is how many Iraqi troops loyal to the centralized government are necessary to keep the peace and establish governance? This milestone must be reached. Another milestone is to bring Sunnis/Shia/Kurds together in a unified government (this does not exist right now). It is apparent that the Iraqi government is a precipice and needs to be adjusted. I would suggest that each faction be given equal representation or equal number of seats in their parliament. The Kurds should get 200 seats, Sunnis 200 seats and Shia 200 seats so there is equal representation for all sects in their government, regardless population numbers. Rotate between sects each election as to who becomes President or Prime Minister. I think it is important to not set unrealistic timelines on departure before these objectives are met; in fact it is not realistic to set a timeline at all when the time it takes is an unknown factor...it takes as long as it will take. Undermining our field commanders in the time it takes to accomplish their only serves to demoralize the troops we sent there to do a job. This is the responsibility that we have to Iraq, and like or not we own it.

All this pain and bloodshed brought to you by President Bush/ Chenney in his attempt to secure oil production agreements for Exxon/Cheveron. "do we really want this kind of bloodshed on our hands?" It's all on the hands of the republican party who must live with the consequences of their supporting the lies of the executive.

No wonder the Saudis and Iranians want the U.S. out of Iraq. Before it is over the entire M.E. will be at war, and we will have to return to finish the job we started, and much greater cost, both of million of lives and trillions of dollars. We need to finish what we have started and help Iraq to flourish as a model democracy...of course this is going to take time. Saudi Arabia IS financing the Sunni Insurgency to overthrow the Shia, and Iran IS financing Shia independence in Iraq with hopes of uniting countries to become the biggest financial/military superpower in the M.E. and the Saudis/Sunnis just won't let this happen. ^^^^^^^^ You are summarizing a blog. Why are we not attacking Saudi Arabia, instead of our President holding hands with and walking slowly with their Royal Emirate in Crawford TX? Most of the 911 terrorists were from Saudi Arabia. Our embassy and military base there were attacked and exploded with US casualties, and the Saudi "gov't" Monarchy did nothing....

Why are we not attacking Saudi Arabia (?)... ==================================================== Although it is true that a rift occurred between The U.S. and Saudi Arabia because of the 9/11 attacks and further attacks on our embassy and military base, it appears that the foreign policy of the U.S. is to secure oil from the Saud...a policy that will remain in effect for many years to come regardless of who is President.

Further: It is fair assumption to say that the political stability of the Middle East and in particular those who trade with us is of vital interest to the national security of the U.S. and why the course in Iraq must be stayed and ?political friendliness? to Saudi Arabia must be preserved. We must have a united political resolve to complete the task at hand in Iraq...we cannot afford to fail.

those who trade with us is of vital interest to the national security of the U.S. and why the course in Iraq must be stayed and ?political friendliness? to Saudi Arabia must be preserved. We must have a united political resolve to complete the task at hand in Iraq...we cannot afford to fail. ^^^^^^^^^^ We can't afford to win. They are making us broke and debtors to China, as OBL said, that not only does our technology not work, Americans will start to have miserable lives, and be driven bankrupt. Do you want OBL and AQ to win with those results? Do you have a better way of financing this war in Iraq?

Do you have a better way of financing this war in Iraq? ====== Like or not we own it, and have a responsibility to finish the job and not "cut and run". I have already mentioned what the costs will be if we fail in Iraq.

Iraqi democratic elections...You know, I remember pictures of Iraqi women with with big smiles on their faces and ink stains on their thumbs when they were allowed to vote in the Iraqi elections...what is to become of them should Iraq revert back to hardcore Islam after we leave...just another Democratic casualty I guess...so sad.

Re: Further: It is fair assumption to say that the political stability of the Middle East and in particular those who trade with us is of vital interest to the national security of the U.S. and why the course in Iraq must be stayed and ?political friendliness? to Saudi Arabia must be preserved. We must have a united political resolve to complete the task at hand in Iraq...we cannot afford to fail. ==================== Civilization has only begun. Not to be undone. by a gun till there are none.

I think I have clearly and concisely pointed out that a certain political party has not thought through all of the ramifications of an early departure from Iraq.

Re: I think I have clearly and concisely pointed out that a certain political party has not thought through all of the ramifications of an early departure from Iraq. ---------------- To be honest, we should have been evaluating them BEFORE we went in rather than AFTER we went in. But then again, some people think it is AOK to experiment on people and put the blame on a few people when we should all accept responsibility for our contributing to the mess.

Re: Would that be the "cradle of civilization? LOL =============== Yeah! With me in the cradle and you singin' 'Rock-A-Bye-Baby', we should audition for a new take on the Rocky Horror Pic Show. As it is I am gettiin' PTSD just thinkin' about it.

As it is I am gettiin' PTSD just thinkin' about it. ====================== ...yeah, and while you're thinking about it you're skating away on a pale green Tarkuna sea, enjoying the 21st century dimpleomacy. right? ;)