U.S. Troops: Out of Iraq by June '07?

[xsedrinam]

That's part of the plan George is proposing next week as he meets with more than 60 members of Congress in Nebraska. Make that George McGovern (http://www.newsday.com/news/nationworld/nation/wire/sns-ap-mcgovern-speech,0,4540937.story?coll=sns-ap-nation-headlines) though. Let alone whether it's the right thing to consider, is it even feasible?

[iBookG4user]

Well, Iraq will probably go back to the way it was before the war, and see that since we backed out before the job was done that they can do something else and we'll back out. And my Brother-in-law will already be out of Iraq by the time that Bush is proposing. At least there won't be a draft when I'm 18 though :D.

[Thomas Veil]

Well, before the war Saddam kept things in check. It won't go back to that. It'll probably end up either being divided into separate states, or engaging in an interminable civil war.

And for all the lives lost and all the money we, the United States, poured down that rat hole, we'll have discovered the same thing that the Soviets discovered when they tried to secure Afghanistan: you just can't win against these people.

[Dont Hurt Me]

I disagree, the military won the war a long time ago they just never won the minds,hearts and the peace. The militarys job is to fight wars, not nation building and politics.
Nation building starts at home and with Islam running these guys minds the rest is just middle east history. Tolerance is a must for any democratic society to thrive. If you just go about killing anyone who doesnt think, worship or act like you then your society is going flop. Just look across the whole mideast, everywhere intolerance seems to rule the day. Without all the oil in that part of the world they would have nothing at all because intolerance towards others is a Big Zero.

[ozontheroad]

Democracy will never work there. Their culture and beliefs will never make it possible.

The only way to change a country it to educate the younger generation, the problem there is that they live in a world that is very different to the west. A world ruled by violence and corruption. Consequently, growing up under these conditions only inculcates that the use violence and corruption is an acceptable way of dealing with things.

If coalition troops leave in 07 (i doubt it) they will be back within 5 years.

The war isn't over by a long shot, its just not a conventional war.

its something that will most likely evolve into a civil war.

trying to impose democracy in Iraq is a futile endeavor.

[IJ Reilly]

Let alone whether it's the right thing to consider, is it even feasible?

In what way do you mean feasible? Surely the troops could be out in eight months, but I don't think that's what you're asking.

[MacNut]

In what way do you mean feasible? Surely the troops could be out in eight months, but I don't think that's what you're asking.I don't think a cut and run will work and will only make it worse in the long run.

[zimv20]

I don't think a cut and run will work and will only make it worse in the long run.
for purposes of having a discussion, i think leaving out loaded terms like "cut and run" will help.

my concern about leaving is that, after the civil war in which the shia majority asserts itself and runs most or all of the middle and southern regions, is that there is an uninterrupted path of shia influence from iran to israel.

what bush and others have so stupidly overlooked is that iraq was iran's balancing influence. any efforts from here on out should be taken with a look towards regional stability, not just calming the violence in iraq, and especially not with the ridiculous goal of forcing democracy across the region.

[Ugg]

Are the bases that have been built in Iraq permanent? Will an American presence remain? Will we continue to patrol Iraqi air space?

I can't imagine that a total withdrawal will take place.

[zimv20]

I can't imagine that a total withdrawal will take place.
nor can i.

we've still got bases in germany, japan, korea...

[toontra]

Are the bases that have been built in Iraq permanent? Will an American presence remain? Will we continue to patrol Iraqi air space?


Er... yes. That was one of the things that made the war desirable to Bush, along with control of their oil and a domestic PR exercise called the War on Terror.

Mind you, the third of these elements seems to be evaporating - maybe not too long before the whole situation explodes and the first two are lost also.

[skunk]

I disagree, the military won the war a long time ago they just never won the minds,hearts and the peace. The militarys job is to fight wars, not nation building and politics.That's only half a job.
Nation building starts at home and with Islam running these guys minds the rest is just middle east history. Tolerance is a must for any democratic society to thrive. If you just go about killing anyone who doesnt think, worship or act like you then your society is going flop. Just look across the whole mideast, everywhere intolerance seems to rule the day.You should bear in mind that those "flops" have been pretty stable as "societies" from the time of Sumeria. It's the drawing of boundaries and the creation of artificial nation-states by the Great Powers which has subverted their order.

[Ugg]

That's only half a job.
You should bear in mind that those "flops" have been pretty stable as "societies" from the time of Sumeria. It's the drawing of boundaries and the creation of artificial nation-states by the Great Powers which has subverted their order.

The Ottoman Empire failed because it overextended itself. It's all fine and dandy to blame the "Great Powers" but the failings of the Ottomans need to be taken into account as well.

[furious]

every nation has failures. if that is what you use as your measuring stick for moving forward you will never in fact get anywhere.

[Ugg]

every nation has failures. if that is what you use as your measuring stick for moving forward you will never in fact get anywhere.

Not sure what you mean exactly, but the Ottoman Empire imploded due to the following reasons.

Overextension of borders
Corruption
The unwillingness to adopt modern technology

The Great Powers made some big mistakes, but Ottoman society was at its lowest point ever when the erstwhile Empire was divvied up.

[skunk]

The Ottoman Empire failed because it overextended itself. It's all fine and dandy to blame the "Great Powers" but the failings of the Ottomans need to be taken into account as well.I'm not talking about the viability of the Ottomans (who were, after all, one of the Great Powers once), but of the societies on the ground, who remain in place despite the comings and goings of empires and tyrants.

[IJ Reilly]

for purposes of having a discussion, i think leaving out loaded terms like "cut and run" will help.

It worked so well for the Republicans during the election I think we should keep it around for old time's sake.

Still would like to know what xsedrinam means by "feasible."

[Ugg]

I'm not talking about the viability of the Ottomans (who were, after all, one of the Great Powers once), but of the societies on the ground, who remain in place despite the comings and goings of empires and tyrants.

Where's the literature, the films, the art? Aren't societies in part, defined by their artistic output? How can art flourish in societies where Art is defined by religious leaders?

Can we blame this lack of a modern culture in the ME on the Great Powers, on the collapse of the Ottoman Empire? Or, on the "stable" societies of the ME?

[skunk]

Can we blame this lack of a modern culture in the ME on the Great Powers, on the collapse of the Ottoman Empire? Or, on the "stable" societies of the ME?What's so great about a "modern culture"?

[thedude110]

Flappers, speakeasies and Cubism, to begin with. (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Modernism)

[Ugg]

What's so great about a "modern culture"?

I dunno about you, but I certainly appreciate being able to post here in the political forum at macrumors. How many Saudis can do that?

I love my Mac! I don't see a lot of technological innovations coming out of the ME.

I like living in a society that has mostly granted equality to women. I can't imgine living in a segregated society where my only public discourse would be with men. That, despite the fact I'm gay.

The Catholic Church survived the Reformation, caused by the printing press, by the way, because it was forced to change. Religions simply won't survive if they remain static. It's an innate aspect of humanity that we want to embrace the future, not wallow in the past.

[zimv20]

Flappers, speakeasies and Cubism, to begin with
:-)

[Don't panic]

That's only half a job.
You should bear in mind that those "flops" have been pretty stable as "societies" from the time of Sumeria. It's the drawing of boundaries and the creation of artificial nation-states by the Great Powers which has subverted their order.

well, it's not that they have been living together stably and peacefully until the 'great powers' came along to wreck their paradise.
The changes in power/society/religion/philosophies have come and gone pretty much in parallel to the rest of the world.

simply, now they appear to be a few decades 'behind' form a western point of view. historically, that's not that much, socially, it a huge difference.

[xsedrinam]

Are the bases that have been built in Iraq permanent? Will an American presence remain? Will we continue to patrol Iraqi air space?

I can't imagine that a total withdrawal will take place.

In what way do you mean feasible? Surely the troops could be out in eight months, but I don't think that's what you're asking.

Ya, Ugg and a good percentage of the posts pretty much flesh out what I had in mind by "feasible". (That is how it's spelled, right?) :)

The past uses of "pull out" when used by U.S. military ops have had a wide range of practical application and lasting influence. What would be the distinguishing characteristics of a U.S. withdrawal from Iraq? What would it look like? If there is a remaining American presence, what would be the circumstances and parameters? Questions along that line which amount to a feasibility study of what a U.S. exit strategy would look like. Surey they have one.

[Ugg]

The past uses of "pull out" when used by U.S. military ops have had a wide range of practical application and lasting influence. What would be the distinguishing characteristics of a U.S. withdrawal from Iraq? What would it look like? If there is a remaining American presence, what would be the circumstances and parameters? Questions along that line which amount to a feasibility study of what a U.S. exit strategy would look like. Surey they have one.

Uhhh, they didn't have a post war strategy. One would hope they have a withdrawal strategy but with Rove, Cheney and Rumsfeld running the war, I doubt they have one and if they do, it's probably not realistic. I'd bet a whole lot of pennies that if they have one it contains a victory march down Pennsylvania Ave. Nothing like a shirker in chief reviewing the troops.

[skunk]

Religions simply won't survive if they remain static. It's an innate aspect of humanity that we want to embrace the future, not wallow in the past.This is clearly untrue. A vast number of people wish for the "good old days", when things were "less complicated".

[Ugg]

This is clearly untrue. A vast number of people wish for the "good old days", when things were "less complicated".

That is true to an extent, but we can't turn back the clock. It's really easy to forget how ugly the good old days really were. I've been reading about the Flu epidemic of 1917-18 and the degree of fear mongering, scare tactics, brutality and discrimination that took place was very scary indeed.

While there may be portions of the past that were good, the vast majority of it is just like today, not very desirable.

You've avoided the question about the lack of art coming out of the ME? Are we now supposed to blame progress for this lack?

[xsedrinam]

Uhhh, they didn't have a post war strategy. One would hope they have a withdrawal strategy but with Rove, Cheney and Rumsfeld running the war, I doubt they have one and if they do, it's probably not realistic. I'd bet a whole lot of pennies that if they have one it contains a victory march down Pennsylvania Ave. Nothing like a shirker in chief reviewing the troops.
It's beyond sad, but evidence seems to point to that conclusion. I hope it's something more than "teaching them to make cars".

[xsedrinam]

Some ranking military which include those who called for Rumsfeld's resignation are claiming an imminent U.S. pullout from Iraq over the next few months would accelerate civil war (http://www.nytimes.com/2006/11/15/washington/15military.html?ex=1321246800&en=634abe625ee6976e&ei=5088&partner=rssnyt&emc=rss), there.

[hulugu]

Where's the literature, the films, the art? Aren't societies in part, defined by their artistic output? How can art flourish in societies where Art is defined by religious leaders?

What about the Renissance? Michelangelo did just a bit of work for the church. Actually, there's a very large amount of art and music being produced in Islamic countries. There's Iranian rappers and graphic artists, amazing architecture in places like Dubai, just to name a few things off the top of my head.

This, however, is orthogonal to the main point. Can Mideast socities survive and even flourish under their current conditons? Of course not, the corrupt and dangerous regimes which currently exist keep this from happening, and one of the most important parts of this is our role in protecting the most excessive regimes because they're friendly and allow us to use their oil. The Saudis and the Iranians are currently in a battle for regional supremacy and they're both corrupt as hell and they both create the kinds of dangers that tend to leak out from their borders.

Frankly, the Mideast needs time. There's going to be long periods of unrest because the borders have changed, the economies have changed, and during this period oppressive regimes have stood in the way of progress.

[Ugg]

What about the Renissance? Michelangelo did just a bit of work for the church. Actually, there's a very large amount of art and music being produced in Islamic countries. There's Iranian rappers and graphic artists, amazing architecture in places like Dubai, just to name a few things off the top of my head.

Frankly, the Mideast needs time. There's going to be long periods of unrest because the borders have changed, the economies have changed, and during this period oppressive regimes have stood in the way of progress.

Yeah, but in the west, for the most part, religion no longer defines the bulk or art that is produced. Yes, there are a few bright spots in the ME when it comes to art. However, Dubai exists because the country was running out of oil and needed to do something to ensure its independent future. While westerners in Dubai enjoy a great amount of freedom, the imported workers from asia and the natives are still heavily oppressed.

I agree that the ME needs time and that Islam is going through a period of soul searching much like Christianity did after Luther revolted against the corruption of catholicism. The question that I have is: Can Islam come to terms with itself and the rest of the world within a reasonable amount of time and before its more radical elements cause serious damage?

The number one problem facing the ME today is its outrageously high birthrate. Until the economies either provide the necessary number of jobs for all who are being born OR the societies realize that their own fecundity will be their downfall, there's little hope.

[hulugu]

Yeah, but in the west, for the most part, religion no longer defines the bulk or art that is produced. Yes, there are a few bright spots in the ME when it comes to art. However, Dubai exists because the country was running out of oil and needed to do something to ensure its independent future. While westerners in Dubai enjoy a great amount of freedom, the imported workers from asia and the natives are still heavily oppressed.

I agree that the ME needs time and that Islam is going through a period of soul searching much like Christianity did after Luther revolted against the corruption of catholicism. The question that I have is: Can Islam come to terms with itself and the rest of the world within a reasonable amount of time and before its more radical elements cause serious damage?

The number one problem facing the ME today is its outrageously high birthrate. Until the economies either provide the necessary number of jobs for all who are being born OR the societies realize that their own fecundity will be their downfall, there's little hope.

I'm not saying we should sit back and passively watch, I'm merely suggesting that the Mideast has gone through such a radical upheavel in the last century that no culture could endure such a shock without going nuts. Christian societies were full of bloodshed and the 'discovery' of the New World created a release valve that is in many ways unavailable to the modern Mideast.

I think you could see the same parallels in Europe, as religion began to slide away from daily influence, other factors came into play. The art that was financed by the Pope became financed by Dutch stock-traders, and the early Colonial powers. American art was financed by tobacco and rum.
Art comes along with commerce and religious influence, it doesn't pop out from culture like Athena from Zeus' forehead on a whim, but because of a myraid of circumstances. Islam is producing art, interesting and powerful art, we just don't see much of it, yet because many of the distribution industries are nascent.

I'm not saying the Mideast is about to flower into a huge artistic commune, I'm merely pointing out that if we compare the Mideast to 16th century Europe we can see similar structures and problems, and thus we cannot just dismiss Mideast culture, which includes the influence of Christians, Jews, Druze, Hindi, and Buddhist cultures. The Mideast has risen and fallen as a cultural and economic power and it would be imprudent to assume this cycle would stop.

[Ugg]

I'm not saying we should sit back and passively watch, I'm merely suggesting that the Mideast has gone through such a radical upheavel in the last century that no culture could endure such a shock without going nuts. Christian societies were full of bloodshed and the 'discovery' of the New World created a release valve that is in many ways unavailable to the modern Mideast.

I think you could see the same parallels in Europe, as religion began to slide away from daily influence, other factors came into play. The art that was financed by the Pope became financed by Dutch stock-traders, and the early Colonial powers. American art was financed by tobacco and rum.
Art comes along with commerce and religious influence, it doesn't pop out from culture like Athena from Zeus' forehead on a whim, but because of a myraid of circumstances. Islam is producing art, interesting and powerful art, we just don't see much of it, yet because many of the distribution industries are nascent.

I'm not saying the Mideast is about to flower into a huge artistic commune, I'm merely pointing out that if we compare the Mideast to 16th century Europe we can see similar structures and problems, and thus we cannot just dismiss Mideast culture, which includes the influence of Christians, Jews, Druze, Hindi, and Buddhist cultures. The Mideast has risen and fallen as a cultural and economic power and it would be imprudent to assume this cycle would stop.

There's no doubt that for the 200 years ending in 1945, Christian nations had a rough time of coming to terms with who they were. However, the situations aren't directly comparable and I would wager that the stakes are now somewhat higher.

I guess that it's a lot easier for me to see that much of what comes out of the ME in the form of movies or books is highly censored. Whether by repressive governments or fearful authors is irrelevant. There's been no flowering of native ME architectural forms. The most famous structures in Dubai are not home designed. If a work of art is only viewed by a few people, can it really be labelled art? In order for it to have a wider audience doesn't there need to be a concerted effort on the part of governments or private institutions to promote it?

When governments aren't even doing all the minimum to promote basic literacy or provide sufficient nutrition and housing, due once again to the highest birthrates in the world, how will they ever promote artistic expression, much less value it?

I've no doubt there's a cyclical nature to cultures but I find more excuses than I do probable or even possible solutions.

I know I keep harping on the birthrate issue, but as far as I see it, there's no hope as long as they keep producing more people than will ever have hope of leading a normal productive life. This doesn't just apply to the middle east, but also Africa and South America and parts of SE Asia.

When people are force into subsistent lifestyles, art can only ever be derivative and for the rich or simply visions of the denizens of the opium dens.