"America exiting" scenarios
"Others argue that a U.S. pullout on a clear timetable announced in advance will bolster Iraq's chances of surviving and undermine the insurgency. A hurry-up timeline would force the new Iraqi government to take control. Instead of U.S. troops as targets, the burgeoning Iraqi army and police units — now numbering nearly 200,000 — would be compelled to quell the simmering sectarian strife, establish order and give the new Iraqi government some domestic legitimacy.
Doubters suggest Iraq's new army would crack along ethnic and religious lines, defecting to the outlawed but well armed and powerful militias that already serve as the power — and instruments of terror — in many towns and neighbourhoods.
For Mr. Murtha [U.S. Congressman John Murtha], getting U.S. troops out sooner rather than later cuts U.S. losses without affecting the likely outcome for Iraq. 'The British were in India for almost 90 years and they were finally forced out and when they were forced out, they had a civil war,' he says. 'We can't settle this for the Iraqis, we cannot win this militarily.'
A whole host of variations on the pullback and hurry-up timeline have been proposed, mostly by Democrat critics, but also by a fistful of retired generals. Mr. Murtha, among others, calls for getting U.S. troops out of the front lines, pulling back to bases outside cities where they will be far less visible. Eventually, troops would exit Iraq altogether but remain close enough to rapidly redeploy and support Iraqi security forces if needed.
It's not just disaffected Americans who argue for an out-of-sight, out-of-mind, exit strategy. 'The removal of foreign troops will legitimize Iraq's government in the eyes of its people,' Mowaffak al-Rubaie, the national security adviser to Iraq's Prime Minister Nouri al-Maliki. 'The removal of coalition troops from Iraqi streets will help the Iraqis who now see [them] as occupiers rather than liberators. It will remove psychological barriers and the reasons that many Iraqis joined the so-called resistance in the first place.' [1]
"In a shabby but spotless living room in the holy city of Najaf, a top deputy of Shiite Muslim leader Moqtada al-Sadr quietly sketched out his vision of the Iraq to come, after the Americans withdraw.
First, 'there will be a civil war,' said the aide, Mustafa Yaqoubi, as his three young children wandered in and out of the room. The rising violence and rivalries under the American occupation make a shaking-out all but inevitable once foreign forces go, Yaqoubi said. 'I expect it.'
'No matter the number of people who would lose their lives, it is better than now,' he added. 'It would be better than the Americans staying.'
When the tumult ends, the Sadr aide said, Iraq's Shiite majority will finally be able to claim its due, long resisted by the Americans -- freedom to usher in a Shiite religious government that Yaqoubi said would be moderate and perhaps comparable in some ways to Iran's.
. . . Yaqoubi said the U.S. failure to meet even the simplest security needs of Iraq was to blame for much of the current instability. As a result, he said, 'when the Americans pull out, there will be a civil war. They are using that now, as an excuse for staying.' " [2]
sources
[1] Globe and Mail. The long march home. September 9, 2006.
[2] The Washington Post. Top Aide to Sadr Outlines Vision of a U.S.-Free Iraq. September 12, 2006.
posted: thursday, september 14, 2006, 11:25 AM ET
update: thursday, september 14, 2006, 11:27 AM ET
Doubters suggest Iraq's new army would crack along ethnic and religious lines, defecting to the outlawed but well armed and powerful militias that already serve as the power — and instruments of terror — in many towns and neighbourhoods.
For Mr. Murtha [U.S. Congressman John Murtha], getting U.S. troops out sooner rather than later cuts U.S. losses without affecting the likely outcome for Iraq. 'The British were in India for almost 90 years and they were finally forced out and when they were forced out, they had a civil war,' he says. 'We can't settle this for the Iraqis, we cannot win this militarily.'
A whole host of variations on the pullback and hurry-up timeline have been proposed, mostly by Democrat critics, but also by a fistful of retired generals. Mr. Murtha, among others, calls for getting U.S. troops out of the front lines, pulling back to bases outside cities where they will be far less visible. Eventually, troops would exit Iraq altogether but remain close enough to rapidly redeploy and support Iraqi security forces if needed.
It's not just disaffected Americans who argue for an out-of-sight, out-of-mind, exit strategy. 'The removal of foreign troops will legitimize Iraq's government in the eyes of its people,' Mowaffak al-Rubaie, the national security adviser to Iraq's Prime Minister Nouri al-Maliki. 'The removal of coalition troops from Iraqi streets will help the Iraqis who now see [them] as occupiers rather than liberators. It will remove psychological barriers and the reasons that many Iraqis joined the so-called resistance in the first place.' [1]
"In a shabby but spotless living room in the holy city of Najaf, a top deputy of Shiite Muslim leader Moqtada al-Sadr quietly sketched out his vision of the Iraq to come, after the Americans withdraw.
First, 'there will be a civil war,' said the aide, Mustafa Yaqoubi, as his three young children wandered in and out of the room. The rising violence and rivalries under the American occupation make a shaking-out all but inevitable once foreign forces go, Yaqoubi said. 'I expect it.'
'No matter the number of people who would lose their lives, it is better than now,' he added. 'It would be better than the Americans staying.'
When the tumult ends, the Sadr aide said, Iraq's Shiite majority will finally be able to claim its due, long resisted by the Americans -- freedom to usher in a Shiite religious government that Yaqoubi said would be moderate and perhaps comparable in some ways to Iran's.
. . . Yaqoubi said the U.S. failure to meet even the simplest security needs of Iraq was to blame for much of the current instability. As a result, he said, 'when the Americans pull out, there will be a civil war. They are using that now, as an excuse for staying.' " [2]
sources
[1] Globe and Mail. The long march home. September 9, 2006.
[2] The Washington Post. Top Aide to Sadr Outlines Vision of a U.S.-Free Iraq. September 12, 2006.
posted: thursday, september 14, 2006, 11:25 AM ET
update: thursday, september 14, 2006, 11:27 AM ET
posted by eric at 10:18 AM
0 Comments:
Post a Comment
<< Home