For the I wasn't for the war but now we have to stay and rebuild it DUers

[NNN0LHI]

I hear this a lot. For those who feel this way, what is your idea of doing right by the Iraqi's? I don't feel this way. I think the Iraqi's are perfectly capable of rebuilding their own country to their own specifications without any help from us. Certainly we would have to pay for it. We tore it down. But why should we be calling all of the shots? Its their country. Help me here.

Don

[whathappened]

1. un need to be there

and jr. need to go on hands and knee's and ask for there help in making amends for there big mistakes

[wndycty]

2. I am conflicted about this. . .

. . .I think we need to get the troops out ASAP, but I am not sure how I feel about blowing up the entire country and just leaving. I think we need an "end game" spelled out immediately.

[MuseRider]

3. I agree

I think at this point we should tell them a date we are leaving (soon) so they can be all set up and ready to go. Yes we broke it and we should pay for it and be ready with any assitance they may ask for. We owe them. They are a capable people and we should stop trying to run it and interfere with everything and above all else we need to stop shooting them.

[dsc]

4. One of two bad things will happen if we leave

Either there will be a violent civil war or there will be an Islamic fundamentalist state. We have left that country with no civil authority and thus are responsible to get them one before we leave. If we leave that country a mess we will be war criminals of the highest order. I do agree with you point on rebuilding. There is no reason we should be directing that (except the emergency kind) but we do owe then the ability to have a civil, democratic government.

[ulysses]

10. and quite possibly both

Either there will be a violent civil war or there will be an Islamic fundamentalist state.

The Bush regime, obviously, does not have the best interests of the average Iraqi - much less those of the Iraqi state - in mind. That said, it is just wrongheaded to think that we can just exit stage right and expect that millions of people, divided by religion and ethnicity, who have had much of their infrastructure destroyed and who have had zero recent experience in self-government, will magically generate a democratic state. Look to Afghanistan in the mid-80s. The Taliban filled the void that was created when we helped the mujaheddin beat the Soviets, and then just left town. Hell, we've been at it for 200+ years and we don't even get it quite right yet.

Two things on edit:

The UN definitely needs to be involved. They need to be running this show. Of course, Bush wouldn't dream of such a thing, as it might interfere with stealing all the oil.

The Iraqis are obviously *competent* to rule themselves - the idea that we have to stay for at least a while is not based on any racist idea that they're too stupid for the job - , but they comprise a sharply divided nation which has been ruled for years by a despot. One does not put a steak in front of a victim of starvation - it will kill him. Of course, Bush doesn't have even oatmeal in mind for these people, so it's all a largely moot point which, yet again, underscores the flaming stupidity of anyone who supported getting into this mess.

[SharonAnn]

5. Since we've now changed a country where women had the

most opportunities of any Arab country into one where women are hidden, afraid of going outside the home for fear of being attacked, and not included in the Iraqi "government" positions that are being created, I think we should leave and turn it over ot the UN and the Iraqis. We've already made a huge mess of it.

[TheDonkey]

6. We need the UN

We must stay now thanks to Bush.

If we leave now the country will be worse off than before. But in order to minimize the costs of American life and money we must internationalize the force and thing of a solid plan on how to get out asap!

[Droopy]

7. I had this position until about a week ago

It was mostly a feeling like we owe them something. And, I have to admit, there was a little sadistic devil inside of me saying, "They wanted it, they get it!", in reference to the war supporters. That part was due to my opposition to the war and all the crap I had to take because of it. I didn't really realize I was doing that until recently.

Now, I agree with you. The Iraqis are competent. They had one of the more advanced societies in the region before the sanctions and the war, even though they were led by a warmongering despot. I think they can handle the rebuilding on their own with financial support from us and investment from other countries if we'll let that happen.

[Clete]

8. I think we should turn it over to the UN to help the Iraqis

rebuild their own nation. We will still have to meddle. We have to make sure Israel is safe, and that no theocracy arises shifting the balance of power. That was the reason poppy left the regime intact in the first place. I don't think we should be protecting American business interests there that are not bidding on the open market. And we do owe them some reparation for blowing their country to bits.

I can be convinced otherwise because right now the above seems to be the best way, however, I am not really sure.

[Cha]

9. I just finished listening to Joe Wilson speak on this and a

whole bunch of other related topics at the UCSB, on May 21, 2003!

And it was Splendid! He thinks we should have an international coalition go in and help keep the Peace.

He mentioned how all the warring factions want the power and the one that is the least worn down will win.

This link was given to us by DWolfMan! ...http://webcast.ucsd.edu:8080/ramgen/UCSD_TV/7730.rm

http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=show_topic&forum=104&topic_id=89719&mesg_id=89719&page=

[Dhalgren]

11. I realize that this threat is for

folks who think we should stay and "fix" Iraq, But I can't resist. I have never been in favor of either breaking Iraq, nor of fixing it. We did not go in there to help the Iraqis, we went in there to steal them blind. We committed armed robbery, murdering upwards to 30,000 of them in the process. To now say we owe it to them to establish a government to out liking is ridiculous, and obscene. A true international peace-keeping force will never come in as long as we keep control of the oil, which is why we are there in the first place. The criminal Mob in control of our country will never agree to that. We should ask for international troops to come and help us in the US - we should evacuate all US troops from Iraq at once.

Sorry, now back to you.

[kentuck]

12. just how much did we tear down....

I recall us marching to Baghdad but I don't recall that we destroyed everything in our path. We bombed a few places in Baghdad during the "shock and awe" campaign. Everything, including electricity, was working up until the war's end. I think whatever damage was done, it would not take the billions of dollars that we are now paying to repair it. Can someone explain what we need to rebuild?

[NNN0LHI]

13. I was not addressing the political angle here, but since many are...

...I had better jump into the fray. For those suggesting setting up a Democracy in Iraq, do you envision something based on the American pattern maybe? I don't know if that will work in Iraq. It might? But I am skeptical if you get my drift? But the real question is if say we really do have Democratic elections over there in a year or two and some Ayatollah wins? What do you do next? Say no deal Mr. Ayatollah. You don't really get the job. We was only kidding about that election? See what I am talking about here? The more we drive these people away from a theocracy, the more they will want one.

Don

[ulysses]

17. I guess I'm confused, Don

Given the shitty position in which we find ourselves and the Iraqi people, what would you have us do? Are you suggesting that the Iraqis would necessarily form a liberal democratic state if we would only leave?

[NNN0LHI]

18. Heck no

They are going to have a theocracy no matter what we do. If we leave today they will have one in a week. If we wait 5 years to leave they will have on a week after then. That is what I think.

Don

[ulysses]

21. your time frame seems a little off

Perhaps you're right about the theocracy, although given Iraq's pre-Saddam history and the situation of some of the other nations in the region, I don't agree. At any rate, they would arrive at a theocracy in one of two ways - election or civil war (with attendant humanitarian nightmare), both of which would take longer than a week unless I miss my guess.

[NNN0LHI]

26. Perhaps I should have spoke clearer and said the beginnings of...

...a theocracy a week later. My mistake. But I think we both agree that when all of the smoke clears there would be an Iranian style theocracy in place? Who was it that said "may you live in interesting times"?

Don

[ulysses]

30. why is that necessarily true?

But I think we both agree that when all of the smoke clears there would be an Iranian style theocracy in place?

I don't claim any particular expertise on the Iraqi people, but I don't see any reason to believe that an Islamicist theocracy is unavoidable - unless we leave immediately without any kind of UN presence.

[NNN0LHI]

32. Because the majority of Iraqi's are Shiite Muslim

And the majority of Iranians are Shiite Muslim. I could be wrong though?

Don

[charlie]

28. Election, civil war

or Iran-sponsored revolution (I don't know if that's the right word. Can you have a revolution in a country with no gov't?). They've already infiltrated the country with agitators.

Dubya's already entangling us deeper into the mess anyway. Apparently, the realpolitikers think now's a good time to use Iraq as a springboard for destabilizing Iran. We're putting former Mukhabarat agents on the payroll to assist Iranian internal dissidents. And the guy we're letting organize this party is Chalabi.

In any case, if we split, the Iraqis might not have time for a civil war. Not if the Iranians can't resist the opportunity to rope Iraq into their sphere and the Turks decide to settle their Kurdish problem once and for all.

[Feanorcurufinwe]

14. The occupation should end as soon as possible

The occupation should end as soon as possible and the UN should have the lead in helping the Iraqis rebuild their country and society.

http://story.news.yahoo.com/news?tmpl=story&u=/afp/20030716/wl_mideast_afp/us_iraq_weapons_politics_1

[Terwilliger]

15. right now, we need to pacify the country

we haven't done that in Afghanistan and look whats happened

We have to insure all Iraqis that we can maintain order, so that then they can make their own democracy, or whatever other government they want.

If we pull out now we just ask for the chaos one might expect from a recently war-ravaged country newly dictator-less.

[IndianaGreen]

24. We are part of the reason the country is not "pacified"

Bush's policies of pacification in Iraq, with the resulting escalation that it entails, were the same policies that kept us in Vietnam for decades while tens of thousands died for nothing!

We must demand that Iraq be put under a UN-mandated administration, and we must insist on an immediate and unconditional withdrawal of all US-UK military and civilian personnel.

[Egnever]

16. Quite simply

We cant leave the country until they have some sort of organized security/police force up and running to do so would be criminal in my opinion.

However imposing our kind of government on them is not the way out.

Ideally we would get un forces in there with us to help provide/train an Iraqi security force to faze out the un forces as they get up and running in the meantime supporting the startup of local elections with some sort of congress to be set up of the local leaders.

The hand picked leaders we have installed at this point is insulting to the Iraqi's I believe and is set up to fail.

Unless we truely put the process in the Iraqis hands instead of dictating it we are doomed.

Unfortunately Bush couldnt wait and pissed a large portion of the world off. I will be suprised if many of the countries want to send thier children in to die at this point after the insults thrown thier way.

Freedom fries!!!!! Yea that one will pay off when/if bush goes to the UN

[w4rma]

19. I think that we need to clean up Bush's mess, but I don't think Bush *can*

clean up his mess, because Bush wants to "privatize" Iraq's oil by giving it to formerly U.S./now Cayman Islands-based oil corporations. It will be tougher for him to give the oil to his special intrests if he allows the U.N. to help us.

Also, he seems to want to install an Iraqi government who will allow these Cayman Islands-based oil companies to walk all over the Iraqis. We need to help the Iraqis set up a true democratic republic that allows the Iraqis to vote and fight by changing minds instead of assassinating whatever dictator is there. Provisions for a free-press, free-speech and a fair vote must be there and the Iraqis need to decide most of the rest. Their government needs a strong foundation with strong checks and balances to make it as hard as possible for a dictator to take control, that we help build, for them to build the rest on.

Then we need to pull out and buy some of our oil from the state-run Iraqi oil services (you can't privitize the oil, because who would you give it's ownership to? The Iraqis, but if all the Iraqis own it, then that means that it might-as-well be run by the government that they will own so that they can vote in changes to how it is run and how the revenues will help support the other public works such as water, police, fire, road building/maintanance and power).

[Emboldened Chimp]

20. We can't stay, and we can't leave

It's your classic Catch-22. If we stay as intended--years, maybe decades--we'll rack up U.S. bodies faster than you can count. If we leave, what little order exists will crumble in an instant with the onset of a civil war. Of course, this only proves that the anti-war crowd was right: we shouldn't be there in the first place. But that's neither here nor there.

What we should do is give Iraqis the rebuilding contracts. Let their own construction and other businesses do the work; these businesses will hire Iraqis for the labor, as well as management positions. This will automatically boost their economy, because people will have money and they'll spend it on goods and services, thus boosting the small businessman, reataurant owner, retailer, etc. Not only will conditions improve, they'll see it as selfless on our part. Meanwhile, we use their oil facilities to pay for the war effort and no more. Part of the oil industry should remain an Iraqi state enterprise, and the rest can be used for international corps. Say 50-50, just for laughs. Finally, I would keep the basic necessities socialized: health care, food, water, electricity, gas, and whatever else (from oil revenues.) The regular Iraqi would benefit from the free flow of money, but won't lose all the things he was used to getting under Saddam, like world class health care (they did have it at one time.) Once things get moving--and it should happen fairly fast--start pulling out the troops slowly, then replace with a small UN force, if possible.

This would work, if only the motives of the * administration were genuine. And of course, they weren't.

[hedda_foil]

22. If the UN doesn't take over completely,

the quagmire will continute to grow to surpass Vietnam in proportions. Whatever we do, now that Iraq has been so thoroughly destabilized, it's probable that the country will eventually become an Islamic Republic. The only real question is how great a price in American and Iraqi lives will be paid to delay the inevitable.

[jeanmarc]

23. My position is probably not likeable, but....

It's better than the current policy.

I don't believe that any nation that can lend a great deal of neutral troops will want to dip their hands into this abyss without a big payoff of oil.

Give it to them. It will happen by way of the UN Security Council. The countries that can be a part of this, France, Germany, Russia, etc. they will all share in the largess of Iraqi oil. It's either that supply is shared with the new security forces or it stays in US/UK hands.

I hope that the UN Security Council countries will put a limit on when contracts towards that oil will expire.

I'm naive to what other countries other than the UK/USA can provide in troops. My guess is that there would still be a need for at least US troops there.

Cut the backroom deals if necessary, and get our troops home. This moron occupation of both the White House and Iraq has to end. Let's make the deals to help alleviate what is not able to be corrected, and make the best of a huge foreign policy blunder.

I hate the Bushes. Bush 41 could have stopped the invasion of Kuwait with a statement of truth. They waffled instead. The rest is history.

[berry]

25. I've had the same conflicts thinking about whether or not US troops

should stay in South Korea. As long as our troop presence was helping to prop up our favored dictator, I mostly wished the troops to be withdrawn. But now that democratically elected presidents have been voted in, I take my cues from them. S Korea wants the troops to stay just until some sort of solution to the military standoff at the DMZ can be found. Even the most anti-American S Koreans think that a sudden withdrawal of the troops would be destabilizing, and now is a very sensitive time (thanks to Bush*). And, at least, S Koreans are not shooting US soldiers. (I suppose you know that both Korea and Japan have to pay us to help support our troops stationed there? Not that it would be easy for them to uninvite us if we really didn't want to leave....)

For Iraq, I think we need to BEG the UN to come in and manage the transition to a new government. We should NOT demand any right to decide anything unilaterally. But we need to pay the lion's share of costs, or offer to. (Why should the sane countries of the world have to clean up our messes and pay for the privilege?) NO American companies should have any reconstruction contracts, except possibly in joint ventures with Iraqi companies that need some technical help. Bechtel is, I hear, engaged in building or rebuilding grammar schools! Why can't Iraqi companies do that? Anyway, the contracting process needs to be in other hands, NOT the US. We have lost our credibility (if we ever had any), IMO.

One interesting point from Joe Wilson's talk (zidzi posted the link above) was his contempt for the abilities of Bremer. Apparently, he has zero managerial experience. (But he IS loyal to Bush.*) Wilson also said that the war hawks are still running things in Iraq. This has got to stop, at a minimum.

I don't really expect BushCo* to be willing to leave now. But events may force them to reconsider. I only hope that when we do leave it will be with some consideration of how our actions affect Iraq. (And yes, I was vehemently opposed to attacking Iraq. But now, we have to work with the situation we have landed ourselves and the Iraqis in.)

[TreasonousBastard]

27. Well,

we invaded, blew up a vast amount of infrastructure and destroyed the existing civil service and security systems.

As much as I was against the war, and the present handling of the occupation, I can't see us just walking out and leaving the place in anarchy, as we did with Afghanistan.

Yeah, we shouldn't have invaded, but now that we did anyway we have responsibility to see that things are restored to at least the pre-invasion status. Life is rarely as simple as we would like it to be, and is filled with Hobson's choices.

The question isn't whether we have that responsibility, it is how it will be done. The crew in charge really don't have a plan, and they have dissed the rest of the world to the point where no one really wants to help out.

Yes, there are major Iraqi and other Arab firms that built what was there before, and they should be rebuilding it now. They also need the basics of civil government recordkeeping, police, firefighters, and everything else we destroyed kicking the Baathists out.

The situation has parallels to the arguments over the de-Nazification of Germany and just who would rebuild it.

Note that Germany was only partially de-Nazified, and West Germany, left to its own devices, did an excellent job of rebuilding, while East Germany, under the boot of Moscow, did a miserable job.

[Against ME]

29. They cannot do it without help from US or the UN.

Chaos cannot turn into structure easily, they are in anarchy, and they would continue to be that way if we left. That is ofcourse untill the shi'ites killed the rest of the factions and created another dictatorship.

I definately think they should call some of the shot, but we need to be there to help them, or rather the world needs to be there to help them.

[leftofthedial]

31. we leave and anarchy ensues

All right, they have virtual anarchy in most of the country now.

It would be immediate civil war.

Besides, there's still oil in the ground.

Other than that, I don't disagree with you.

Seriously, I think if the US army of occupation left tomorrow, a Shiite majority would establish the most fundamentalist Islamic state in history. Kurds and Sunnis would be repressed. Leaving now wouldn't fix the problems inherent with the arbitrary colonial boundaries the Brits drew. To really let the people determine their own path would require the current regimes abandoning nearly every country in the Middle East.

I think a true international coalition needs to be put into place to help the Iraqis expedite the creation of their own government. The PNAC-Halliburton crowd has no interest in stability in Iraq.

[T_i_B]

33. Don't remove troops, REPLACE them.

My view that we need to replace the US/UK troops with a UN force, backed up with a generous aid budget to allow the reconstruction of that which bombing destroyed to get going ASAP tends to be met with some hostility by the troops out mob. The issue is one of the main reasons why I'm not hanging about with the Stop the War Coalition like I used to.

From what I can see, withdrawing the military presence would probbably lead to civil war in Iraq. Iraq is also in a perilous state financially and UN involvement would be a good way for the decent amount of funding to reach the right places. If we withdraw the troops without the UN then Iraq will most likely be at the mercy of the IMF.

The current situation is not good, Bush & Blair are making a right pigs ear of things in Iraq, but from what I can see a UN takeover very much looks like the least worst option.