A Conservative Plan for Iraq
Anyone who questions the lack of a realistic and comprehensive Iraq strategy is labeled a friend of fascism by the Republican leadership. House Majority Leader John Boehner (R-OH) recently said, “I wonder if [Democrats] are more interested in protecting the terrorists than protecting the American people.” Republicans are paralyzed with the fear of being thought ineffective on national security and the war.
Meanwhile, the Democratic leadership cannot seem to accept that—regardless of how we got there—we are in Iraq. They have not made a convincing case that an arbitrary phased or date-certain troop withdrawal is in the best long-term interest of the United States. Rather, they seem to think that withdrawal will undo the decision to have gone to war. Rubbing President Bush’s nose in Iraq’s difficulties is also a priority.
This political food fight is stifling the desperately needed public discussion about a meaningful resolution to the fire fight. Most Americans know Iraq is going badly. And they know the best path lies somewhere between “stay the course” and “get out now”.
Some Truths
1) Iraq is having a civil war between the Sunnis and Shiites. The Kurds will certainly join, if attacked. It may not look like a civil war, because they don’t have tanks, helicopters, and infantry; but they are fighting with what they have.
2) Vast oil revenues are a significant factor behind the fighting. Yes, there are religious and cultural differences—but concerns about how the oil revenue will be split among the three groups make the problem worse.
3) Most Iraqis support partitioning Iraq into Shiite, Sunni, and Kurdish regions. (Their current arrangement resulted from a pen stroke during the British occupation, not some organic alignment.)
4) Most citizens of the Middle East who support groups that kill and terrorize civilians—such as Hezbollah, Hamas, or al Qaeda—in part because of their aggressive stance against Israel and the United States, but also because they provide much needed social services, such as building schools.
5) Both Republican and Democratic administrations have spent decades doing business with the tyrants who run the Middle East in exchange for oil and cheap labor. This has been the one of the rallying calls of Bin Laden and Hezbollah—that we support tyrants who abuse people for profits. In fact, our latest trade deals with Oman and Jordan actually promote child and slave labor; it’s so bad the State Department had to issue warnings about rampant child trafficking in those countries.
6) Iran is using the instability in Iraq to enhance its political stature in the region. Leaving Iraq without a government that can stand up to Iran would be very destabilizing to the region and the world.
From the U.S. perspective, this is all mostly about energy. As things stand, a serious oil supply disruption would devastate our economy, threaten our security, and jeopardize our ability to provide for our children.
New Directions
Success in Iraq and the Middle East in general requires us to work in three areas simultaneously: (1) fostering a more stable Middle East region, including Iraq, (2) pursuing alternative sources of oil, and (3) developing alternatives to oil. To these ends we must:
1) Insure that the oil revenues are fairly and transparently split among all three groups: Shiite, Sunni, and Kurds based on population.
2) Allow each group to have a much stronger role in self government by creating three virtually-autonomous regions. Forcing a united Iraq down their throats is not working. Our military would then be there in support a solution that people want, rather than one they are resisting.
3) Become a genuine force for positive change, thus denying extremist groups much of their leverage. Driving a fair two-state solution to the Israeli/Palestinian problem should be our first priority. We should also engage in projects that both help the average Middle Easterner and Americans, such as supporting schools that are an alternative to the ones that teach hate and recruit terrorists. We should also stop participating in trade deals that promote child and slave labor by insisting on deals that include livable wages and basic labor rights.
4) Declare a Marshal Plan to end our Middle Eastern energy dependency with a compromise between exploring for new sources, reducing consumption, and developing of alternative energies. For example, we should re-establish normal relations with Cuba so we can beat China to Cuba’s off-shore oil. We should also redirect existing tax breaks for Big Oil into loan guarantees for alternative energy companies.
Once we no longer need so much oil from the Middle East, we can begin winning over its people by using our oil purchases to reward positive and peaceful behavior from their leaders. This would ultimately reduce tensions and encourage prosperity in the region.
We will have to live with the threat of Islamic radical terrorism forever; but these solutions are a start to reducing the threat. Both parties have to put politics aside and put together an honest and reasonable plan that the American understand.
October 18th, 2006 at 10:36 am
John,
Maybe we can have a discussion after the election about how to solve this problem. The Murtha plan is basically the Baker/Hamilton plan. Perhaps when the details come out from that plan we can start to have a discussion.
Do you think Bush should be held responsible?
October 18th, 2006 at 10:43 am
caroline
I think everybody in Washington is responsible. We will not solve the problem until all sides but the politics aside and starts working together.
October 18th, 2006 at 10:53 am
JohnKonop: Ah, you’re back to your favorite rhetorical trick: if everybody’s a little guilty then everybody’s equally guilty.
Of course the President is responsible. That’s the nature of being Commander and Chief. He said “go”.
A lot of fools encouraged him, and the Congress enabled him, but the President is responsible.
Even he would state that without qualification.
October 18th, 2006 at 11:05 am
Lefthook
We do have three branches of Government. And guys like John Kerry also voted in favor of the Iraq policy.
MS. Clinton is still bullish on Iraq.
If Democrats had not supported the policy we would not be in Iraq.
AS I said,everybody in Washington is responsible.
BTW The DEMS had an ANTI- WAR
guy(DEAN) to run against Bush and your party rejected him not Republicans!
We can fix the problem or point fingers!
October 18th, 2006 at 11:35 am
JohnKonop: Hey, I basically agree with your recommendations in the post. And I agree that the cowardly Congressional Democrats should be held to account for that vote. And I agree that finger pointing now makes it more difficult to improve things in Iraq.
But “THE DECIDER” is ultimately responsible. And history will not be kind.
October 18th, 2006 at 12:57 pm
Someone said that partitioning will cause more violence. What do you say? I’m beginning to think that Turkey can be brought around with them trying to get into the EU.
October 18th, 2006 at 2:31 pm
caroline,
I would tell them to read a book about the Middle East.
Do you think Sunnis will let Shiites rule them?
October 18th, 2006 at 2:34 pm
No, I don’t and that is one of the downfalls of any plan. The Sunni have ruled everything for, what? 80 years or more? I don’t think that they will want to give up control or cede any part of the country to another tribe. To get anything to work, you would have to get them to change their attitude. Sorry to say but it may take when they all get so damn tired of a civil war that they are willing to accept an agreement.
October 18th, 2006 at 3:49 pm
The surrounding countries are afraid these ethnic divisions will permeate them too. Turkey says they won’t allow the Kurds to carve out their own land. Some say the Iraqis were somewhat united against us, and some say it was preferable for them to fight each other. So are these divisions more PNAC handiwork or is this really self-determination? Do we force this division?
October 18th, 2006 at 4:06 pm
There’s a reason why there hasn’t been a successful terrorist attack on US soil since 9/11…It’s because every terrorist in the World who shouts, “Death to America!” is flocking to Iraq to do battle with our Military…And therein lies the BRILLIANCE of the Iraqi War (something that escapes most Liberals who are obssessed with pointing fingers at anyone and everyone who isn’t a bleeding-heart Democrat). The Democrats have NO PLAN for Iraq past troop withdrawl, admitting defeat (on behalf of BUSH) at the hands of insurgents/terrorists, opening up our Homeland to hoards of these maniacs and then saying, “We did the best we could” after the next US CIVILIAN Bloodbath…Sadly reminiscient of Clinton’s “Do Nothing and Hope For the Best” plan that DIRECTLY led to 9/11. Bin Laden was in the sights and all Clinton had to do was say “YES”. He didn’t and our NEW War On Terror can be traced to that failure, if you’re one to point fingers. There should be no hurry to exit Iraq, especially exiting solely for domestic political gain. This President had the guts to take the fight over to the Middle East and the Psychopaths gladly joined in from every part of the World, punching their ONE-WAY tickets to fight the American Devil…But it’s quite a different fight to engage the American Military instead of devising and executing plans to murder scores of American Civilians on their Homeland Soil. You want US Civilian deaths by the thousands? Then bring the troops home before their job is done. Every day that goes by is a day with FEWER terrorists with their sights trained on America, as long as our Military is confronting them on foreign soil. Will they ALL ever be gone…No…But while they are roaming the countrysides of Iraq until being toe-tagged, the worst thing that could happen is give them VICTORY and unite them in an all-out assault on OUR soil, which would begin less than a year after premature troop withdrawl. Clinton did nothing to protect us from terrorists as he was too busy with his Oral Office Games. At least Bush can be CREDITED with removing the War on Terror from US Soil and concentrating it in Iraq, and I might add, WITH the blessings of the US Congress AND United Nations AND dozens of other countries — and MOST IMPORTANT, the support of approx 75% of US Citizens. War is not a game and it should never be taken lightly. There are always casualties. At least the casualties in Iraq are Military who are trained and equipped for a fight and not women and children who never had a chance…
October 18th, 2006 at 4:36 pm
The Bad blood between Shiites and Suunies goes back way before the Iraq war.
October 18th, 2006 at 5:59 pm
HERE or THERE
Good thing we got a man at the top making all the right moves. http://www.welchreport.com/pastnews_c.cfm?rank=2348 Now what was that about fighting them here?
October 18th, 2006 at 6:01 pm
“every terrorist in the World …is flocking to Iraq to do battle with our Military”.
Question: Let’s say we dedicated 2 nonstop flights per day for terrorists to go to Baghdad.
Would those flights be more or less likely to be blown-up than a regular flight?
October 18th, 2006 at 6:06 pm
You could definitely make the case that every border in the region was imposed by colonial powers rather than ethnic lines. But national identity is very strong too.
October 18th, 2006 at 6:30 pm
John,
I like your plan.
October 18th, 2006 at 6:33 pm
Jace,
Do You think both Parties are ready to put aside politics and get a plan together?
October 18th, 2006 at 6:37 pm
Bill,
I am lost for words on your post! What is going on in Washington?
Everyone should read this link from BILL!!!!
http://www.welchreport.com/pastnews_c.cfm?rank=2348
October 18th, 2006 at 6:41 pm
John Konop,
Is that a legit site? The news is almost 9 months old.
October 18th, 2006 at 6:45 pm
AP: Burns says president keeping war plan quiet
HELENA, Montana (AP)– Sen. Conrad Burns says he believes President Bush has a plan to win the war in Iraq but is keeping it quiet, a statement Democrats pounced on Wednesday as reminiscent of comments made during another divisive war.
Burns, at a debate Monday with Democratic challenger Jon Tester, said he believes Bush has a plan to win — but added: “we’re not going to tell you what our plan is.”
October 18th, 2006 at 6:45 pm
caroline,
I have no idea Bill posted the link.
October 18th, 2006 at 6:52 pm
caroline
I put this on Google “grant citizenship to 7,000 Ahiska Muslims”
Pages of links, it must be good information.
October 18th, 2006 at 6:59 pm
http://www.islamonline.net/English/News/2004-07/24/article04.shtml
October 18th, 2006 at 8:35 pm
I am speechless - practically. Does BUSH think a population of 300,000,000 just isn’t quite enough? How can these immigrants be guaranteed entitlements above what U.S. citizens receive?
In light of this and the Iraq war and the illegal immigrant/border issue as well as so many other issues, I really honestly believe it’s not my country anymore.
October 18th, 2006 at 8:37 pm
Letcia
Great point!
October 18th, 2006 at 9:10 pm
John Konop,
That Burns statement got peals of laughter apparently. Burns is toast. The NRSC has pulled out of MT. It isn’t the first time Burns has said something this stupid.
Thanks for googling!
October 18th, 2006 at 9:14 pm
What the heck are we doing with 7000 muslims in PA? There’s some reason for this but I can’t fathom what. We’ve got mexicans (granted illegal) living in squalor while these people get first class treatment?
October 18th, 2006 at 10:13 pm
Do You think both Parties are ready to put aside politics and get a plan together?
Well, judging by the words being thrown across both sides of the isle this election year…I’m gonna have to go with “no”.
Once again, the guys who suffer the most from partisanism toward the war are the guys who are fighting it.
October 19th, 2006 at 6:01 am
Jace,
YOU ARE RIGHT”Once again, the guys who suffer the most from partisanism toward the war are the guys who are fighting it”.
Congress needs to grow up!
October 19th, 2006 at 7:43 am
“Question: Let’s say we dedicated 2 nonstop flights per day for terrorists to go to Baghdad.
Would those flights be more or less likely to be blown-up than a regular flight?”
ANSWER: Does it matter?
October 19th, 2006 at 7:54 am
You WANT WAR,
The War is mainly between Shiites and Sunnies. What does that have to do with terrorist?
October 19th, 2006 at 8:01 am
You want War
Welcome to Control Congress Blog!
October 19th, 2006 at 8:42 am
This a “generational” war that will definitely take one or more generations to change the religious, extremeist roots of the conflict. I suggest that we plan and commit a twenty year interdiction with the best equipped and trained professional soldiers in small units that are self sufficient for up to two week engagements. Quick response/strike teams itended to take no prisoners; judiciously inserted to strike real terror in the terroists and insurgents. Get up to speed with ten to twenty thousand in less than 100 person units. Support the engagements with the best tactical air units. Then get all of the citizen soldiers out of there. Do it fast.
October 19th, 2006 at 8:46 am
BillJames,
How will that motivate the Shiites and Sunnies to stop fighting each other? They have hated one another longer then America has been a Country.
October 19th, 2006 at 9:31 am
BillJames
You must be an officer. You’re just choc-fulla positivity. This political group-think makes me ill. The troops on the ground like to keep it real.
October 19th, 2006 at 8:25 pm
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=25L2DgZNM40&eurl=
http://www.lewrockwell.com/reed/reed110.html
October 27th, 2006 at 11:53 am
The US military is just one of a half dozen militias and armies operating in Iraq.
That, by itself, makes Konop ludricous for suggesting that we have any more say about how to manage things than do any of the other five armies.
The real conservative plan is for the US military to return to its bases in Iraq and assume defensive positions to minimize casualties.
Then, if the US wants to do something in Iraq this is what Iraq really needs:
Training in combat medicine.
October 27th, 2006 at 12:00 pm
Matt
How does that stop the Shiites and Sunnies from killing each other?
BTW welcome to the site!
January 22nd, 2007 at 12:39 pm
Excuse me, but why do these old articles keep bubbling to the front-page surface on this blog?
January 22nd, 2007 at 1:08 pm
John,
The fight is:
Western world (including seculars in Iraq) and Jihadists.
Period.
Terrorists get paid to blow things up. They get paid by the leaders of jihad.
So make three countries, jihadists will cross those three newlines just as they cross the one. They will then recruit and pay the poor to blow themselves up in a marketplace of their opposing sect.
Problem NOT solved.
January 22nd, 2007 at 1:18 pm
John,
Why is it hard for you to believe that 9/11 ever happened? Why is it hard for you to belive that, if given the chance, it would happen everyday here just like Iraq?
Three countries in Iraq, then getting out, won’t change the hatred and committment of Jihad on the United States. It will worsen the situtation.
January 22nd, 2007 at 1:25 pm
West
The hate between Sunnis and Shiites goes back thousands of years.
Also you watch the video on this post and tell me the post 9/11 strategy is working?
http://controlcongress.com/uncategorized/the-war-within
January 22nd, 2007 at 1:28 pm
Chris
We have a system that shows us old stories with lots of views. That is when we move stories back up.
January 22nd, 2007 at 1:28 pm
Westy, what do you think would happen if jihad arrived in your town? What would you do, barricade yourself inside your home and pound out demands for the president to declare martial law to sweep the streets of all muslim-looking people from the safety and comfort your powerful little keyboard? Take it to the streets yourself with other America-loving militia types and start apprehending or executing muslims on sight? What exactly do you think will happen in America when jihad rears its bloody head after 5 years of “war on terror” conditioning as a result of 9/11?
January 22nd, 2007 at 1:41 pm
John,
Fundamentalists have always hated Western civilization. Moreso, then they hate each other.
Your words prove my point.
9/11 happened. We didn’t seek it out.
January 22nd, 2007 at 2:02 pm
West
Did you watch the video of the CNN special I posted?
January 22nd, 2007 at 2:14 pm
John,
No I didn’t. What’s the jist?
January 22nd, 2007 at 2:15 pm
John,
Before you hit me up with CNN I must say, That’s like gving me news from Al Jazeera. But go ahead.
January 22nd, 2007 at 2:15 pm
West
Watch all the segments you may learn something.
January 22nd, 2007 at 2:16 pm
West, answer my question.
January 22nd, 2007 at 2:17 pm
Christy,
Want to have a typing competition?
BTW, in your childish rambling you actually do bring up a real threat. Fundamental jihad has spread to Europe, here US, and Africa.
We should never execute muslims but we should police terrorism.
There is a very big difference here.
Some of you don’t believe that Arabic people have a brain for freedom and democracy but that is where you are dead wrong.
January 22nd, 2007 at 2:30 pm
John,
CNN…that’s where you have gone terribly awry my friend.
Al Jazeera.
You are bigoted to believe that Arabs haven’t the minds and sophistication fit for democracy. So very wrong my friend.
That said, I do believe DEMs and RNCs should work together fo win in Iraq.
Just need a politician who can get the right plan out and explain it clearly to us. Then show some follow through.
The plan cannot be cut and run though.
I will always believe in showing some level of honor for our President in office.
It show weakness and disorganization, to the world, to see whimpering and whining towards our Commander in Chief.
January 22nd, 2007 at 2:37 pm
You didn’t answer my questions. To the corner with the dunce cap for you until you learn to read and respond adequately. Face the wall.
January 22nd, 2007 at 8:55 pm
West
Try watching the video and give a real answer.
January 23rd, 2007 at 7:59 am
West
Why not answer the question from Chris?
July 31st, 2007 at 3:01 pm
[…] That is why I wrote years ago, which is supported by the NIE report, that we must recognize each group and stop forcing a strong federal government for any hope of containment. If not we will deal with another strong man after massive blood shed or we will see a regional civil war. […]