What is your definition of "win" in the Irag war?

[BYU grad]

I guess I'm one of those that thinks there is no way we can "win" the Irag war...partly because no one has really clearly articulated to my satisfaction what "win" really means.

So, what do you think? What does it really mean to "win" and is it possible?

[gh]

Re: What is your definition of "win" in the Irag w

I guess I'm one of those that thinks there is no way we can "win" the Irag war...partly because no one has really clearly articulated to my satisfaction what "win" really means.

So, what do you think? What does it really mean to "win" and is it possible?

This is a question fraught with monstrous political implications. I'll let it stand for now, but you'll understand if it dies a sudden and mysterious death.

[lonewolf]

I don't know how a thread could be more political.

[Marlow]

IMO, no matter when or how we leave, the same sectarian problems will continue to plague Iraq, so a phased pull-out over the next year should be our course. Staying longer will accomplish nothing in the long run. It's a quagmire no matter what our plan is, so we should extract ourselves as gracefully as possible (which is to say, not very) starting now.

If the preceeding is deemed 'political', please exterminate it with extreme prejudice, as that was not my intent.

[Pego]

IMO, no matter when or how we leave, the same sectarian problems will continue to plague Iraq, so a phased pull-out over the next year should be our course. Staying longer will accomplish nothing in the long run. It's a quagmire no matter what our plan is, so we should extract ourselves as gracefully as possible (which is to say, not very) starting now.

If the preceeding is deemed 'political', please exterminate it with extreme prejudice, as that was not my intent.

Agreed on all counts.

[Kevin Richardson]

Marlow has my vote, as well. I honestly think we won the war, but we are struggling with what to do in it's aftermath. As an employee of the DoD, I am very concerned with the fact that our prolonged presence in that region is placing stresses on our forces that leave us in a weak position. My proposition, FWIW, would be to hand over the tenuous control we have in Iraq to a coalition of Arab states. The US presence there is part of the motivation for much of the violence that is occurring. While this would probably require some continued financial involvement on our part, it would enable our soldiers to catch their breath, and provide the services with the time they need to bring our materiel back up to best working conditions.

[tandfman]

To me, winning the war would mean reaching a point where the people of Iraq are better off than they were before the war started. I'm not sure they're there. I don't know if they ever can be.

It's a tough question, though. Would I rather live as an oppressed minority in a stable dictatorship, or live in political freedom in a totally unstable environment such as the one that exists today? Not having had the misfortune of living in either of those situations, I can't really say which I'd choose.

[EPelle]

I:m not of the opinion that it is your war to win.

[Pego]

To me, winning the war would mean reaching a point where the people of Iraq are better off than they were before the war started. I'm not sure they're there. I don't know if they ever can be.

It's a tough question, though. Would I rather live as an oppressed minority in a stable dictatorship, or live in political freedom in a totally unstable environment such as the one that exists today? Not having had the misfortune of living in either of those situations, I can't really say which I'd choose.

I lived under the fascism in unstable conditions as an oppressed minority as well as under a stable dictatorship of communism. While neither one was particularly good, the latter was a far better option.

[tandfman]

Actually, I misspoke. Under Saddam Hussein, the ruling government represented the Sunni minority. It was the majority (the Shi'ites) who were oppressed.

[Mennisco]

The real win only comes when the psychopath running Iran is gone and thriving democracies exists in both Iraq and Iran, ones which are at peace with Israel. Don't hold your breath.

[SQUACKEE]

I hate to be so negative and i hope im wrong but there will never be any lasting peace or any "won" wars anywhere in the conflicts in the middle east. :cry:

[Pego]

I hate to be so negative and i hope im wrong but there will never be any lasting peace or any "won" wars anywhere in the conflicts in the middle east. :cry:

What about starting a poll? What will last longer? Strife in the middle east or Soto's HJ WR :wink: ?

[kuha]

IMO, no matter when or how we leave, the same sectarian problems will continue to plague Iraq, so a phased pull-out over the next year should be our course. Staying longer will accomplish nothing in the long run. It's a quagmire no matter what our plan is, so we should extract ourselves as gracefully as possible (which is to say, not very) starting now.

If the preceeding is deemed 'political', please exterminate it with extreme prejudice, as that was not my intent.

Agreed on all counts.

Agreed (and I like Epelle's wise words, too). Ironically, I suspect that the only thing that can hold that country together is a strong-man leader. More or less like the one they had..........., but hopefully a bit less ruthless. The odds of that happening anytime soon?: pretty low.

[Helen S]

The real win only comes when the psychopath running Iran is gone and thriving democracies exists in both Iraq and Iran, ones which are at peace with Israel. Don't hold your breath.

Why does it have to be a democracy? I think stability, peace, and a happy population can come about in other forms.