{"id":935,"date":"2005-12-09T15:57:14","date_gmt":"2005-12-09T15:57:14","guid":{"rendered":"0"},"modified":"2006-09-28T12:09:29","modified_gmt":"2006-09-28T12:09:29","slug":"were_in_till_we","status":"publish","type":"post","link":"http:\/\/marcdanziger.com\/?p=935","title":{"rendered":"We’re In ‘Till We Win"},"content":{"rendered":"

Over at LT Smash’s shop<\/a>, he’s drumming up calls and emails in support of “We’re In ‘Till We Win” (if I may paraphrase).<\/p>\n

It’s a week before the elections in Iraq – one of the first and freest in the Arab Middle East – and, for partisan advantage, the leadership of my party is saying that we should tell the Iraqi people “OK, we’re going home now. Nice visiting you, sorry we didn’t finish cleaning up the mess.”<\/p>\n

I emailed my hawkish Democratic Member of Congress<\/a>, Jane Harman a few weeks ago.<\/p>\n

Here’s what I got in reply:<\/p>\n

Dear Mr. Danziger:<\/p>\n

The 2,000th American casualty provides a grim marker for our involvement in Iraq, but it also presents an important opportunity to answer the American people\u2019s most pressing question: What is our exit strategy?<\/p>\n

This war is costing far too much in American lives and taxpayer dollars. It is creating a new breeding ground for terrorists where one did not previously exist. It is setting back our efforts to confront Iran. And it is causing our allies to question our competence, policy judgments and above all, our word.<\/i><\/p><\/blockquote>\n

But just as staying indefinitely is not an option, so too is an immediate pullout of most American forces. We are not able to keep order with the number of troops we have there now. Withdrawing most of our forces immediately would effectively turn Iraq over to Al Qaeda, or perhaps Iran, leaving in our wake civil war, increased human suffering, and a far-more dangerous place than we found 31 months ago.<\/p>\n

Thus, the most prudent exit is a steady efficient drawdown of U.S. troops beginning after the Iraqi elections in December. Exactly how many and at what pace? Those numbers may be important but only for symbolic \u2013 not necessarily strategic \u2013 reasons. Troops signify intentions, and the American people (and the Iraqi people, for that matter) are concerned about our intentions.<\/p>\n

For that reason, America must clarify its intentions if this drawdown \u2013 this exit from Iraq \u2013 is to succeed. <\/p>\n

First, President Bush should state unequivocally that the U.S. does not seek and will not maintain permanent military bases in Iraq. Our 60-year presence in Germany and our 50-year presence in Korea rightfully make people nervous that a half-century from now, American Marines will be living on a base in downtown Baghdad. President Bush should put that to rest \u2013 and make clear that U.S. policy is to leave Iraq completely.<\/p>\n

Second, President Bush must clarify our intentions with respect to Iraq\u2019s oil. We have no designs on Iraq\u2019s precious natural resource, but Iraqis don\u2019t believe us. We should state clearly that oil revenues belong to the people of Iraq and no one else. At the same time, we should also help Iraq get the oil flowing and encourage its neighbors, like Kuwait and Saudi Arabia, to assist.<\/p>\n

Third, we should redouble our diplomatic efforts to get allies and partners to come into Iraq to share the burden for security and infrastructure. Internationalizing our efforts will take the target off our back and make it easier for us to leave. But it will only work if we invite others in \u2013 and if the offer to cede control is genuine.<\/p>\n

Fourth, President Bush should ask a high-level personal envoy to focus on nothing but ironing out the political conflict between Shiites, Sunnis and Kurds. Creating a weakened, balkanized state is not our intention, despite the conspiracy theories of some. U.S. Ambassador to Iraq, Dr. Zalmay Khalizad, who engineered the Sunni \u201cbuy-in\u201d to the recent Constitutional referendum, is a natural choice for this role, but it will mean reducing his other responsibilities.<\/p>\n

And fifth, we must set forth a clear plan to have a fixed number of Iraqi military units trained to operate independently by a certain date. Establishing metrics for success, and sticking to them, will send the unequivocal message that the Iraqi people will be the defenders of their own country.<\/p>\n

These five statements of American intention, backed up by concrete action, must accompany any drawdown in troops. No one \u2013 not in the Muslim world or here at home \u2013 will believe us unless we begin to leave, but no one should believe us unless we state now that we want a future for Iraq that is free of American involvement.<\/p>\n

America seeks no empire, yet we give the impression to some that we do. Putting that issue to rest, once and for all, will allow the democratically elected Iraqi government to gain control over their country and will let our brave men and women finally come home.<\/p>\n

Regards,<\/p>\n

JANE HARMAN
\nMember of Congress<\/i><\/p><\/blockquote>\n

While I actually agree with parts of this (esp. the “Your oil belongs to you”), once again, her objective isn’t success against the insurgents; it’s “what does it take to get us to come home,” as clearly stated in the opening paragraphs.<\/p>\n

Her notion that internationalizing the war – involving ceding control – is a good idea mystifies me. Who, in the feckless UN or EU, has shown any measure of resolve in dealing with this?<\/p>\n

And this just makes no sense to me at all…can anyone help? <\/p>\n

These five statements of American intention, backed up by concrete action, must accompany any drawdown in troops. No one \u2013 not in the Muslim world or here at home \u2013 will believe us unless we begin to leave, but no one should believe us unless we state now that we want a future for Iraq that is free of American involvement.<\/i><\/p><\/blockquote>\n

I’m composing a new letter and will get it to her by the 14th.<\/p>\n","protected":false},"excerpt":{"rendered":"

Support Lt. Smash’s call to contact Congress and let them know that there is a ‘Victory Consituency.’<\/p>\n","protected":false},"author":1,"featured_media":0,"comment_status":"open","ping_status":"open","sticky":false,"template":"","format":"standard","meta":[],"categories":[],"tags":[],"_links":{"self":[{"href":"http:\/\/marcdanziger.com\/index.php?rest_route=\/wp\/v2\/posts\/935"}],"collection":[{"href":"http:\/\/marcdanziger.com\/index.php?rest_route=\/wp\/v2\/posts"}],"about":[{"href":"http:\/\/marcdanziger.com\/index.php?rest_route=\/wp\/v2\/types\/post"}],"author":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"http:\/\/marcdanziger.com\/index.php?rest_route=\/wp\/v2\/users\/1"}],"replies":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"http:\/\/marcdanziger.com\/index.php?rest_route=%2Fwp%2Fv2%2Fcomments&post=935"}],"version-history":[{"count":0,"href":"http:\/\/marcdanziger.com\/index.php?rest_route=\/wp\/v2\/posts\/935\/revisions"}],"wp:attachment":[{"href":"http:\/\/marcdanziger.com\/index.php?rest_route=%2Fwp%2Fv2%2Fmedia&parent=935"}],"wp:term":[{"taxonomy":"category","embeddable":true,"href":"http:\/\/marcdanziger.com\/index.php?rest_route=%2Fwp%2Fv2%2Fcategories&post=935"},{"taxonomy":"post_tag","embeddable":true,"href":"http:\/\/marcdanziger.com\/index.php?rest_route=%2Fwp%2Fv2%2Ftags&post=935"}],"curies":[{"name":"wp","href":"https:\/\/api.w.org\/{rel}","templated":true}]}}