What would a progressive "long term commitment" to Iraq entail?

[pinto]

I ask this because it's clear we're not leaving our involvement in Iraq in the next year or so. Even immediate withdrawal of armed forces would take some time, logistically, from what I understand. The "coalition" still touted in the press releases is non-existent, and the collapsed infrastructure calls for some help. Add to that mix the reality that Iraq has become a militia street war for local political control.

So, what *ought* our presence in Iraq look like, given where we are all at today? What steps ought a Democratic Administration, with the assumed support of a Democratic Congress, take to remove our military safely and address the chaos we have helped create in this madness?

[ColbertWatcher]

1. Progressive stance should be...

...to work toward and provide international security to allow for Iraqis to decide for themselves what they want to do with their own country.

[pinto]

2. I agree with that broad standard.

:thumbsup:

[ColbertWatcher]

3. It's broad, because...

...as I understand it, progressives believe in democracy.

And democracy means we don't foist an agenda on people.

In other words: the opposite of republican.

[pinto]

12. Yep. Agree.

[The_Casual_Observer]

4. Until another Saddam figure emerges & subdues the populace

by brutal repression there isn't going to be any relief.

It's not progressive, but it's the only thing that's ever worked there in the last couple of hundred years.

[Thickasabrick]

13. Excuse me - women are now brutally oppressed - 70% of them

aren't allowed to go to school and the majority cannot work. They are required to cover up their heads now but when Saddam was in charge, this was not the case. He encouraged women to become educated and professionals. The brutal oppression is still there - it's just being called "democracy".

[L. Coyote]

5. That is an oxymoron, perhaps?

Wouldn't a Progressive stay in their own country, to fix one's own problems?

Are you asking how Progresives will clean up Bush's mess?

[pinto]

14. Primarily, yeah. But we're there, it's a mess, where do we go from here?

Cleaning up Bush's mess *is* part of it. We going to inherit that, along with the Republican deficit, the ill will we've garnered around the world, etc. etc, ad nauseam.

All I can figure is that some sort of international tap dance that incorporates an end to military/occupation with real, accountable infrastructure support will work.

Not sure what that would, or could entail, hence my question.

I've been a long advocate for some kind of return of the UN *in cooperation* with the Arab states, as well as Iran, to buffer it all and provide some real support.

[SteinbachMB]

6. Morally

...it must be to stabilize Iraq as much as possible, handing over control of the country to Iraqis, but allowing sufficient forces to remain in Iraq to help strengthen Iraq's ability to defend itself, and its citizens. Leaving Iraq will not be an easy task, whoever does it, and whenever it starts.

[sicksicksick_N_tired]

7. Employing IRAQIS to reconstruct basic infrastructure, financing IRAQI businessmen, effin' BEGGING,..

,...the UN and the surrounding nations to unite in helping Iraq back on its feet, providing incentives to all the middle and intellectual IRAQIS that ran for safety to come back, coordinating whatever humanitarian assistance is necessary (gawd knows there's plenty needed), getting schools and universities and hospitals up and running, nationalizing the oil requiring whatever percentage necessary to AT LEAST get the nation back to pre-war conditions,...for a start.

[pinto]

16. Yeah. Good answer.

:thumbsup:

I'd love to see one of those UN declarations for Iraq as a humanitarian crisis zone, with some real time advocacy for Arab/Persian state money and time to help the people and put a breather on the Shiite/Sunni civil war.

[sicksicksick_N_tired]

17. Under the circumstances,...

,...Iraq is clearly a 'humanitarian crisis zone' with the number of deaths and wounded and oppressed/starving and refugees.

However, I think history, recent history, tends to show civil unrest is caused by third (edited to add FOREIGN) parties usurping interest in sovereign resources. The unrest tends to be desperate actions calculated to gain some measure of control, no matter how small, over the resources. Of course, the third (edited to add FOREIGN) parties always have the money to wage comparatively greater force/violence/manipulation leading people to scramble for any tidbit. That's why I am a huge advocate of nationalizing oil AT LEAST until Iraq is back to pre-war conditions. Then, the IRAQIS can be in a more equal footing to negotiate contracts with the multi-nationals (although, I do understand those multinationals have tended to enjoy the benefits of nationalization because they have worked quite profitably with tyrants and dictators). Perhaps, the Iraqis can set up an independent board to oversee nationalization?

I wish I knew a quick solution to the disaster created by this administration. There are none.

I'll bet another progressive goal that would help Iraq greatly is prosecution of war-profiteering and war crimes! Seriously!!!

[chknltl]

8. Cleaning up the depleted uranium oxide that we left there...

I am an advocate of literers being made to pick up liter.

[El Pinko]

9. Getting the hell out and respecting their right to self-determination.

...which also entails NOT privatizing all their citizen-owned (publicly owned) industries!

[mike_c]

10. there is NO SUCH THING as a "progressive long term commitment..."

...to a U.S. occupation of Iraq. The war against Iraq is a crime against humanity. It is imperialist. It is neocolonialist. It is entirely inconsistent with ANY progressive values that I recognize!

[sicksicksick_N_tired]

11. Well, I believe we OWE the Iraqi people, NOT in continued occupation but rather,...

,...financially and whatever assistance they need (i.e. ASK FOR) to help them.

I completely agree that, the Iraqis should be the ones answering this question. They are the victims. We are the criminals. At a minimum, we OWE restitution, BIG TIME.

[pinto]

15. I hear you. Yet, what is the progressive answer for us and Iraq as it is, here and now?

I realize one option is to vacate lock stock and barrel. Meaning not only our military/occupation fiasco, but our involvement with any kind of infrastructure support - as corrupt as it has been under this Administration.

Imho, there is probably a middle ground that recognizes a debt we owe to the rank and file of Iraq while we accept the failure of our occupation.

[sicksicksick_N_tired]

18. Kicked and recommended because ending the occupation can't be our ONLY goal,...

,...when our nation did, in fact, victimize an entire nation and cause horrific harm to a completely innocent people.

If John McCain wants to preach "moral obligations", we must take him on!

Yes, we DO have a moral obligation!!!
We have a moral obligation to do whatever the Iraqis need to make their lives, whole, ABSENT FURTHER DESTRUCTION!
We have a moral obligation to END military occupation and financial oppression.
We have a moral obligation to empower the Iraqis we completely disempowered by injury and death.
We have a moral obligation to STOP IMPOSING MILITARY FORCE via bullets and bombs.
WE HAVE A MORAL OBLIGATION TO PAY RESTITUTION, THE IRAQIS DETERMINING HOW TO UTILIZE THAT FINANCIAL REIMBURSEMENT!

While John McCain speaks of 100 years of military occupation, I believe a ten year commitment to financially support Iraqis, WITH AUTHENTIC GOOD WILL, as they re-build their nation is a better solution minimizing the blowback from BUSHCO ventures.

I think the question presented deserves discussion by people who are MORE than mere 'ideologues'.

That's what I think.

[mike_c]

20. you forgot the most important thing owed to victims of injustice....

Justice.

Arrest the "leaders" responsible and put them on trial for war crimes. Hand them over to The Hague.

[sicksicksick_N_tired]

23. You posted as I was writing about "justice".

Although I didn't include the justice you express in that post, I have consistently advocated that, prosecuting those responsible for an illegal war and the profiteering therefrom would advance peace and stability and hope, here and abroad. My advocacy "feels" more selfishly nationalistic, though, because I believe our own nation would heal and grow from a necessary justice that has been squelched for too damn long. So, I usually advocate justice against these perpetrators on behalf of my country.

You are right, though, in my belief, that, Iraqis would feel a sense of vindication if our own war criminals were prosecuted. No doubt about it!!!!

[burrowowl]

19. Agree to safe conduct of troops out

of Iraq for reparations to be manged by Iraq to rebuild. If graft shows up stop payments until monies are given to local companies to e.g. rebuild sewer system, etc.

[sicksicksick_N_tired]

22. I wish it could be that simple. However, this administration installed a puppet government,...

,...trained an unstable police force, RAN OFF the Iraqis (middle-class and popularly influential and educated) that would be most helpful, created huge obstacles with surrounding nations and so on and so forth.

So, more work is going to be required to create a plan for justice and peace.

First and foremost, we have to PROVE our commitment to justice, peace and reconciliation. I'd consult with Iraqis OUTSIDE the puppets. I'd broadly and widely expose those consultations. Then, I'd broadly and widely expose each and every step towards OUR commitment to right all wrongs, WITHOUT MILITARY FORCE OR US OCCUPATION.

Troop withdrawals would be part and parcel of our commitment to righting wrongs and showing best efforts towards justice.

[LWolf]

21. There should be no U.S. presence in the middle east.

That's the progressive stance.

Peacekeeping should be a function of the UN. We can help fund it, but we shouldn't be there physically.

There will never be peace as long as we are in occupation.