Put simply, I have not heard nor can I conceive of any "graceful way out."
I don't know of any, either, but perhaps that is because nobody is trying to find one? I mean, if they really wanted to, do you doubt that the same people who prepared the world for this war can also prepare it for a graceful exit?
How about getting together an Iraqi group, complete with a tentative government of clan representatives (Kurds, Shias, etc) "There is now an Iraqi resistance and we support them, but as we never had any colonialist intentions (especially for the oil), we now leave but continue to support them."?
That is just me. I am not a strategist and I am sure if they wanted to, American think tanks and the strategists in the administration can come up with better.
My question was about your statement that going on with the war is better than an exit. Given the risks you are well aware of, I was wondering why you do not seek to end it.
Even if (and I do not think this likely) there is no graceful exit, any exit will only mean that the current administration loses face and is doomed. It will be a triumph of Americans' will over their government. It is not necessarily a bad thing. Given the risks, I do not see that saving the Bush administration is worth dooming Americans for lasting ill will and increased terrorism. |
