"Sorry, I disagree. The people you refer to as "Saudi funded insurgents" are a bunch that can not be allowed to run (or help run) a country ever again."
I agree... and I believe that my suggested policy of REMOVING the US from the middle of the Iraqi Civil War is the most likely way to assure that that doesn't happen, as the near-inevitable resultant will be the squaring off of Saudi-backed Iraqi Sunnis against Iranian-backed Iraqi Shi'a --- with the progressive weakening of extremist leaders on *BOTH* sides of the conflict (hopefully the pointlessness and bloody failures of such a campaign will bring about the desire of publics on both sides to over-throw their corrupt Autocratic leaders... and reconsile themselves to an era of greater religious tolerance and pluralism).
That, much to be desired outcome, AIN'T going to happen if the US stays as a 'target of convenience' to both sides, and as a boon to recruitment efforts of extremists.
You see, I to desire the same results you do for the region... it's just that I believe the SMARTEST, MOST LIKELY TO BE EFFECTIVE policy would be a little like Reagan's policy was when he and his advisors believed that the GULF WAR between Iran and Saddam would be beneficial to the US. (It *was*, and would have produced even more salutory results if we hadn't shifted policy near the end, and moved to support Saddam and keep him in power).
"al Qaeda has in mind something very different than what the Sunnis of Iraq probably want."
Of course. But so what? Everyone has different goals, dreams, what-have-you. ...Dreams alone don't make reality.
"Sorry, I believe that women should be allowed medical care and education. I believe that people should be allowed to practice their own religion (or lack there of). I believe that homosexuals should be allowed to walk the streets without the fear of being beaten or killed. I believe that women shouldn't be raped or killed for talking to a man."
I agree STRONGLY... But right now Iraq is writing elements of the Sharia (with encouragement by the Theocrats in Iran) into their new constitution, and they just SIGNED a defense treaty with Iran (over our objections), and Iran just promised to send large numbers of military 'trainers' to help out their Shi'a neighbors in Iraq, aned everyone knows how corrupt an oppressive the Saudi system of Wh'abbism and Monarchy is --- they are some of the WORST offenders in the area of woman's rights and religious freedom in the entire WORLD.
So, I see little evidence that the current US policy (trapped with the 'Tar Baby' in Iraq, pouring BILLIONS upon BILLIONS down a corrupt rat hole) is likely to be particularly effective at achieving any of those goals --- but REMOVING THE TARGET FROM OUR BACKS, and, standing aside and watching the currents of history lead to the enfeeblement and rejection of extremism on BOTH sides of the Sunni/Shi'a conflict (a la the Reagan strategy) is VERY MUCH MORE LIKELY to achieve political evolution towards the more universal human values in the region.
In other words, if the find yourself trapped digging a hole... the first step to the solution is to STOP DIGGING.
"Frankly you've spent a lot of time writing about an Islamic equivalent of the Reformation. Well, the Sunni and Shia have been fighting for over a thousand years, they've had their religious wars and it appears came to an understanding."
Not over Iraq, they haven't. (Or, at least the 'understanding' that the Sunni minority had that they would always be the top dog, calling all the shots, is not rejected by the other parties....)
"And the crucible of the Reformation was Switzerland."
By 'crucible', I hope you are not trying to imply that the effects of Reformation didn't spread to affect all of Christendom (because I would disagree with that statement), nor that the root causes were not similiarly widespread? |
