Kissinger: Military Win In Iraq Impossible

Former Secretary Of State Joins Call For U.S. Talks With Iraq's Neighbors, Including Iran

(AP)  Military victory is no longer possible in Iraq, former Secretary of State Henry Kissinger said in a television interview broadcast Sunday.

In a wide ranging interview on British Broadcasting Corp. television, Kissinger presented a bleak vision of Iraq, saying the U.S. government must enter into dialogue with Iraq's regional neighbors — including Iran — if any progress is to be made in the region.

"If you mean by 'military victory' an Iraqi Government that can be established and whose writ runs across the whole country, that gets the civil war under control and sectarian violence under control in a time period that the political processes of the democracies will support, I don't believe that is possible," he said on the BBC's Sunday AM breakfast show.

But Kissinger warned against a rapid withdrawal of troops, saying it could lead to "disastrous consequences," destabilizing Iraq's neighbors and causing a long-lasting conflict.

"If you withdraw all the forces without any international understanding and without any even partial solution of some of the problems, civil war in Iraq will take on even more violent forms and achieve dimensions that are probably exceeding those that brought us into Yugoslavia with military force," he said.

Iraq's neighbors, especially those with large Shia populations, would be destabilized should there be a quick withdrawal from Iraq, Kissinger said.

"So I think a dramatic collapse of Iraq — whatever we think about how the situation was created — would have disastrous consequences for which we would pay for many years and which would bring us back, one way or another, into the region," he said.

Kissinger, whose views have been sought by the Iraqi Study Group, led by former Secretary of State James Baker III, called for an international conference bringing together the permanent members of the United Nations Security Council, Iraq's neighbors and regional powers like India and Pakistan to work out a way forward for the region.

He also said that the process would have to include Iran and that the U.S. must enter into dialogue with the country.

Asked if it was time for President Bush and British Prime Minister Tony Blair to change course, he responded: "I think we have to redefine the course, but I don't think that the alternative is between military victory, as defined previously, or total withdrawal."

[bellal-2009]

I think Henry Kissinger's notion that we need to quit looking at this as a win or lose situation. It's hard not to when the military is involved but it is a forward momentum that is continuously changing and his comments make it clear that the dynamics of the Middle East have changed and will continue to change. The key is to guide it to a succesful government for the people.

[lrnnyaeger]

Mr. Kissenger is probably the only person who sees and understands the whole scenario. Give him the diplomatic authority to deal within IRaq and with its' neighbors to come to an agreement which would justify the withdrawal of our troops from the entire region.

[olebd]

I want to know this guy's secret to longevity. He hasn't changed in 40 years....what is he, like 150 now?

What took him so long to weigh in on this war? It may be old age slowing him down.

[alphaa10-2009]

1. Kissinger, where have you been? Why has it taken 3,000 American lives and some 20,000 seriously wounded to bring your august attention to bear on a national crisis?

2. Has the Bush military disaster been a mystery to you so long? Did it first dawn on you something might be wrong when Halliburton packed up and left after squandering $2.1 billion in taxpayer dollars?

3. Or was it when you sensed a lack of civil order-- and US presence-- on the streets of Baghdad when 150 government officials were rounded up in broad daylight by gunmen wearing police uniforms?

4. Or, were you waiting until you were invited by fellow Republicans to comment?

5. Or, did you sense your silence made your consultancy so incredible, it might actually hurt business?

Thanks for helping out, Henry. But I noticed one thing-- you never once used the phrase, "Peace with Honor", as you did with Vietnam. Is there no honor left to salvage from this debacle?

[alphaa10-2009]

ourtomorrow exclaimed, "You can all continue living in your fantasy world of 9/11 conspiracies and power plays for oil and the Vice President pulling the strings, keep living in your fabricated reality because clearly what is really happening is to much for you all to accept."
---

Speaking of State of Denial, what steely resolve to deny the undeniable!

And I recognize you-- weren't you "Baghdad Bob" who worked for Saddam, as his press flak? As I remember the story, you were captured, right? And somehow flown out directly to Andrews, where Bush met you personally and gushed (with admiration) "Anyone who can lie THAT, you know, that Americans will never, ever enter Baghdad, deserves a spot on my team." And weren't you runner-up to Tony Snow?

Now, if Bush is on a "Mission from God", that clearly proves divine endorsement of Bush and all that implies, right? So, disagreement becomes a sin? But, a nagging concern-- who told you about that divine mission? Bush? Which brings up the nasty issue of infallibility, which I am sure you haven't the time for address-- in this life.

[alphaa10-2009]

laurieleemooo said, "THIS *** HAS EVERYTHING TO DO WITH HATRED AND NOTHING ELSE. THIS IS ABOUT PURE HATRED ON THE PART OF THE MUSLIM RADICALS.

THAT IS IT PERIOD----THATS WHAT THIS IS
ALL ABOUT.

You my little friend have been BRAINWASHED by your little muslim terrorists friends if you believe this is about anything other than HATE!!!!
---

Ms. Leemooo, you have demonstrated you understand hatred. Now, please remember to turn off your caps lock key, else it makes you seem like some SHOUTING IDIOT. I know you are not filled with hatred because I have seen your other posts, which demonstrate capacity for at least one other preoccupation-- cheering for a Bush "victory" in Iraq. But that show is over, according to Herr Doktor Kissinger. (Where was this character when we needed him?) Now, Ms. Leemooo, start cheering for a united country in time of national misdirection and dire peril.

[stranger45-2009]

Would I send my son to this war? You might ask would I send him to WW II? Or Vietnam? Hell no that's for poor kids to do. I do love the blood and destruction though. As long as it's someone elses son or daughter. So how do I feel toward those who do volunteer? Impressed, they either have much bigger balls than me or they are desperately poor and trying to make a better life for themselves. Either way, who cares? An attempt to establish democracy in the Middle East has proven to be very profitable for a handfull of connected individuals and companies. That's why I greatly respect and admire those who have made the attempt--the Bush administration. They have been resolute, something I have not seen in my lifetime. They may not succeed, mostly for the reasons that they are criminaly incompetent and arrogant. But also we have traitors on the home front calling for some kind of acountability from the administration. The nerve of these peasants speaking truth to power. They should just shut their mouths and send there money and kids to Iraq. Those traitors have apparently occupied the high ground for now. But not for long..we'll find a way to blame the failures in Iraq on them.

Thanks to Frankly6

[bushrocks1]

Would I send my son to this war? You might ask would I send him to WW II? Or Vietnam? Maybe you would distinguish those conflicts and whether you would send your son to fight in them. But that question is misdirected in a very important way: I can't command my son to go to war. He has to make that choice. So the better question would be: would I volunteer to fight in Iraq, WW II, Vietnam? Would I volunteer to fight in any war? Respond if drafted? I don%u2019t know. I'm not equivocating, only addressing that it is a hypothetical. As a hypothetical, I can say, sure I'd fight. But I have nightmares of battle (from my past life as a Jacobite). So how do I feel toward those who do volunteer? Impressed but maturely knowing that many things go into their decision. But I do strongly believe that a country who can't find those men is doomed. The fact that we can find them is one reason why I say there is no failure in Iraq. Objectively, I also believe it for other reasons. An attempt to establish democracy in the Middle East is a bold, brilliant, noble effort, facing a high chance of failure. That's why I greatly respect and admire those who have made the attempt--the Bush administration. They have been resolute, something I have not seen in my lifetime. They may not succeed, for reasons outside their control or fault: traitors on the home front, being a big one. But now those traitors have apparently occupied the high ground. Yet... we're still in Iraq. Why?... I'm waiting.

[j-whitman]

Outmorrows,,, Reagan didn't defeat Russia nor Communism,, The Berlin Wall wouldn't have lasted another year anyway... And if you go back & look at Bush's work record,, you'll see it was 1 failure after another untill he got his PR team together as governor,,,, Cheney is the half-wit behind the selictive (cherry picking) of our intelligence & much the blame for this current failure in Iraq... Both together are responsible for the collapse of the entire Middle-East regional conflict we are now engaged in & losing swiftly.

[observantx]

Will somebody PLEASE take both of Kissinger%u2019s shoes off, pull off his socks and stuff them in his mouth. Please wrap a little duct tape around his head and mouth while you are at it to make sure the socks stay put.

This retread creep has been feeding %u201Cwe can win%u201D drugs to Fearless Leader for months. Now since he has recently found the spotlight again, he is warming to his old persona of worldly policy maker. Now that Iraq has turned completely sour, he is trying to hitch a ride on the reality express. He needs a bucket of cold water thrown on him and the bum%u2019s rush out of the spotlight.

Henry, go home. Make some warm milk. Get good nights sleep. Please leave us alone.

[observantx]

Will somebody PLEASE take both of Kissinger%u2019s shoes off, pull off his socks and stuff them in his mouth. Please wrap a little duct tape around his head and mouth while you are at it to make sure the socks stay put.

This retread creep has been feeding %u201Cwe can win%u201D drugs to Fearless Leader for months. Now since he has recently found the spotlight again, he is warming to his old persona of worldly policy maker. Now that Iraq has turned completely sour, he is trying to hitch a ride on the reality express. He needs a bucket of cold water thrown on him and the bum%u2019s rush out of the spotlight.

Henry, go home. Make some warm milk. Get good nights sleep. Please leave us alone.

[ourtomorrows]

You conspiracy folk continue to amaze me with your lunacy.

I am equally fascinated by the simpletons (yes simpletons) who continue to insist this is all about oil. If it was only about oil, we would be in a far less dangerous situation. This is about a President who believes he is on a mission to liberate the Middle East and will stop at nothing to see that mission achieved. I fail to understand why people don't get that! We are in a far more dangerous world than one where the US and GB are doing what they have done for a century and trying to get oil. That is part of it but that is not what President Bush is after. Wake up people!

Those of you who continue to underestimate the President and continue to talk about Cheney as the power behind the throne, you are wrong and your view is incredibly dangerous. It is the President who is at the helm folks, he really is and he is on a mission, maybe even as he sees it, a mission from God to bring democracy to the Middle East and he will not give up or give in until he accomplishes that mission. Why don't you people get that? He is as determined to achieve his goals as Reagan was to destroy the USSR.

You can all continue living in your fantasy world of 9/11 conspiracies and power plays for oil and the Vice President pulling the strings, keep living in your fabricated reality because clearly what is really happening is to much for you all to accept.

[feelfree1]

ncolsens,

You appear to be advocating for the mass-murder of a huge number of innocent people; people which we claim to be "liberating", and claim to care about.

Will you take personal responsibility for such an act, or will you hide behind our flag to promote your terrorist proposal of wide-spread indiscriminate mass-murder, from the shadows?

[feelfree1]

ceekuei,

You have touched on a very sensitive and fundamental issue. Well done.

It is undoubtedly not in the interests of the American public, nor of the people around the globe for that matter, for the U.S. to keep wasting billions and blions of U.S. tax dollars, blood, and treasure, in blind welfare support of the repulsive, anti-human, and calamitous policies of Israeli leaders.

Their influence in U.S. politics is grossly disproportionate.

[feelfree1]

emhawks,

Nice list. A few more to add:

Richard Perle, Douglas Feith, and of course, Paul Wolfowitz. Tony Bair is almost too obvious to mention.

It is quite a challenge to even select from the worst offenders, in creating a list of current Western war criminals.

The only way to win in Iraq is to either pull out now, or a few well placed nukes in their little country.....remember Hiroshima August 6, 1945? It really works

[pendragon679]

"...when British and then American oil companies literally went in and took over the middle east."

Ted Koppel said it best on this morning's edition of "Face The Nation" when he stated that this is all about OIL. That's right folks, O-I-L. You know, black gold, Texas tea...

Nations outside of the Middle East have been fighting over Persian Gulf oil since WWI, and possibly before. The Gallipoli campaign was largely for oil; the North African campaign in WWII was for control of those massive oil fields; the first Gulf War was for oil; and the current mess is all about OIL. Until we get over our obsession with this toxic fossil fuel & begin to develop viable alternatives, we'll never get out of that quagmire...

[nynative1340]

The Sunnis and Shias hate each other. The only thing they have in common besides their basic Islam religion, is that they also hate Westerners in general and Americans in particular. To understand that, one would have to read a lot of books, but one in particular says a lot. "Endless Enemies" explores our faulty foreign policy since the Eisenhower years.

One only has to know that we toppled a fledgling democracy in 1953 and installed a tyrant: the Shah. But that only intensified the hatred towards the West. That hatred started when British and then American oil companies literally went in and took over the middle east.

Wake up Americans!! The hatred pot has been brewing for a very long time...

[tinker3478]

That's a big 10-4 nynative.

[nynative1340]

No, Ex USMC Sargeant, I did not sleep through the Gulf War. In fact, during that time I was ending my 28 years in the military. Compared to what's going on now in Iraq, chasing Saddam out of Kuwait was hardly a war. Bush 41 should have completed the job by taking Saddam down, but he didn't because he had to smarts to know that it wouldn't be a "slam dunk," and I can't imagine that it would have been any easier then than it is now.

On the other hand, Bush 43, lacking the intelligence (smarts) and foresight that his father had, just charged in, thinking it was going to be a slam dunk, or so he was told by his CIA director.

Considering that the Vietnam and Iraq wars were both started with a lie, both were managed poorly, it's not entirely ironic that both will end with the same outcome.

When you consider that Bush 43 never ran a successful business, this should come as no surprise. Even his years as governor of Texas were not all that successfue. It's sad that, in this great nation, we have to pick our leaders from a handful of lackeys.