Diplomacy, Not Deadlines Says Iraq Panel

Meanwhile, Report Says U.S. May Abandon Effort To Bring Sunni Insurgents Into Fold

(CBS/AP)  Success in Iraq would rely more on diplomacy, not deadlines, under recommendations from a bipartisan commission. That would rob many war critics of the impetus they wanted to force a speedy, sizable U.S. troop withdrawal from the battlefield.

The Iraq Study Group's report, expected out next week, urges a gradual reduction of U.S. forces in Iraq and a more aggressive regional diplomacy, but set no timetable, according to officials familiar with the group's deliberations. The report could give President Bush political cover to shift tactics in the increasingly unpopular war.

White House national security adviser Stephen J. Hadley noted on Thursday that Mr. Bush has solicited a separate in-house review of Iraq policy. Mr. Bush probably would make any changes or decisions arising from the various reports in "weeks rather than months," Hadley said.

The Washington Post, meanwhile, reported on its Web site Thursday night that the U.S. is considering whether to abandon efforts to bring Sunni insurgents into the political process to stabilize the country.

The concern is that the outreach to Sunni dissidents has failed and may be alienating the country's majority Shiites, who dominate the government. The State Department proposed the shift as part of a White House review of Iraq policy, said the report, which cited unidentified sources familiar with the proposal.

Despite the sectarian strife which has left hundreds of Iraqis dead, the Bush administration has so far refused to call the violence in Iraq a civil war, a position not abandoned by Secretary of State Condoleezza Rice in recent days.

Rice tells CBS Evening News anchor Katie Couric that regardless of what you call the situation, the Iraqis "are people who want to live together not live apart. The notion that there's been some political decision or even some social decision to separate themselves into separate entities is simply not true."

The congressionally chartered study group, whose recommendations are not binding, will encourage Bush to engage U.S. adversaries Syria and Iran to improve regional dialogue, several officials said. That outreach could include a regional conference among all of Iraq's neighbors or a wider gathering of Middle East nations that also would address separate Middle East peace issues.

The Bush administration has not completely ruled out diplomacy with Iran and Syria, but has been reluctant to enter talks that could be seen as reward for what Washington calls bad behavior.

"I think it's very clear that if Iran wants to be part of a stabilizing force, they can do it any day," Secretary Rice told Couric.

The report suggests that Bush give Iraqi leaders notice that America's military commitment is not open-ended. The panel's Republican and
Democratic members could not agree on bolder proposals.

Just a day after a commission leader said the panel had reached consensus and would release its findings on Wednesday, members of Congress seized on the report as their own benchmark for success.

"The fact that they reached a consensus poses a challenge to the Congress to try and reach its own consensus with the president," said outgoing Senate Armed Services Committee Chairman John Warner, a Republican.

And Democratic Senator Christopher Dodd said the report could foster "growing bipartisan support in this country."

Under the panel's recommendations, U.S. troops could be pulled back slowly from the front lines, acting as more of a support structure for the Iraqi security forces, officials said. Several officials spoke about the report on condition of anonymity because the panel's deliberations were private.

Some media reports suggested that the commission will recommend withdrawing nearly all U.S. combat forces from Iraq by early 2008, leaving behind only those troops needed to train and support the Iraqis. The reports described the recommendation as a goal rather than a firm timetable.

Advisers to the panel and others aware of its work also noted that many of the recommendations will not differ greatly from either current policy or from ideas already under debate within the administration.

Mr. Bush has repeatedly rejected a wholesale troop withdrawal or what he calls artificial deadlines, vowing that he would not "pull the troops off the battlefield before the mission is complete."

"This business about a graceful exit just simply has no realism to it at all," he said Thursday.

Meanwhile, in an interview with the Arabic satellite TV station Al-Arabiya, Rice admitted to mistakes in the Iraq war, but she says people will have to wait until she's out of office to find out what she thinks they were.

She says someday she can write books about that.

In Iraq:

A U.S. soldier was killed in fighting in the volatile Anbar province, the American military said Saturday. The soldier, who was assigned to the 1st Battalion, 1st Armored Division, died Friday from wounds sustained due to enemy action in the insurgent stronghold that stretches west from Baghdad to the Iraqi borders with Syria, Jordan and Saudi Arabia, according to a statement. The soldier's name was not released pending notification
of relatives.

At least 2,887 members of the U.S. military have died since the Iraq war started in March 2003, according to an Associated Press count.

American forces conducted several raids in and around Baghdad on Friday, killing two insurgents and wounding an Iraqi woman the militants were using as a "human shield," the U.S. command said. In the Taji area, coalition forces fought with insurgents, killing one and "wounding a female local national who was being used as human shield by the terrorist," the U.S. command said in a statement. The female, whose name and age were not given, was hospitalized in stable condition, the U.S. military said. American soldiers also detained 14 suspected insurgents during the raid, including "a known foreign fighter facilitator" who was not identified.

There was no sign that Iraqi Prime Minister Nouri al-Maliki was having any luck stopping a widening revolt within his divided government. Vice President Tariq al-Hashemi said he wanted to see al-Maliki's government gone and another "understanding" for a new coalition put in place with guarantees that ensure collective decision making. Al-Maliki's No. 2, Deputy Prime Minister Salam Zikam Ali al-Zubaie, also a Sunni, argued that the president's government failed to curb the spread of sectarian politics. Meanwhile, 30 Shiite lawmakers loyal to radical anti-American cleric Muqtada al-Sadr continued their boycott of government dealings.

A roadside bomb also exploded in a commercial square in the center of Baghdad, killing three civilians and wounding 17, said police Lt. Ali Muhsin said.

A bomb in a parked car exploded near a fruit and vegetable market in northeast Baghdad, killing two Iraqis and wounding 16, said police Lt. Bilal Ali Majid.

In Sadiyah, a primarily Sunni area of southwestern Baghdad, a Shiite man was killed and six of his relatives were wounded when a bomb explosion drew them outside their house Friday morning, and a second bomb then exploded right near them, a police officer said on condition of anonymity to protect his own security.


©MMVI, CBS Broadcasting Inc. All Rights Reserved. This material may not be published, broadcast, rewritten, or redistributed. The Associated Press contributed to this report.

Share:

Digg

Facebook

Yahoo! Buzz

Twitter

Mixx

More From Iraq After Saddam

• Chief Pentagon Auditor Forced from Post
• AP: Military Contractor Oversight Too Lax
• Top Saddam Aide Gets Second Conviction
• Bombs Claim 50 in Iraq
• Biden Meets with Key U.S. Leaders in Iraq
• Senate Investigates Blackwater Subsidiary
• Celebration, Carnage Mark Handover in Iraq

• 

  PhotosExplosions Rock Baghdad

• 

  PhotosIraq Photos:July 13?July 19

Add a Comment

• 1
• 2
• next

See all 27 Comments

by pakaal December 2, 2006 11:25 PM EST

inarguable, you said "However, the western world has decimated radical Christianity in the last 400 years, moving it into the ideological backfield."

Tell that to the generals spouting off that us being in Iraq is part of a "holy war", and to the radical Christianists in America who believe the same, including our President George Bush, as well as to the folks who say we must support Israel NOT because they are a downtrodden people who finally found a home but because they protect the Christians' access to the "holy land".

Reply to this comment

by pakaal December 2, 2006 11:22 PM EST

inarguable, you said "The fact is that we will HAVE to engage radial Islam at some point, of that there should be NO doubt, and a certain amount of violence (i.e.Iraq) is a sad but necessary evil."

The first part of your statement makes sense, but violence is hardly a "sad but necessary evil" as you put it. Not to mention that saying engaging radical Islam in Iraq is completely inaccurate. Iraq had a secular government until we toppled it. Saddam was a brutal monster, but he was not a religious leader. Apartheid was ended in South Africa due to diplomacy and embargoes, not military intervention. Diplomacy works, when applied effectively. Unfortunately, the Bush Administration did very little of that - ineffectively - and ended dragging America into a war there - ineffectively.

Reply to this comment

by patriotic9 December 2, 2006 12:49 AM EST

I think One extremist religious group cannot defeat another.Only people who could defeat the RADICAL ISLAM were the ATHIEST RUSSIANS who were defeated by EXTREMIST ISLAMIST in AFGHANISTAN by the help of their RADICAL CHRISTIAN BROTHERS from UNITED STATES under REAGAN ADMINSITRATION who had given MONEY,MILITARY TRAINING and WEAPONS to OSAMA BEEN FORGOTTEN.
All the CHRISTIANS,MUSLIMS and JEWS were brothers while fighting against GOD-LESS RUSSIANS.Now they are fighting against each other eventhough they all believe in the existance of GOD with different names after that they will be fighting on the name of different sects in their own religions which has started in IRAQ between shias and sunnis and so on.As long as people do belive in the presence and existance of GOD,fights will be continued to make rich richer and poor poorer and the GOD won't be able to come infront of those fighting believers and tell them don't fight on my name,I never ordered you to do that.

Reply to this comment

by patriotic9 December 2, 2006 12:28 AM EST

Don't you think the killing of a CHRISTIAN LEADER in LEBANON is also associated with the plan of second coming of their final messiah IMAM MEHDI?Do you think SHIA from IRAN to LEBANON could be so powerful if we didn't remove a SECULAR GOVT in IRAQ?Do you think Radical SUNNI insurgents could be so powerful in IRAQI AL ANBAR PROVINCE if we didn't remove SADDAM whose intelligence used to keep eye on people who used to worship in mosques five times a day?If we were smart people ,we'd have used SADDAM to fight against Alqaeda like we had used him before to fight gainst IRANIAN AYATOLLAHs.What do you think.

Reply to this comment

by patriotic9 December 2, 2006 12:07 AM EST

I might be harsh but I think eventhough,it wasn't wise to invade Iraq,it's very important for us to invade Iran (to control SHIA INFLUENCE in Iraq)and to invade Syria(to stop the flow of SUNNI INSURGENTS in AL ANBAR province) and not to repeat the same mistake of bringing democracy to any other MIDDLE EASTERN COUNTRY.
Saudi Arabia is another source of RADICALISM but atleast their border with Iraq is with the SHIA POPULATED IRAQI cities who won't let SAUDI SUNNIs evter IRAQ through their provinces.

Reply to this comment

by patriotic9 December 2, 2006 12:01 AM EST

I think Chaos in Iraq is much better then stabilty under a religious govt.Religious govt in Iraq will result in the formation of an ISLAMIC EMPIRE from Iran in the EAST to LEBANON in the WEST ruled under those AYATOLLAHs who consider us the GREATEST SATAN.Once they get the control of all the MIDDLE EASTERN OIL,we'll be thrown back into stone age.
This is only about SHIA RADICALS,we havent discussed the danger posed by SUNNIs specially the WAHHABIs.

Reply to this comment

by patriotic9 December 1, 2006 11:56 PM EST

I think a SECULAR DICTATOR in MIDDLE EAST is much better then a DEMOCRATICALLY elected RELIGIOUS RADICAL.I am glad to talk to you as you seem to have much more knowledge then an average JOE.
Saddam was a SECULAR DICTATOR.The most benifited and previleged people at the time of Saddam were Iraqi catholics called Caldians because he was aware of the fact that in a muslim counrty like iraq,nobody would like to see a Catholic being a President.We have removed Sadddam from power and as a result a RADICAL EXTREMIST SHIA named MALIKI who is practically a GOVERNOR from IRAN has been brought into power who is taking our tax money and our weapons to arme his SHIA BROTHERS not only in IRAQ but also HEZBOLLAH in LEBANON in order to help the second coming of their final MESSIAH Imam MEHDI who is the twelfth imam according to Iranian and Iraqi shias.They do believe as you know that their final imam will kill all the unbelievers and form an ISLAMIC EMPIRE.I really sad about the fact that these radicals didn't have to spend a single penny or bullet for acheiving their objectives but they used our tax money and our soldier's lives just like BIN LADEN had done in the past when he used the REAGAN ADMINISTRATION.

Reply to this comment

by patriotic9 December 1, 2006 11:44 PM EST

Inarguable
"Western world has decimated radical Christianity in the last 400 year"
This may be true about Europe but not about United States where the main reason why Homosexuals don't have right to marry like Heterosexual citizens is because of the involvement of RADICAL CHRISTIANITY in our politics.Why women don't have equal rights like men is again because of RADICAL CHRISTIANITY's involvement in our polictics.Pres.Bill Clinton was an adult mature man and Monica Lewinky was an adult mature woman.If they were involved in sexual intimacy,why majority of Americans had opposed their actions.Again because of the INTOLERANCE taught by RADICAL CHRISTIANITY.If you tell those RADICAL CHRISTIANS in UNITED STATES that according to the study done in University of Illinois "men are GENETICALLY PROGRAMMED to cheat on their wives"do you think they will care about whether how accurate that scientific study was or not.I bet they will only care about what BIBLE had said thousands of years ago"Thou shalt not comit adultry".They won't even try to think why Bible had forbidden adultry thousands of years ago when people didn't use to have CONDOMS and why it's not right to implement that thousands of years old bible today.

Reply to this comment

by inarguable December 1, 2006 11:29 PM EST

Patriotic9 - you are also totally correct when saying that intolerance is a huge part of all extremist religions. However, the western world has decimated radical Christianity in the last 400 years, moving it into the ideological backfield. In the west, many like to say they are Christian, but in truth our religion now is Capitalism, with hardcore faith worship playing a minor role in our day to day lives. A HUGE portion of the Islamic world however today still behaves as Christianity did during the days of the Inquisition, demanding absolute and rigid adherence to the sayings and deeds of the Prophet Mohammad, with draconian penalties still enforced. Freedom and Democracy and the fundamental right to choose has almost nullified radical Christianity's grasp on our western society today, with violence in the name of the church being very rare indeed. Basically, the hope is to use freedom, democracy, and allowing for the free exchange of ideas to slowly alter and water-down radical Islam so that it more closely resembles the non-violent design and worship that Christianity exercises today. This will take decades to achieve however as the radical mindset is slowly culled from the Islamic herd.

Reply to this comment

by inarguable December 1, 2006 11:19 PM EST

Patriotic9 - Installing Freedom and Democracy are the only ways we will ever achieve peace. Since 1816, in over 2000 major conflicts worldwide, NOT A SINGLE CONFLICT has ever been fought between two stabilized democracies. Free democratic societies create a built-in method of negotiation and conflict resolution via the Charters and Constitutions that allow for peace to be effectively sought before reaching the point of no return. Now, it is not going to be pretty early on, no question, but this conflict is a multi-generational one that will be going on for many decades yet, and creating free and democratic societies is our best option to avoid widescale future bloodshed that will make the violence in Iraq look minor in comparison. The fact is that we will HAVE to engage radial Islam at some point, of that there should be NO doubt, and a certain amount of violence (i.e.Iraq) is a sad but necessary evil to attempt to secure a true long-term peace and hopefully avoid massive warfare in the future. I am of the mindset however (as is virtually EVERY other expert in the field) that our conflict with radical Islam will get FAR worse before it gets better.

Reply to this comment

by patriotic9 December 1, 2006 10:46 PM EST

Intolerance is not only a part of Radical Islam but it's the part of all religious extremism.We face the same problem by RADICAL CHRISTIANS in our country who are very intolerant to people of different lifestyles specially HOMOSEXUALS.Most of the European countries have legalized HOMOSEXUAL MARRIAGES but in United States,it's still illegal which is a discrimination on the basis of SEXUAL ORIENTATION.Samething with other issues like PROSTITUTION,WOMEN'S EQUAL RIGHT(In United States a man is legally allowed to run and jog on the street completely TOPLESS but if a woman comits the same action,she may get arrested on the name of INDECENT EXPOSURE.Same action completely decent for a man is so indecent for a woman that she may be thrown into jail which is a DISCRIMINATION on the basis of GENDER).I know RADICAL ISLAM is a little more intolerant compare to other religions,but if you look at any religion,it's foundation is based on INTOLERANCE and VIOLATION OF HUMAN RIGHTS.One problem with the religious people of any faith is that when they get a command from their religious book,they don't use common sense at all and fully submit to their religious ideology irrespective of how NON-SENSE that ideology may be.

Reply to this comment

by patriotic9 December 1, 2006 10:35 PM EST

Democracy means govt of the people.Do you think bringing democracy to Middle Eastern countries like Iraq,Saudi Arabia,Egypt,etc is good and benificial for United States or bad.We have already seen the election results in Iraq in the form of Maliki and in Palestine in the form of Hamas.

Reply to this comment

by inarguable December 1, 2006 10:27 PM EST

Patriotic9-I only have 1500 words here, so i am not going to get into the explanation of the ideological differences between the two primary branches of the Islamic faith here, as that can be (and should be) easily looked up online by everyone here. As to WHY people who voice absolutist viewpoints regarding the Iraq conflict should have that knowledge BEFORE forming a concrete opinion on the subject comes down to being able to appreciate and understand the enemy we face. Having spent years studying fundamentalist Islam and having lived in the Middle East for 6 months, what continues to amaze me is that the average person in our western society simply does not bother to understand the radical, theologically driven mindset that allows people to religiously justify to themselves the mass murder of others who hold a different ideological viewpoint. The sectarian strife in Iraq today is a clear-cut example of what happens when ignorance and fundamentalism combine to create an environment that breeds intolerance, and it would be foolish to imagine that we can ever have a hope of defeating or nullifying this threat if we don%u2019t appreciate why and how they are able to justify the use of extreme violence as their primary method of conflict resolution. Everyone in the free world should read the Holy Quran, the Hadiths, and Sharia to gain a basic knowledge of what drives the followers of fundamentalist Islam, as the P/C media will not even broach the subject out of fear of offending.

Reply to this comment

by inarguable December 1, 2006 9:55 PM EST

BlondMadison - Your comments exhibit an obvious ignorance of the incredible threat potential radical Islam presents to the free world, as well as a clear misunderstanding of the long-term purpose behind the invasion of Iraq. You do little else besides vehemently attack President Bush, but fail to demonstrate even the slightest appreciation of the nuance and complexities involved in this LONG-TERM struggle. We are facing an enemy today in radical Islam that is FAR more threatening than that which the "Evil Empire", the USSR, presented us during the Cold War, and myopic thinkers (non-thinkers actually) like you who lack the foundational base of knowledge of the subject matter and of the enemy we face love to demand immediate solutions to hyper-complex issues that CANNOT be simplified just to match your lack of understanding. Even your statements about nations like North Korea or Iran exhibits a total ignorance of those dictatorial nation states, the ideology fuelling their leadership, and the historical precedents involved. This is an evil and hyper-complex world, and not everyone lives on safe little black-and-white planet Alec-Baldwinia where you seem to reside. You should keep an open mind, do some homework, and actually learn about what you are talking about BEFORE forming and voicing hard and fast emotionally-based opinions that lack even the slightest ounce of pragmatism to support them. Knowledge is power, and ignorance is most certainly not bliss.

Reply to this comment

by patriotic9 December 1, 2006 9:29 PM EST

inarguable
Would you please tell us from your knowledge and experiences what are the basic differences between SHIA and SUNNI ISLAM and why we as Americans need to know those differences.

Reply to this comment

by inarguable December 1, 2006 8:00 PM EST

It is stunning to me how myopically short-sighted many people are, and even worse, how ignorant the vast bulk of our society is to the level of threat we face from radical Islam. People seem to be amazed that Iraq did not immediately fall into a stable, Jeffersonian style democracy, and that exposes the fundamental ignorances the Western World has regarding the Arab/Islamic world. As a terrorism analyst for a major NGO global think-tank who has almost a full decade of studying the threat of radical Islam specifically, it never ceases to amaze me how many people rapidly form absolutist, concrete opinions about this subject without possessing or bothering to gain themselves a true foundational base of knowledge of the subject matter. These issues are so incredibly nuanced and complex, and maintaining an open-mind and thinking pragmatically rather than emotionally is the only way to truly understand and appreciate what we are up against. In my line of work i deal with people who will argue incessantly about sectarian violence in Iraq, but when i ask them to explain the ideological difference between a Sunni and a Shi'a Muslim, they cannot even answer that most BASIC of questions about the faith of Islam. People should LEARN the nuance and complexities BEFORE coming to hard and fast conclusions that they cannot back up. Unless you can adequately explain with facts how you achieved that POV, then you should keep an open mind and not be so absolutist in your conclusions.

Reply to this comment

by jn122736 December 1, 2006 7:29 PM EST

The dung pit this administration has dug us into in Iraq is virtually unsalvageable. Neither the republicans nor democrats have any idea what actually to do next (specified steps)?

Americans as a whole have an inexplicably optimistic nature. Why else do millions of us continue to buy lottery tickets with the odds against winning being what they are?

%u2026 Most of us have placed tall hopes on this commission finding the magic bullet to get us out of this mess when we really don%u2019t believe there is one.

The bottom line is, no matter how soon or late we accept Iraq as a loss and withdraw, Hugh costs will follow, not the least to our egos.
%u2026 The longer we take to decide, the more American servicemen and women will be sacrificed.

Just h much is our egos worth?

Reply to this comment

by blondmadison December 1, 2006 6:51 PM EST

"THE MEDIA, AND OUR UNIVERSITIES ARE TO BLAME FOR IRAQ!"

I disagree. We can't blame the media or the universities. When Saddam was given a deadline--at the last hour, he honored the deadline. He held his hand out, offering to Dan Rather to tell George W that he wanted to talk.

George W decided he could take our troops lives in his hands and if we lost a few,well, "we all knew there would be casualties in a war."

That's not the media, that's not the universities. That's the mentality of a spoiled rich white boy who has lived with secret service protecting his -ss all of his life--a person who does not have to hold the lives of civilians as precious.

There will never be anyone else to blame for this other than George W. Bush. He acts the same with North Korea and he acts the same with Iran. He won't speak to them?

He has no right to not speak to another country. The huge stupid -ss is a world leader. IT'S HIS JOB TO SPEAK TO COUNTRIES HE DOES NOT LIKE. IT'S HIS JOB.

Reply to this comment

by trueprogress December 1, 2006 2:29 PM EST

THE MEDIA, AND OUR UNIVERSITIES ARE TO BLAME FOR IRAQ !


IT is not our doing that the Iraqi nation is killing its own innocents.
It is our media and University fault for filling us up with "Multicultural" Blather, that "All cutures are the same", and "Who are we to Judge" crapola, so now we are shocked.
Hey ! Our culture is better. IT is like going to another planet of barbarians and fanatics.
We brought them a chance for Democracy . Remember, "power to the People." and Democracy NOw ! We are the most decent people on earth.

If the media had shown the real Arab PAlestinean barbarism ( targeting Isreali school buses, women and children, biologic germs in roadside bombs still, gauging eyes, killing ***, honor killing of young girls, still have slavery ! ) instead of the "Even handed" approach, we would have known. Ditto University. Ditto our State Dept.

Reply to this comment

by rsoxfan1123 December 1, 2006 1:43 PM EST

frankly6-very true.

Reply to this comment

• 1
• 2
• next

See all 27 Comments

Add a comment

Comment SUBMIT

Click here to add another comment.

The posting of advertisements, profanity, or personal attacks is prohibited. By using this Web site you agree to accept our Terms of Service. Click here to read the Rules of Engagement.

Comment reply

Submit Cancel

The posting of advertisements, profanity, or personal attacks is prohibited. By using this Web site you agree to accept our Terms of Service. Click here to read the Rules of Engagement.

Report offensive content:

If you believe this comment is offensive or violates the CBSNews.com Terms of Use, you can report it below (this will not automatically remove the comment). Once reported, our staff will be notified and the comment will be reviewed.

Select type of offense:

Offensive: Sexually explicit or offensive language

Spam: Advertisements, commercial links, or repetitive posts

Disruptive posting: Flaming or offending other users

Illegal activities: Promote cracked software, or other illegal content

Off-topic: Commentary unrelated to the storyline

Comments (optional):

Report Cancel

E-mail this comment to a friend.

E-mail this to: (Separate multiple e-mail addresses with commas. Limited to 10 addresses.)

Your e-mail address:

Send me a copy of this message

Note: Your e-mail address is used only to let the recipient know who sent the e-mail and in case of transmission error. Neither your address nor the recipients's address will be used for any other purpose.

Add your own personal message: (Optional)

Hi, I found this user's comment on CBSNews.com and thought you might be interested in reading it. Send e-mail Cancel

[pakaal]

inarguable, you said "However, the western world has decimated radical Christianity in the last 400 years, moving it into the ideological backfield."

Tell that to the generals spouting off that us being in Iraq is part of a "holy war", and to the radical Christianists in America who believe the same, including our President George Bush, as well as to the folks who say we must support Israel NOT because they are a downtrodden people who finally found a home but because they protect the Christians' access to the "holy land".

[pakaal]

inarguable, you said "The fact is that we will HAVE to engage radial Islam at some point, of that there should be NO doubt, and a certain amount of violence (i.e.Iraq) is a sad but necessary evil."

The first part of your statement makes sense, but violence is hardly a "sad but necessary evil" as you put it. Not to mention that saying engaging radical Islam in Iraq is completely inaccurate. Iraq had a secular government until we toppled it. Saddam was a brutal monster, but he was not a religious leader. Apartheid was ended in South Africa due to diplomacy and embargoes, not military intervention. Diplomacy works, when applied effectively. Unfortunately, the Bush Administration did very little of that - ineffectively - and ended dragging America into a war there - ineffectively.

[patriotic9]

I think One extremist religious group cannot defeat another.Only people who could defeat the RADICAL ISLAM were the ATHIEST RUSSIANS who were defeated by EXTREMIST ISLAMIST in AFGHANISTAN by the help of their RADICAL CHRISTIAN BROTHERS from UNITED STATES under REAGAN ADMINSITRATION who had given MONEY,MILITARY TRAINING and WEAPONS to OSAMA BEEN FORGOTTEN.
All the CHRISTIANS,MUSLIMS and JEWS were brothers while fighting against GOD-LESS RUSSIANS.Now they are fighting against each other eventhough they all believe in the existance of GOD with different names after that they will be fighting on the name of different sects in their own religions which has started in IRAQ between shias and sunnis and so on.As long as people do belive in the presence and existance of GOD,fights will be continued to make rich richer and poor poorer and the GOD won't be able to come infront of those fighting believers and tell them don't fight on my name,I never ordered you to do that.

[patriotic9]

Don't you think the killing of a CHRISTIAN LEADER in LEBANON is also associated with the plan of second coming of their final messiah IMAM MEHDI?Do you think SHIA from IRAN to LEBANON could be so powerful if we didn't remove a SECULAR GOVT in IRAQ?Do you think Radical SUNNI insurgents could be so powerful in IRAQI AL ANBAR PROVINCE if we didn't remove SADDAM whose intelligence used to keep eye on people who used to worship in mosques five times a day?If we were smart people ,we'd have used SADDAM to fight against Alqaeda like we had used him before to fight gainst IRANIAN AYATOLLAHs.What do you think.

[patriotic9]

I might be harsh but I think eventhough,it wasn't wise to invade Iraq,it's very important for us to invade Iran (to control SHIA INFLUENCE in Iraq)and to invade Syria(to stop the flow of SUNNI INSURGENTS in AL ANBAR province) and not to repeat the same mistake of bringing democracy to any other MIDDLE EASTERN COUNTRY.
Saudi Arabia is another source of RADICALISM but atleast their border with Iraq is with the SHIA POPULATED IRAQI cities who won't let SAUDI SUNNIs evter IRAQ through their provinces.

[patriotic9]

I think Chaos in Iraq is much better then stabilty under a religious govt.Religious govt in Iraq will result in the formation of an ISLAMIC EMPIRE from Iran in the EAST to LEBANON in the WEST ruled under those AYATOLLAHs who consider us the GREATEST SATAN.Once they get the control of all the MIDDLE EASTERN OIL,we'll be thrown back into stone age.
This is only about SHIA RADICALS,we havent discussed the danger posed by SUNNIs specially the WAHHABIs.

[patriotic9]

I think a SECULAR DICTATOR in MIDDLE EAST is much better then a DEMOCRATICALLY elected RELIGIOUS RADICAL.I am glad to talk to you as you seem to have much more knowledge then an average JOE.
Saddam was a SECULAR DICTATOR.The most benifited and previleged people at the time of Saddam were Iraqi catholics called Caldians because he was aware of the fact that in a muslim counrty like iraq,nobody would like to see a Catholic being a President.We have removed Sadddam from power and as a result a RADICAL EXTREMIST SHIA named MALIKI who is practically a GOVERNOR from IRAN has been brought into power who is taking our tax money and our weapons to arme his SHIA BROTHERS not only in IRAQ but also HEZBOLLAH in LEBANON in order to help the second coming of their final MESSIAH Imam MEHDI who is the twelfth imam according to Iranian and Iraqi shias.They do believe as you know that their final imam will kill all the unbelievers and form an ISLAMIC EMPIRE.I really sad about the fact that these radicals didn't have to spend a single penny or bullet for acheiving their objectives but they used our tax money and our soldier's lives just like BIN LADEN had done in the past when he used the REAGAN ADMINISTRATION.

[patriotic9]

Inarguable
"Western world has decimated radical Christianity in the last 400 year"
This may be true about Europe but not about United States where the main reason why Homosexuals don't have right to marry like Heterosexual citizens is because of the involvement of RADICAL CHRISTIANITY in our politics.Why women don't have equal rights like men is again because of RADICAL CHRISTIANITY's involvement in our polictics.Pres.Bill Clinton was an adult mature man and Monica Lewinky was an adult mature woman.If they were involved in sexual intimacy,why majority of Americans had opposed their actions.Again because of the INTOLERANCE taught by RADICAL CHRISTIANITY.If you tell those RADICAL CHRISTIANS in UNITED STATES that according to the study done in University of Illinois "men are GENETICALLY PROGRAMMED to cheat on their wives"do you think they will care about whether how accurate that scientific study was or not.I bet they will only care about what BIBLE had said thousands of years ago"Thou shalt not comit adultry".They won't even try to think why Bible had forbidden adultry thousands of years ago when people didn't use to have CONDOMS and why it's not right to implement that thousands of years old bible today.

[inarguable]

Patriotic9 - you are also totally correct when saying that intolerance is a huge part of all extremist religions. However, the western world has decimated radical Christianity in the last 400 years, moving it into the ideological backfield. In the west, many like to say they are Christian, but in truth our religion now is Capitalism, with hardcore faith worship playing a minor role in our day to day lives. A HUGE portion of the Islamic world however today still behaves as Christianity did during the days of the Inquisition, demanding absolute and rigid adherence to the sayings and deeds of the Prophet Mohammad, with draconian penalties still enforced. Freedom and Democracy and the fundamental right to choose has almost nullified radical Christianity's grasp on our western society today, with violence in the name of the church being very rare indeed. Basically, the hope is to use freedom, democracy, and allowing for the free exchange of ideas to slowly alter and water-down radical Islam so that it more closely resembles the non-violent design and worship that Christianity exercises today. This will take decades to achieve however as the radical mindset is slowly culled from the Islamic herd.

[inarguable]

Patriotic9 - Installing Freedom and Democracy are the only ways we will ever achieve peace. Since 1816, in over 2000 major conflicts worldwide, NOT A SINGLE CONFLICT has ever been fought between two stabilized democracies. Free democratic societies create a built-in method of negotiation and conflict resolution via the Charters and Constitutions that allow for peace to be effectively sought before reaching the point of no return. Now, it is not going to be pretty early on, no question, but this conflict is a multi-generational one that will be going on for many decades yet, and creating free and democratic societies is our best option to avoid widescale future bloodshed that will make the violence in Iraq look minor in comparison. The fact is that we will HAVE to engage radial Islam at some point, of that there should be NO doubt, and a certain amount of violence (i.e.Iraq) is a sad but necessary evil to attempt to secure a true long-term peace and hopefully avoid massive warfare in the future. I am of the mindset however (as is virtually EVERY other expert in the field) that our conflict with radical Islam will get FAR worse before it gets better.

[patriotic9]

Intolerance is not only a part of Radical Islam but it's the part of all religious extremism.We face the same problem by RADICAL CHRISTIANS in our country who are very intolerant to people of different lifestyles specially HOMOSEXUALS.Most of the European countries have legalized HOMOSEXUAL MARRIAGES but in United States,it's still illegal which is a discrimination on the basis of SEXUAL ORIENTATION.Samething with other issues like PROSTITUTION,WOMEN'S EQUAL RIGHT(In United States a man is legally allowed to run and jog on the street completely TOPLESS but if a woman comits the same action,she may get arrested on the name of INDECENT EXPOSURE.Same action completely decent for a man is so indecent for a woman that she may be thrown into jail which is a DISCRIMINATION on the basis of GENDER).I know RADICAL ISLAM is a little more intolerant compare to other religions,but if you look at any religion,it's foundation is based on INTOLERANCE and VIOLATION OF HUMAN RIGHTS.One problem with the religious people of any faith is that when they get a command from their religious book,they don't use common sense at all and fully submit to their religious ideology irrespective of how NON-SENSE that ideology may be.

[patriotic9]

Democracy means govt of the people.Do you think bringing democracy to Middle Eastern countries like Iraq,Saudi Arabia,Egypt,etc is good and benificial for United States or bad.We have already seen the election results in Iraq in the form of Maliki and in Palestine in the form of Hamas.

[inarguable]

Patriotic9-I only have 1500 words here, so i am not going to get into the explanation of the ideological differences between the two primary branches of the Islamic faith here, as that can be (and should be) easily looked up online by everyone here. As to WHY people who voice absolutist viewpoints regarding the Iraq conflict should have that knowledge BEFORE forming a concrete opinion on the subject comes down to being able to appreciate and understand the enemy we face. Having spent years studying fundamentalist Islam and having lived in the Middle East for 6 months, what continues to amaze me is that the average person in our western society simply does not bother to understand the radical, theologically driven mindset that allows people to religiously justify to themselves the mass murder of others who hold a different ideological viewpoint. The sectarian strife in Iraq today is a clear-cut example of what happens when ignorance and fundamentalism combine to create an environment that breeds intolerance, and it would be foolish to imagine that we can ever have a hope of defeating or nullifying this threat if we don%u2019t appreciate why and how they are able to justify the use of extreme violence as their primary method of conflict resolution. Everyone in the free world should read the Holy Quran, the Hadiths, and Sharia to gain a basic knowledge of what drives the followers of fundamentalist Islam, as the P/C media will not even broach the subject out of fear of offending.

[inarguable]

BlondMadison - Your comments exhibit an obvious ignorance of the incredible threat potential radical Islam presents to the free world, as well as a clear misunderstanding of the long-term purpose behind the invasion of Iraq. You do little else besides vehemently attack President Bush, but fail to demonstrate even the slightest appreciation of the nuance and complexities involved in this LONG-TERM struggle. We are facing an enemy today in radical Islam that is FAR more threatening than that which the "Evil Empire", the USSR, presented us during the Cold War, and myopic thinkers (non-thinkers actually) like you who lack the foundational base of knowledge of the subject matter and of the enemy we face love to demand immediate solutions to hyper-complex issues that CANNOT be simplified just to match your lack of understanding. Even your statements about nations like North Korea or Iran exhibits a total ignorance of those dictatorial nation states, the ideology fuelling their leadership, and the historical precedents involved. This is an evil and hyper-complex world, and not everyone lives on safe little black-and-white planet Alec-Baldwinia where you seem to reside. You should keep an open mind, do some homework, and actually learn about what you are talking about BEFORE forming and voicing hard and fast emotionally-based opinions that lack even the slightest ounce of pragmatism to support them. Knowledge is power, and ignorance is most certainly not bliss.

[patriotic9]

inarguable
Would you please tell us from your knowledge and experiences what are the basic differences between SHIA and SUNNI ISLAM and why we as Americans need to know those differences.

[inarguable]

It is stunning to me how myopically short-sighted many people are, and even worse, how ignorant the vast bulk of our society is to the level of threat we face from radical Islam. People seem to be amazed that Iraq did not immediately fall into a stable, Jeffersonian style democracy, and that exposes the fundamental ignorances the Western World has regarding the Arab/Islamic world. As a terrorism analyst for a major NGO global think-tank who has almost a full decade of studying the threat of radical Islam specifically, it never ceases to amaze me how many people rapidly form absolutist, concrete opinions about this subject without possessing or bothering to gain themselves a true foundational base of knowledge of the subject matter. These issues are so incredibly nuanced and complex, and maintaining an open-mind and thinking pragmatically rather than emotionally is the only way to truly understand and appreciate what we are up against. In my line of work i deal with people who will argue incessantly about sectarian violence in Iraq, but when i ask them to explain the ideological difference between a Sunni and a Shi'a Muslim, they cannot even answer that most BASIC of questions about the faith of Islam. People should LEARN the nuance and complexities BEFORE coming to hard and fast conclusions that they cannot back up. Unless you can adequately explain with facts how you achieved that POV, then you should keep an open mind and not be so absolutist in your conclusions.

[jn122736]

The dung pit this administration has dug us into in Iraq is virtually unsalvageable. Neither the republicans nor democrats have any idea what actually to do next (specified steps)?

Americans as a whole have an inexplicably optimistic nature. Why else do millions of us continue to buy lottery tickets with the odds against winning being what they are?

%u2026 Most of us have placed tall hopes on this commission finding the magic bullet to get us out of this mess when we really don%u2019t believe there is one.

The bottom line is, no matter how soon or late we accept Iraq as a loss and withdraw, Hugh costs will follow, not the least to our egos.
%u2026 The longer we take to decide, the more American servicemen and women will be sacrificed.

Just h much is our egos worth?

[blondmadison]

"THE MEDIA, AND OUR UNIVERSITIES ARE TO BLAME FOR IRAQ!"

I disagree. We can't blame the media or the universities. When Saddam was given a deadline--at the last hour, he honored the deadline. He held his hand out, offering to Dan Rather to tell George W that he wanted to talk.

George W decided he could take our troops lives in his hands and if we lost a few,well, "we all knew there would be casualties in a war."

That's not the media, that's not the universities. That's the mentality of a spoiled rich white boy who has lived with secret service protecting his -ss all of his life--a person who does not have to hold the lives of civilians as precious.

There will never be anyone else to blame for this other than George W. Bush. He acts the same with North Korea and he acts the same with Iran. He won't speak to them?

He has no right to not speak to another country. The huge stupid -ss is a world leader. IT'S HIS JOB TO SPEAK TO COUNTRIES HE DOES NOT LIKE. IT'S HIS JOB.

[trueprogress]

THE MEDIA, AND OUR UNIVERSITIES ARE TO BLAME FOR IRAQ !


IT is not our doing that the Iraqi nation is killing its own innocents.
It is our media and University fault for filling us up with "Multicultural" Blather, that "All cutures are the same", and "Who are we to Judge" crapola, so now we are shocked.
Hey ! Our culture is better. IT is like going to another planet of barbarians and fanatics.
We brought them a chance for Democracy . Remember, "power to the People." and Democracy NOw ! We are the most decent people on earth.

If the media had shown the real Arab PAlestinean barbarism ( targeting Isreali school buses, women and children, biologic germs in roadside bombs still, gauging eyes, killing ***, honor killing of young girls, still have slavery ! ) instead of the "Even handed" approach, we would have known. Ditto University. Ditto our State Dept.

[rsoxfan1123]

frankly6-very true.