Declare Victory, because Victory is won

With Iraq’s response to every outrage and bombing, the thousand-year victorybecomes more complete. In November, less than one million Iraqis (nearly all of whom were part of the Sunni Arab regime) had left the country. Now the number is more than two million.

At the same time, the parliament of Iraq wishes to be consulted before the UN reauthorizes the US Mandate over Iraq. The civil war which Iraqi Sunni rejectionists started, to beat the people of Iraq into submission, is all but won by the people of Iraq.

Our Victorious Ally

It is hard to imagine a path where they could return to power, though many still advocate paying danegeld to baathists and the antidemocratic tribes, reasoning that cool self-interest on the part of the Sunni Arab tribes which would have prevented this civil war will spontaneously appear when money is put on the tabel.

America does not need to be in Iraq. We should leave Iraq. We merely need to provide money, materiel, and air cover to Iraq. American forces would be better spend in intensively building up Kuwait and Kurdistan (the so-called “2K Solution“) than directly fighting a civil war which is now a foregone conclusion.

President Bush, declare victory. Because you have won. America has won. Iraq has won.

And those who respond to ballots with bullets have lost.

4 thoughts on “Declare Victory, because Victory is won”

  1. This guy also agrees with you. Let go of the impossible dream regarding a politically (and therefore philosophically) united Iraq. The 2k strategy is excellent. Allow Iraq to become what it, by real design, should be.

  2. The book author — at least as he is represented in the review. The author seems, with variations in detail. to also believe we have won in Iraq.

    The reviewer is of a more orthodox viewpoint.

  3. Lexington,

    Thanks again for the review, and the explanation. I think I”m more sympathetic to Kaufman than the reviewer is, and I recognize that the reviewer makes simplistic arguments to attack a view he disagrees with.

    On two points, though, Kaufman himself seems to be wrong:

    “He believes it was really the foreign-policy team of the late president Richard Nixon and his secretary of state, Henry Kissinger, that initiated a period of US weakness, with their willingness to accommodate Soviet power and their purely realist emphasis on power politics as opposed to the internal nature of the Soviet regime. “

    The greatest accomplishment of Nixon and Kissinger was turning China into a third force in world politics, breaking the previously apparently monolithic into two warring camps. Waiting-out the Soviet Union as an imperialist power had been the American strategy since the late 1940s, and Nixon did more than any other President to use Communism's previous gains against itself.

    “Considering that even most neo-conservatives have long since abandoned any attempt to argue that the Iraq war was well managed, it is genuinely surprising to come across a reasonably thoughtful author – and Kaufman is one – still willing to defend Bush absolutely to the hilt. Amazingly, Kaufman will not even concede that the Iraq war was badly managed: he calls it a sound application of a sound doctrine. “

    I'm not sure what this means. The Iraq War and was managed brilliantly, from its beginning to the disbanding of the Iraqi Army. Since then, however, the Bush administration has consistently made the wrong decision.

    Thanks again for the tip!

  4. Late to the thread, but:

    “America does not need to be in Iraq. We should leave Iraq. We merely need to provide money, materiel, and air cover to Iraq.”

    Agreed, but one of the lessons of Vietnam is, once the troops are withdrawn the Democrats will cut all funding for supplies and air support.

  5. Kelly,

    Agreed. The Democratic Party attack on the Republic of Vietnam in the 1970s justly prevented them from looking credible on national defense for a generation.

    The current Democratic leadership looks like its attempting to keep that reputation for a generation more. [1]

    Hillary Clinton's comment that the military should expect a commitment in Iraq until at least 2015 [2] shows that not all Democrat Senators are anti-American when it comes to the military.

    But it only takes enough to make the others come along. And it only needs to happen once.


Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *