Chuck Hagel Says "No" to Occupation

Today:

. . . . .The time for more U.S. troops in Iraq has passed. We do not have more troops to send and, even if we did, they would not bring a resolution to Iraq. Militaries are built to fight and win wars, not bind together failing nations. We are once again learning a very hard lesson in foreign affairs: America cannot impose a democracy on any nation -- regardless of our noble purpose.

We have misunderstood, misread, misplanned and mismanaged our honorable intentions in Iraq with an arrogant self-delusion reminiscent of Vietnam. Honorable intentions are not policies and plans.

. . . . . It may take many years before there is a cohesive political center in Iraq. America's options on this point have always been limited. There will be a new center of gravity in the Middle East that will include Iraq. That process began over the past few days with the Syrians and Iraqis restoring diplomatic relations after 20 years of having no formal communication.

What does this tell us? It tells us that regional powers will fill regional vacuums, and they will move to work in their own self-interest -- without the United States. This is the most encouraging set of actions for the Middle East in years. The Middle East is more combustible today than ever before, and until we are able to lead a renewal of the Israeli-Palestinian peace process, mindless destruction and slaughter will continue in Lebanon, Israel and across the Middle East . . . .

The United States must begin planning for a phased troop withdrawal from Iraq. The cost of combat in Iraq in terms of American lives, dollars and world standing has been devastating. We've already spent more than $300 billion there to prosecute an almost four-year-old war and are still spending $8 billion per month. The United States has spent more than $500 billion on our wars in Iraq and Afghanistan. And our effort in Afghanistan continues to deteriorate, partly because we took our focus off the real terrorist threat, which was there, and not in Iraq.

We are destroying our force structure, which took 30 years to build. We've been funding this war dishonestly, mainly through supplemental appropriations, which minimizes responsible congressional oversight and allows the administration to duck tough questions in defending its policies. Congress has abdicated its oversight responsibility in the past four years.

Washington Post

Cut off Funding

Dennis Kucinich:

. . . . Why are we keeping them in an impossible situation? Why are we stoking a civil war with our continued presence? We have to take a new direction in Iraq, and that direction is out.

Now, there are many plans out there. The people talking about phased redeployment, the president as the commander in chief ultimately has the authority to determine the placement of troops. Congress’ real authority, and Congress’ constitutional [mandate] as a co-equal branch of government, requires that it be heard from, and I believe that Congress must exercise its authority to protect the troops by bringing them home. And the only way we can do that effectively is to vote against supplemental appropriations—which has kept the war going, or to vote against appropriation bills which fund the war. That’s Congress’ ultimate power—the power of the purse.

If we truly care about our troops, we’ll get them out. It’s the phoniest argument to say that a cut-off of funds will leave troops stranded in the field. There’s always money in the pipeline to pay for an orderly withdrawal. But those who favor continuing the war or escalating the war are using the troops as a tool to further policies that are against the interests of the troops, against the interests of [the] American people, and against the interests of peace in the world.

....There are many world leaders who are aware of the failed policies of this administration. And even Tony Blair understands that a new direction must be taken if we’re to avoid another war. War with Iran is not inevitable. But we need to talk to the Iranian government, just as we need to open up discussions with the Syrian government. This is the time to do it. You know, There’s a new Congress. The American people voted for a new direction. Let’s take a new direction. Let’s try diplomacy.

TruthDig

Sunni Snipers Taking a Toll

An American serviceman, wounded by a sniper, is dragged toward safety last month in Karma, Iraq.




U.S. troops in Iraq confront growing danger of snipers. Insurgents are better trained and have greater mobility and cover.

New York Times

We'll Stand Down When Iraqis Stand Up?

Ahmed Amr says it's time Americans should ask: Who are we training, if not the Death Squads?

Partition?

Juan Cole says partitioning Iraq may sound like an exit strategy, but it ignores the realities of the middle east.

Politicians of both parties have increasingly cited the idea of dividing Iraq into three distinct entities -- Shiite, Sunni Arab, and Kurd -- as an option that should be seriously considered. For some Republicans, it has become a way to separate themselves from President Bush's unpopular Iraq policy; for some Democrats, it has been a way to avoid the ``cut and run'' label and suggest an alternative to the current course.

. . . . American politicians who advocate breaking up Iraq, or even just the promotion of ethnically based provinces, fail to appreciate the complexity of the issues they are broaching. A unified Iraq is the cornerstone of the Persian Gulf order established after World War I. If that order is violently renegotiated as a result of the partition of Iraq, it could guarantee decades more of violence, guerrilla wars, and still bloodier conflicts.

Mercury News