How do we solve the problem of Iraq?

[kwicky]

Today President Bush has asked for solutions to the Iraq problem and is willing to take good advice from anyone that can contribute.

Some possible solutions have already been put forward:
1. Engage Iran and Syria
2. Pull out forces to safe surrounding countries and engage only when necessary.
3. Bring forces home.

This website is a good platform for making constructive suggestions. We have heard so many times the negative contributions that may express personal opinions but do little to help the situation.

Please submit anything positive you think may be of help!

[whiffey]

I think we pull out. I have backed Bush and Blair all the way, I believe they acted on the information they had at the time.

Iraq has a completely different culture, religion, everything, from the West. Democracy will never work there, and why should it. We should ring-fence our homelands and let them get on with it. Can you imagine crowds with guns firing shots into the air in London ? Well it's not that far off. If we need to safeguard the supply of oil to the West then we should do anything and everything necessary to that end. All they'll do is use it to burn each other.

Sunnis, Shiites, Kurds, etc etc. No solution, get out.

[kwicky]

Another possible solution has been put forward by the administration. It is now considered that Rumsfeldt seriously underestimated the number of troops required in Iraq to make it stable. Therefore increase this to a workable level to overcome and obliterate the insurgents.

[Stu in USA]

Just have to look at former Yugoslavia. Tito kept a lid on the country, same as Saddam. It was a real mess after end of dictatorship, then the country divided into smaller democratic ones and now all appears at peace. So why not divide Iraq into Sunni, Shiite and Kurdish countries? It seems that the Kurdish region is virtually a seperate country anyway. Not saying it will be easy, ie dividing up oil revenue etc, but surely better than current situation.

[kwicky]

Another idea that has been put forward is to engage with the insurgents to defuse any hatred and make progress towards a unified Iraq.

[Stu in USA]

Surely "engaging with insurgents" will only increase the hatred? No for me a permanently divided Iraq is the only future.

[johnizere]

stu........look what's happened in Israel and the surrounding countries.......they'll all want their piece of ground back. I have no idea what the solution could be, I fear for those that want democracy in their country, but as has been said, they're not used to it, and won't know how to handle it.

[Lonnie]

Hearts and minds, something that should have been done right at the beginning, rebuilding the residential areas, running youth clubs, womens clubs,

Appoint leaders who are qualified in certain areas, eg, Youth leaders.

You could only try it now in certain areas, but it'd be worth a shot, because the one thing we can't do now, is leave, and we have to show the Iraqi's somehow,that its not an occupied country.

[Dom Tuk]

Under Saddam Iraq was a modern country. Oil revenues had resulted in fantastic first world facilities in roads/hospitals/education and other infrastructure. It was also a secular country. of course civil liberties were radically stamped on especially for the shias and few sunni dissidents. But woemn had equal rights and people generally were happy with their lot. The comparison with Tito is apt. Both these dictators kept a lid on the situation thru sometimes brutal means. Now how are you going to bring back the situation to how it was described in my first few lines.
1) USA/Uk are hated by both sides. So step 1 get out of there.
2) pump money in to rebuild Iraq. Not give money to US contractors but give money to Iraqis to bring their country to the infrastructure it had.
3) in other words if UK/USA are involved forget it, their hands are too bloodied to do any rebuilding.

[anotheoldgit]

Oh dear Lonnie on what planet do you live on?
Perhaps you would like to volunteer, to set up a Girls Guide, Boy Scout troop, or maybe organise tea and coffee mornings, for the genteel people of Iraq, (hang your weapons up on your way in).
We have got rid of Sadam for them, they don't want us now, so let's get out.

[Loosehead]

Inevitably the US/UK will realise that they are just delaying the inevitable. I tend to agrre with whiffey, we should pull out and let them fight it out. I think a civil war is unavoidable. We do not want to have troops there indefinately.

[NH]

The tension between Sunnis and Shi'ites seems to have gone on since the dawn of time. Factor in Kurds...

You might as well ask about how we address the icky, awkward problem of human mortality.

[johnlambert]

fender
the US/UK alliance will never let the Syrians + Iranians get their hands on all that oil, they would hold the West to ransom
now we're in, we need to stay in till we sort out the mess we started.
Inagine the casualties we would get if we pulled out now. To the arab mind, we (the US/UK) would be withdrawing from Iraq, that to the arabs is a loss odf face and a disgrace, they would have a field day

[kwicky]

In trying to find a solution to this complex problem we are experiencing what the experts are hoping to solve. There is no easy solution! Probably Stu has come closest to what on the surface seems a practical way out of this mess. Partitioning into 3 blocks seems workable except for the oil distribution. But further problems arise when Sunnis are resident in Shia areas and vice versa so it would mean a massive evacuation to achieve this.

Iraq was once dominated by the Sunnis under Saddam Hussein. Now a puppet government Shias have the upper hand. In addition El-sadr (a Shia cleric) would like the Sunnis to be obliterated with his death squads. The balance has swung the other way.

Any solution therefore must at least resolve these 2 religious factions (although the Kurds play a smaller part). If one section dominates then there can be no solution. The coalition only aggravates the worsening problem. Saddam (a Sunni) could be allowed to exert some influence on the situation as he would be respected.

[Lonnie]

aog,I speak from experience, the experience of being in the forces, in an unnamed Middle Eastern country, it works, provided its done at the right time. you'll notice, I said it should have been done in the beginning, I do realise its probably to late now,

The only solution now, is to bring in Iran and Syria, but it'll never happen.

[NH]

Dividing into 3 blocks makes sense...I suppose you could divide all land, excluding oilfields, into 3, proportionately, then divide all the oilfields into 3, proportionately, will special access roads going to each section. But I suspect it's like the Israel-Palestine thing; there's no way of making sure one state won't try to remove the other and then maybe grab bits of Kuwait as well, for example, thus causing the conflict to drag on and on and on and on....

[kwicky]

The problem of bringing in Iran is that it will bolster the Shias but will make it top heavy against the Sunnis who already resent losing their leader Saddam Hussein. In retaliation this could lead to further bloodshed and bombing of the mosques. If Iran could curtail the enthusiasm of these death squads (ie El Sadr) it would help but many believe they are behind the arming of these breakaway groups.

It is necessary for equilibrium that the Sunnis have a powerful leader, as they once did, so that fair agreement can be made with the two factions. Unpalatable it may be but a weakened Saddam could provide this again.

[kwicky]

Splitting Iraq into 3:

see
http://www.timesonline.co.uk/article/0,,2089-2 393750,00.html

[jno]

Lonnie's onto something. In many countries (Egypt and Algeria, for instance), Islamists win the hearts and minds of the locals by providing the sort of local services he mentions - in contrst to the central governments, which for whatever reason fail to do so. Whether foreigners could do the same I don't know, but it might be worth a try.