GIGO

Remember that old Computer phrase: Garbage In, Garbage Out. Well, that accurately describes our approach to solutions in Iraq.

An Iraq Program based on Egos over facts does not have a chance of working…

Here's a few things we know:

We know that our government rejected the idea of dealing with the real power sources in the country; instead, we alligned ourselves with Shalabi, a known crook we were warned against.

We also know that we built an offensive program predicated on lies, misstatements and flawed research that was turned around to accommodate our Executive's short-term interests.

We also know that our government rallied against the only common sense solution:
Partition the country into three enclaves and split the oil income.

No, these were not the solutions entertained by our government intent upon controlling Iraq's principal asset: Oil!

So, here's the premise advanced by our government.

Iraq should be a democracy with its people willing to engage each other in good faith.

Given those conditions, may we ask the question why?



It wasn't like that when we invaded Iraq for purposes not yet made clear to anyone.



But let's leave that aside for a moment.



Let’s posit some serious questions to ascertain where we are in this blind-sided hypothesis.



At any time in their history, did the Iraqis show a preference for Democracy.


Were they interested in Democracy now?

Of course not!

Why?



Because Islam as practiced by the Iraqis is at cross-purposes with Democracy. So why are we trying to jam it down their throats.



The truth of the matter is that Yugoslavia was the perfect analog for Iraq..



Yugoslavia was an impossible mix of people who historically were incapable of getting along.



They were in opposition over religions, cultures and ideas and there were long smoldering hatreds.



With Tito gone, it was an invitation to Civil War and that's precisely what happened…almost immediately.



With Saddam, the Tito of Iraq disposed, it was not surprising—had we understood anything of the culture and tradition of the Middle East, that this strictly ruled country would dissolve into civil war pitting its three major people against each other: The Sunnis, Shia' and Kurds.



There would be a civil war whether we were there or not.



And that seems one of the facts that we can’t seem accept or retain.



\

The only thing that our being there meant was that more Americans would die and Al Qaeda, a parasite that feeds on other's unrest, would get the green light to come in and suck the blood of the Iraqis and gorge itself at our expense.



That's all there is to it.



There is no arcane or esoteric arguments here except for perhaps the reason why we invaded in the first place….



This is no place for fast-draw cowboy politics.



It is a place that desperately needs common sense.



And in the process we might ask why all our solutions tend to be military solutions, why our Secretary of State will not deal with people we don't like (Isn't that what Secretaries of State do?)...

and why we have eschewn diplomacy for bullying...



All we have effectively done is raise the enmity of the world and predispose most of the thinking world to damn us as fools of the worst kind.



Instead of using common sense, we credited ourselves on ending the war three years ago and instead of looking at the truth, could not get over our self-important premier role in the country.



Maybe we should get over ourselves and come to the realization that we are not the world’s policeman; that we have our own neglected priorities like school and health care.



If we are seeking our own downfall, we have made a good start.



Wake up America and get smart!

The only thing we have accomplished is to make the military industrial complex more powerful, sacrificed our young and aroused the enmity of the rest of the world.





In the end, all those republicans who never lifted a finger will be making excuses about how they were deceived as they cling to the last remnants of their jobs.



Les Aaron