That's right, they are blowing up themselves and innocent, men, women and children along with them.
WHY?

Um.. yeah.. but when Saddam was in power, a few dozen people a month might die... And he ruled with fear and an iron fist. There were no (or very very few) car bombings, suicide attacks and near-civil war... now there is. so before you trumpet how great the surge is for the people of Iraq.. think.

PS: The idea of taking Saddam out was fine.. he was evil... but I don't think the guys in charge of that thought "well, what happens when he is dead?".. they didn't look at the history of the region. This region has been in conflict for hundreds of years... Saddam was th ...

That's right, they are blowing up themselves and innocent, men, women and children along with them.
WHY?

Um.. yeah.. but when Saddam was in power, a few dozen people a month might die... And he ruled with fear and an iron fist. There were no (or very very few) car bombings, suicide attacks and near-civil war... now there is. so before you trumpet how great the surge is for the people of Iraq.. think.

PS: The idea of taking Saddam out was fine.. he was evil... but I don't think the guys in charge of that thought "well, what happens when he is dead?".. they didn't look at the history of the region. This region has been in conflict for hundreds of years... Saddam was th only one keeping a near "peace". What? they thought they'd kill Saddam and say "Hey! now you can make a democracy & all get along!!"?? no... anyone who knew anything about the region knew what would happen. And what we have today is exactly what they thought would happen. Shi'ite and Sunni (and others) fighting for power. IMO, it will continue most likely until a new warlord/dictator/etc take control.

A surge means nothing more, than turning up the speed button at which you can kill people. More troops, more dead, faster. This is not going to help a s***. Tell me, what exactly is your definition of winning this war n2? Having no more people left to kill or so send to be killed? A war of attrition? Do you think/hope the Sunnis or Shi'ites or insurgents or whoever they are, are just going to lay down their guns and IED's one day and go home? "Okay you guys! You win! Bye!" That is just not going to happen. Something else but war needs to be tried.

What if instead for a start, Iraq was split up into three parts? North, south and west, for Kurds, Shi'ites and Sunni. Peace-keeping forces in b...

A surge means nothing more, than turning up the speed button at which you can kill people. More troops, more dead, faster. This is not going to help a s***. Tell me, what exactly is your definition of winning this war n2? Having no more people left to kill or so send to be killed? A war of attrition? Do you think/hope the Sunnis or Shi'ites or insurgents or whoever they are, are just going to lay down their guns and IED's one day and go home? "Okay you guys! You win! Bye!" That is just not going to happen. Something else but war needs to be tried.

What if instead for a start, Iraq was split up into three parts? North, south and west, for Kurds, Shi'ites and Sunni. Peace-keeping forces in between. Each their own leader. I KNOW this isn't thought through, but they have to figure something else out. I don't have all the answers, but we can all see that war isn't one of them.

Actually, thisnamecantbetaken, as much as I believe that what we're doing in Iraq is the correct thing to do *at this point in time*, you hit on a great point: dividing Iraq in a way similar to what you described is a big issue right now and possible the best solution we have. I think it would be great to establish a democratic, federalist government with a provincial government in each region, similar to our state governments.

The only problem with that is, you guessed it: oil. There is a lot of oil in the north and south, but not much in the center. So the Sunni province would get kind of screwed over economically. However, I think that the federal Iraqi government in this case coul...

Actually, thisnamecantbetaken, as much as I believe that what we're doing in Iraq is the correct thing to do *at this point in time*, you hit on a great point: dividing Iraq in a way similar to what you described is a big issue right now and possible the best solution we have. I think it would be great to establish a democratic, federalist government with a provincial government in each region, similar to our state governments.

The only problem with that is, you guessed it: oil. There is a lot of oil in the north and south, but not much in the center. So the Sunni province would get kind of screwed over economically. However, I think that the federal Iraqi government in this case could divide up the economic gains from oil between the smaller provincial governments.

Only from the left can comparing Bush to Saddam or Hitler not seem delusional. You people have some serious hatred issues with those who don't agree with you. No rational person could seriously consider such issues.

As for the surge, it is working. And I think the main reason isn't the surge in the number of troops (which hasn't even been completed yet), but the change in the rules of engagement. Right now the lefty press is starting to run stories complaining about overcrowding in Iraqi jails. We aren't just killing, we are capturing many of the insurgents. We are taking over areas in Baghdad that those people used to control and now that the Iraqi military and police forces have grown, we...

Only from the left can comparing Bush to Saddam or Hitler not seem delusional. You people have some serious hatred issues with those who don't agree with you. No rational person could seriously consider such issues.

As for the surge, it is working. And I think the main reason isn't the surge in the number of troops (which hasn't even been completed yet), but the change in the rules of engagement. Right now the lefty press is starting to run stories complaining about overcrowding in Iraqi jails. We aren't just killing, we are capturing many of the insurgents. We are taking over areas in Baghdad that those people used to control and now that the Iraqi military and police forces have grown, we are able to hold those areas and move on to other areas.

If a gang of thugs is taking over a city, the best way to handle it isn't to just leave the city to them. LA is having a gang problem and they worked up their own surge to root out those gangs and take back the city. The same has to be done in Iraq. Either we root out the terrorists, or we turn the country over to them and have to deal with them eventually anyway (when they are much more powerful). This isn't a problem that is just going to go away if we leave.

I DO see where you're coming from n2, I do, but what then? That's so short-term. Let's say we've gotten control over everything, chased all the bad guys away, filled the jails and so on. That isn't peace, that's just temporary containment. What happens the moment you then leave? Or let down your guard for a minute? Right. They flood the cities again. These groups have to be separated. Physically at first, perhaps regionally like we suggested earlier maybe, who knows. There is so much hatred between them it, will take generations to repair, if ever. (Like with Rwanda and Yugoslavia) THEN when everybody's 'calmed down', we SIT and figure out what to do then. At some point or another people are...

I DO see where you're coming from n2, I do, but what then? That's so short-term. Let's say we've gotten control over everything, chased all the bad guys away, filled the jails and so on. That isn't peace, that's just temporary containment. What happens the moment you then leave? Or let down your guard for a minute? Right. They flood the cities again. These groups have to be separated. Physically at first, perhaps regionally like we suggested earlier maybe, who knows. There is so much hatred between them it, will take generations to repair, if ever. (Like with Rwanda and Yugoslavia) THEN when everybody's 'calmed down', we SIT and figure out what to do then. At some point or another people are going to HAVE to talk. They won't do that, until the killing stops. There should be made some sort of peace accord. I don't know how, that's the diplomats and politicians job to figure that out, but isn't it worth a try? What has the last 4 years of war really gotten us? Are we any closer to our goals? No. Let's try something else.

Baghdad was the worst spot, the largest city, and the capitol of the country. It only makes sense to start there. If this works, we will likely have to do the same in a couple of other cities as well. But those places you don't hear much about in the south and north don't need any surges as they are in pretty good shape. And as we do this, the Iraq military and police forces will continue to grow.

I think one of the problems is that people expected us to be able to throw up a legitimate Iraqi military in a matter of months. They look at it as only taking two months for our own military personnel to go through boot camp, so why not the Iraqis. What they don't look at is the years and years o...

Baghdad was the worst spot, the largest city, and the capitol of the country. It only makes sense to start there. If this works, we will likely have to do the same in a couple of other cities as well. But those places you don't hear much about in the south and north don't need any surges as they are in pretty good shape. And as we do this, the Iraq military and police forces will continue to grow.

I think one of the problems is that people expected us to be able to throw up a legitimate Iraqi military in a matter of months. They look at it as only taking two months for our own military personnel to go through boot camp, so why not the Iraqis. What they don't look at is the years and years of training our senior officers have. And the growth of their military is important when it comes to not only taking those areas (which we were doing before), but holding them as well.

This is pretty naive, but look at is this way as if the Sunnis and Shi'ites and whoever are like kids fighting in a schoolyard. The US is supposed to be the yard monitor. Break up the fight and teach these kids about democracy and to be nice and so on, blah blah blah. (The schoolyard bully has been hung earlier btw) The trouble is the US is the teacher who is rolling around on the ground and in on the fight! Punching on the kids, unruly as they may be, but still! The US and allies need to step out of the fight, regain international support and figure out some sort of intervention and do it all together. The US wouldn't have to deal with the training of the Iraqi forces alone, the othe...

This is pretty naive, but look at is this way as if the Sunnis and Shi'ites and whoever are like kids fighting in a schoolyard. The US is supposed to be the yard monitor. Break up the fight and teach these kids about democracy and to be nice and so on, blah blah blah. (The schoolyard bully has been hung earlier btw) The trouble is the US is the teacher who is rolling around on the ground and in on the fight! Punching on the kids, unruly as they may be, but still! The US and allies need to step out of the fight, regain international support and figure out some sort of intervention and do it all together. The US wouldn't have to deal with the training of the Iraqi forces alone, the other nations could help and probably would. Like it's been done many times before. IMHO a lot of the world today looks sort of embarrassedly away at what the US is doing in Iraq and are curling their toes. Over-exaggerated maybe, but they definitely don't feel comfortable with it or the US would have many more allies and supporters. A new deal needs to be made or a NEW New Way Forward figured out at least. A lot of people aren't feeling like we're the good guys so much anymore, ya know?

Oh don't say that, this is us, remember! You! The we bit in WE, the people! The US is supposed to be a democracy remember! (Just get rid of Bush first. Ha ha! Just kidding. No, I'm not.) Anyway, WE get to tell the politians what to do. Or that's how it's supposed to work at least...

I think a lot of the animosity towards the US is still just directed towards the US administration (and a lot of crappy foreign policies too, spread throughout the years of course), not the people of the US. Not yet, that is. Just don't ever vote for another Bush! Ha ha! No, but seriously. Some of that reputation has to be regained and CAN be, but the US should start by being the good guys again and stopping t...

Oh don't say that, this is us, remember! You! The we bit in WE, the people! The US is supposed to be a democracy remember! (Just get rid of Bush first. Ha ha! Just kidding. No, I'm not.) Anyway, WE get to tell the politians what to do. Or that's how it's supposed to work at least...

I think a lot of the animosity towards the US is still just directed towards the US administration (and a lot of crappy foreign policies too, spread throughout the years of course), not the people of the US. Not yet, that is. Just don't ever vote for another Bush! Ha ha! No, but seriously. Some of that reputation has to be regained and CAN be, but the US should start by being the good guys again and stopping the drawn out, illegal, seemingly futile, bad-reputation-making, pre-emptive, sad, rotten war would sure be a good start.

Come on folks! People are dying by the truckloads over there every day. Right this minute. No end in sight. Something else has to be tried.