Would forging a common cause with Iraq get the focus on positive developments?
347395
It is possible it could work, but forging a new government of the people, by the people and for the people should have worked too. Unfortunately these different sects are so used to blowing each other up they don't know any better.
749371
Erudite....Your question is based on a false premise. Have a little faith.\n\nThis whole area has been chaotic for centuries - we have only be there for a few years and our accomplishments have been pretty impressive. The vast majority of key players who ascribe to this radical faction of hatred have been captured or killed and a free election has been held. The Iraqi militia continues to train and grow and participate in many of the operations to rid this country of these Islamic factions that continue their tactics of terror and murder.\nHopefully, a democratic country in this region will help stabilize and secure this powder keg so the people can live in peace with a government that answers to them - instead of the other way around. \n\nIf only the media would be genuine in their "fair and balanced" reporting, perhaps our optimism would be a little improved.
629197
It depends on what you mean about support.\n\nI think, in retrospect, the invasion of Iraq was a mistake.  It has taken away too much political capital that would be better spent stopping what it turns out may be the real threat of the Middle East... Iran.\n\nI still believe in the best values of the US and what it stands for but I think the current administration has led us down a path that I have greater and greater difficulty supporting.\n\nDoes that make me unpatriotic?  I hope not.
1178617
As I read this question, the hope is not merely to convince the American people that it's a good idea to bring the troops home, but also to motivate them to action. As previous posters have suggested, mere public opinion isn't necessarily going to have a measurable effect on policy decisions.\n\nThe current state of things already suggests that Americans are unhappy with the war, but even those staunchly opposed to the invasion from the start often feel that to leave "prematurely" could irreparably harm the development of the new Iraqi government.\n\nOf course, that issue is mired in policy spin and PR - I would venture out on a limb and say that it's extremely difficult for the average American to get a good, valid sense of conditions in Iraq - stability of government and infrastructure, genuine threat assessments, etc. I can honestly say, despite spending a good deal of time trying to figure it out - I have no idea how much "we" are needed to keep stability there now.\n\nObviously, "the job is done" is a fine message to send to the American people, and it might do the convincing that the original question requests. However, it depends on where this message comes from.\n\nIf liberal or progressive sources, for example, proclaim proudly that "the job is done", while the administration does the opposite "...and we will stay as long as we're needed" - then public opinion may divide strongly along party lines about the imminent need to bring troops home. So unless this message comes from the right place, I think it will fail.\n\nSo what is the right origin for a message - one that counters policy PR spun by an administration with contrary goals?\n\nI read recently that Howard Zinn believes that messages like this need to come from the troops themselves - and in this case, I heartily agree.\n\nIf the troops themselves begin to voice *either* an overwhelming sense of dissent from the administration - i.e. "We're no longer accomplishing anything here but putting ourselves at risk", or an overwhelming sense of completion - i.e. "We've accomplished our goals in Iraq; it's time to come home"....if THOSE voices could be heard, then our troops could come home.
1018754
Badly, very badly.\n\nAll three sides, the Sunnis, Kurds and Shi'ites will fight like dogs, and eventually the United States will not be able to stop it. Those Iraqi troops we trained will also come back to haunt us too. This is a bad situation, and all the weapons in the US arsenal will not be able to solve it.\n\nOn the upside, I think it would have happened one way or the other, contrary to liberal public opinion....sad situation, time for us to leave!
877435
I don't think that it can be blamed on the democraps....\n\nI would like to think that EVERYONE in our country would like our sons and daughters to come home....\n\nThis war has drug on and on and we need  to come up with a better plan...what we have now isn't working. \n\nI am not maybe for pulling them all out now...but the Iraqi government had GOT to get their s**t together.
556985
Not anytime soon.  People in the west need to understand that Iraq and much of the ME region has been heavily factionalized and controlled by local political groups with divergent agendas for thousands of years.  As such, a move to democracy will require a protracted period of time to change the thinking of the general populace.\n\nThe older generations are not likely to welcome any change.  It will take time for them to die off while signifiant continuous effort will be needed to pursuade the younger generations that there is a different way.\n\nLook how long it has taken in the US for anything approaching racial equality and harmony to evolve.  The slaves were freed in the 1860s, yet were not guaranteed suffrage until 100 years later.  Although progress has been made, we still have a LONG way to go.\n\nA meaningful long-term change in Iraq will take a US & UN presence of 50 - 100 years in order to stabilize the political system.  Anyone who thinks otherwise is simply blind to the realities of human nature at best, and an abject fool at worst.
628138
Yes, knowing what we know now, this wasn't the solution.\nMuch more could have been achieved with less loss of lives and resources.\nThe real problem with Iraq is yet to emerge. This country is in complete disarray, there is nothing left. the moment the Americans leave, a civil war will break out, because there is no dominating or controlling force. In a normal revolution there is an organization, a plan, a people movement. Ideals, a bigger picture. But here?\nA better way would have been to work from the inside,to start up a movement, to feed them money, structure. To let that movement gain momentum, and so on. In the case of Iraq, maybe try to split up the country?
1128791
No. That is actually a good question. I think that Pres. Bush is trying to gain the world support [especially the UN..because they didn't when they liberated Iraq] Bush just wants to make sure that he has an ally.
532646
You had the bad luck to be born in a region that cares more for religion than for human rights.  It isn't going to happen soon, but I believe and hope that the removal of Saddam was a good first step in bettering the human condition in Iraq.  When the people of the middle east determine that they'd rather get along with each other rather than putting others down based on long standing religious beliefs, then we'll all gain.\n\nGood luck sir.
1107022
I am paying attention. The reason these are not made more public is because it takes all of the steam out of the left's anti-war argument. \n\nIf things can be proven to be going well in Iraq, then they would have no basis for an argument.
848727
I think it is.  The death of Saddam should put an era of Iraqi history to rest.  It may even act as a cathartic event for the country as a whole and allow the present govt. to move forward and tackle the many issues currently facing them.
957384
Realism an inclination toward literal truth and pragmatism?  Is that your understanding of the word?\nIf so, I would hope it excludes wishful thinking.  \nThat seems to be the driving force in our Iraq policy.\nEdit - \nA little extra, maybe the root  of the question.\nRealism promotes short-term gain, often at the expense of long-term security.\nhttp://www.opinionjournal.com/editorial/feature.html?id=110009239\n\nAfter reading this I should change my answer.
710993
The UK has already begun the retreat. I expect Australia and others to follow. We are too deeply entrenched to do exactly that very quickly. Democrats know this. We are likely the ones who will remain behind to help Iraq. \nThere are much deeper reasons aside from democracy for Maliki's call to remain in Iraq indefinitely. There are ties between Iraqi leadership begging us to stay, Saddam's death sentence, and Don Rumsfeld's resignation yesterday. Maybe something on the scale of Watergate from the Nixon era.
193571
Iraq is slowly but surely turning into a self governing democracy that will in the near future be capable of defending itself and participating and working with nations worldwide economically and as an ally in the war against terror. the Iraqi people will be free to pursue the freedoms that we here in America have long taken for granted.Iraq does indeed have a bright future ahead and because they do our future here is America is brighter as well.~
1133811
Dats a neat idea- is anyone listening?? it'll sell well in Iraq atleast
627589
I think we won't really know the impact of the war in Iraq for years down the road.  I sort of think of it like this:  People tried to ignore and appease Hitler.  In the end it cost 6 million Jewish people thier lives.  Perhaps if someone had taken a stronger stand earlier on it could have been avoided.  Maybe going in to Iraq earlier instead of waiting for something catasrophic to occur will save more people in the long run.  In that respect, maybe Bush is enlightened compared to the average guy on the street.