Fareed Zakaria at PostGlobal

Fareed Zakaria

Editor of Newsweek International, columnist

PostGlobal co-moderator Fareed Zakaria is editor of Newsweek International, overseeing all Newsweek's editions abroad. He writes a regular column for Newsweek, which also appears in Newsweek International and often The Washington Post. He is a member of the roundtable of ABC News' "This Week with George Stephanapoulos" as well as an analyst for ABC News. And he is the host of a new weekly PBS show, "Foreign Exchange" which focuses on international affairs. His most recent book, "The Future of Freedom," was published in the spring of 2003 and was a New York Times bestseller and is being translated into eighteen languages. He is also the author of "From Wealth to Power: The Unusual Origins of America's World Role" (Princeton University Press), and co-editor of "The American Encounter: The United States and the Making of the Modern World" (Basic Books). Close.

Fareed Zakaria

Editor of Newsweek International, columnist

PostGlobal co-moderator Fareed Zakaria is editor of Newsweek International, overseeing all Newsweek's editions abroad. He writes a regular column for Newsweek, which also appears in Newsweek International and often The Washington Post. more »

Main Page | Fareed Zakaria Archives | PostGlobal Archives


Stuck in the Iraq Loop

There is a paradox in the current situation in Iraq. We are told that the surge has worked brilliantly and violence is way down. And yet the plan to reduce troop levels—which was at the heart of the original surge strategy—must be postponed or all hell will once again break loose. Making sense of this paradox is critical. Because in certain crucial ways things are not improving in Iraq, and unless they start improving soon, the United States faces the awful prospect of an unending peacekeeping operation—with continuing if limited casualties—for years to come.

In a brilliant and much-circulated essay written in August 2007, "Anatomy of a Tribal Revolt," David Kilcullen, a veteran Australian officer who advised Gen. David Petraeus during the early days of the surge, wrote, "Our dilemma in Iraq is, and always has been, finding a way to create a sustainable security architecture that does not require 'Coalition-in-the-loop,' thereby allowing Iraq to stabilize and the Coalition to disengage in favorable circumstances." We have achieved some security in Iraq, though even this should not be overstated. (Violence is still at 2005 levels, which were pretty gruesome.) But we have not built a sustainable security architecture.

How does one create a self-sustaining process that leads to stability? Do we need more troops? Longer rotations? Kilcullen points in a different direction: "Taking the Coalition out of the loop and into 'overwatch' requires balancing competing armed interest groups at the national and local level." In other words, we need to help forge a political bargain by which Iraq's various groups agree to live together and not dominate one another. "These [groups] are currently not in balance," Kilcullen wrote, "due in part to the sectarian biases of certain players and institutions of the new Iraqi state, which promotes a belief by Sunnis that they will be the permanent victims of the new Iraq. This belief creates space for terrorist groups, including Al Qaeda in Iraq, and these groups in turn drive a cycle of violence that keeps Iraq unstable and prevents us from disengaging."

Watching the recent spike in suicide bombings, one has to wonder if we are watching precisely that cycle start up again. The sectarian tensions in Iraq have not improved much. The Sunni militias—who switched sides over the past six months—have developed some trust for the United States but little for the Iraqi Army. Reports suggest that as the Iraqi Army gets stronger and better trained, and gets more expensive weapons—none of which are shared with the Sunnis—the latter are becoming more worried that they have made a bad decision. In the crucial province of Diyala last week, thousands of members of "Concerned Local Citizens" groups (CLCs) stopped working in protest over the sectarian activities of the local police force and its chief. U.S. officers have kept promising that a significant number of CLC members would be given jobs in the regular Army and police. That does not appear to be happening anywhere near as fast as it should. At the same time, the new provincial elections that Sunnis and many Shiite groups have demanded for years have once again been delayed. Maj. Gen. John Kelly, commander of U.S. forces in Anbar province, publicly warned that if these polls were not held as promised by Oct. 1, it could mean more violence.

There has been some positive news reported in the past few weeks. On closer examination, it is more hype than reality. Two of the laws passed, one reversing de-Baathification and the other offering a limited amnesty to former insurgents, have been worded in such a way that much will depend on how they are implemented—by the Shiite government. The reason these assurances were written into law in binding terms was, of course, that Sunnis place so little trust in the good will and fairness of that government. When Baghdad promises to administer oil revenue wisely and fairly, though there is no law telling it precisely what to do, its claims are met with mistrust and unease by the Sunnis and the Kurds.

A Pentagon report to Congress last week admitted that "all four components of the hydrocarbon law are stalled." The law on provincial elections passed but was then vetoed by the presidency council, specifically by Shiite Vice President Adel Abdel Mehdi, whose party now runs most of southern Iraq and does not wish to take its chances in new elections. And it's worth noting that the laws that passed did so only after months of intense wrangling, which produced an 82–82 tie that was broken by the Sunni speaker of Parliament, Mahmoud al-Mashhadani. Finally, all these measures I've mentioned add up to only three or four of the 18 benchmarks set out by the Maliki government and the Bush administration to judge their own progress.

It's possible that the uptick in violence, the tensions in Diyala and other such signs are just twists and turns in Iraq's troubled path. That is probably the way they will be read in the current atmosphere of self-congratulation in Washington. But they might also be signs that the architects of the surge—chiefly General Petraeus—were right all along when they said that the purpose of the military deployment was to buy time for Iraqis to make political progress. One year into the surge, five years into the war, those metrics have not improved. That's why American troops remain stuck "in the loop" in Iraq.

Editor's Note: Fareed Zakaria is the editor of Newsweek International, and co-moderator of PostGlobal. His "World View" column and recent pieces for Newsweek can be found here.

Comments (95)

paul taylor:

Why is it that no one gets it?

Bush is not in Iraq to simply settle the country down to the point where we can pack up and leave. This never was the point. If you want to know what Bush is doing, then look at what he is doing. He is building a fortified mega-castle of an embassy, and hardened military staging bases around the country, especially near the borders of hostile states. He is building for the long haul.

It is abundantly clear that Bush intends to pacify Iraq solely for the purpose of using that country to establish U.S. hegemony over the area. Why? For one reason, he is convinced that Islam is rising up against the West, even though it is more to the point, to those who live in the Middle East, that Western cultural, political, and now military imperialism, are threatening Islam.

And both Bush and Israel are convinced that Israel needs our military support. This, more than ever because of organized opposition forces, supported by Iran and other political and private interests in the area. Israel got a taste of this in her attack on the Hezbollah in Lebanon. Bush is also motivated by the desire to prevent important oil resources in Iraq from falling into hostile hands.

The strange thing is why Bush ever started the Iraq war. An awful lot of careless and arrogant thinking went into the rationale and planning of this venture. With Saddam Hussein in power there was already a measure of political stability in Iraq. He opposed and helped neutralize, in Iraq, Osama bin Laden, al Qaeda, and Islamic extremism. And he was Iran's only overt enemy in the area. Hussein was doing everything we wanted a dictator to do, almost. Maybe because Saddam was not OUR dictator. He was his own man. And he was an easy target.

So here we are in Iraq, not for the short run, but for perpetuity, for all practical purposes. President Bush turned the apple cart upside down. By destroying the political, social and economic fabric of Iraq, the U.S., and the West, have actually become the problem, not only in Iraq but in the area.

And why not face the inevitable truth that Bush has been giving us an apple cart of senseless rationalizations for his invasion of Iraq?

paul taylor:

Why is it that no one gets it?

Bush is not in Iraq to simply settle the country down to the point where we can pack up and leave. This never was the point. If you want to know what Bush is doing, then look at what he is doing. He is building a fortified mega-castle of an embassy, and hardened military staging bases around the country, especially near the borders of hostile states. He is building for the long haul.

It is abundantly clear that Bush intends to pacify Iraq solely for the purpose of using that country to establish U.S. hegemony over the area. Why? For one reason, he is convinced that Islam is rising up against the West, even though it is more to the point, to those who live in the Middle East, that Western cultural, political, and now military imperialism, are threatening Islam.

And both Bush and Israel are convinced that Israel needs our military support. This, more than ever because of organized opposition forces, supported by Iran and other political and private interests in the area. Israel got a taste of this in her attack on the Hezbollah in Lebanon. Bush is also motivated by the desire to prevent important oil resources in Iraq from falling into hostile hands.

The strange thing is why Bush ever started the Iraq war. An awful lot of careless and arrogant thinking went into the rationale and planning of this venture. With Saddam Hussein in power there was already a measure of political stability in Iraq. He opposed and helped neutralize, in Iraq, Osama bin Laden, al Qaeda, and Islamic extremism. And he was Iran's only overt enemy in the area. Hussein was doing everything we wanted a dictator to do, almost. Maybe because Saddam was not OUR dictator. He was his own man. And he was an easy target.

So here we are in Iraq, not for the short run, but for perpetuity, for all practical purposes. President Bush turned the apple cart upside down. By destroying the political, social and economic fabric of Iraq, the U.S., and the West, have actually become the problem, not only in Iraq but in the area.

And why not face the inevitable truth that Bush has been giving us an apple cart of senseless rationalizations for his invasion of Iraq?

Alex McLaren:

Zakaria, have you APOLOGIZED yet for supporting this war five years ago? I remember your columns, spouting nonsense about how democracy in Iraq would stimulate democracies in other Arab countries. Have you ever, in your career, been more wrong? I hope not...this blunder is bad enough. I'm just glad your not in charge of anything consequential.

-Alex

Mariano Patalinjug:

Yonkers, New York
20 March 2008

Let's just face this one brutal reality: Iraq is "Mission Impossible" for the United States.

There is no chance whatsoever for the U.S. achieving military victory there--never mind what President Bush and VP Dick ("Rasputin") Cheney keep on saying like a broken record.

It was dead wrong for the U.S. to invade and occupy Iraq on false pretenses. Iraq has turned pretty much "Bush's Folly."

Now the U.S. is caught in a sticky quagmire there. Bush, Cheney, Rice, Gates and their coterie of "neocons" are clueless on how to wiggle out of this quagmire.

But the American people, fully two-thirds of them now, know what America should do. They want America out of Iraq--quickly but responsibly.

Cut the umbilical cord which has for five long years tied Iraq to the United States and which, paradoxically, has made the supposedly independent and sovereign government of Iraq a vassal or a client-state of the United States--a very costly vassal, mind you, in terms of American lives and treasure.

Once cut, it is quite possible that the Iraqi government will finally step up to the plate and do what a government should do, which is to "govern."

It should then make full use of its over 300,000 military and police forces to stabilize and secure the country. It should then feel compelled to find ways to achieve national reconciliation.

The next administration--provided the American people do not make the tragic mistake of giving indefatigable and unreconstructed warrior John McCain the White House--will put ending the war in Iraq on top, the very top, of its agenda. That will be in faithful obedience to the will of the American people.

Mariano Patalinjug
MarPatalinjug@aol.com

mazad:

Jakaria -

Name me a conservative idea that is newer than five thousand years. There are basically two kinds of conservatives; those who don't got
it and blame liberals and minorities for it, and those who got it and
only care about keeping it that way.

mazad:

Jakaria -
Name me a conservative idea that is newer than five thousand years.

There are basically two kinds of conservatives; those who don't got it and blame liberals and minorities for it, and those who got it and
only care about keeping it that way.

Brian:

as one whose work has been plagiarized by Kilcullen,
I find it offensive to see anything he has "written" being branded as brilliant or innovative.

Fareed, find out who wrote that stuff originally and give them the credit.
That guy Kilcullen has never had one original idea of his own.

Brian:

as one whose work has been plagiarized by Kilcullen,
I find it offensive to see anything he has "written" being branded as brilliant or innovative.

Fareed, find out who wrote that stuff originally and give them the credit.
That guy Kilcullen has never had one original idea of his own.

Anonymous:


LOVEO & LOVEA is arrived. We are Here!


...~~~~~o.... -----___
.~~~~....(♥)...............\
~~~~~................]={|)...)
.~~~~....(♥).......___./
...~~~~~o--------

=

~~~~o ----
..~~~~(♥) \
~~~~~ ]={} )
..~~~~(♥) /
~~~~o ----


Please visit :jo:zevz.us: OR

♦.J
♦♦..O
♦♦♦...Z
♦♦♦♦....E
♦♦♦♦♦....V
♦♦♦♦♦♦.....Z.us

THANK YE ALL!

Anonymous:

:jo:zevz.us:

Anonymous:

:jo:zevz.us:

Anonymous:

:j::ozevz.us:

Anonymous:

:j:
:ozevz.us:

Anonymous:

Please visit:

:j:
:o:
:zevz.us:

Thank You!

Anonymous:

:j:
:o:
:z:
:e:
:v:
:z:
.us

Anonymous:

:J:
:O:
:Z:
:E:
:V:
:Z:
.us

Anonymous:

.j
..o
...z
....e
.....v
......z.us

Thanks you ALL!

Anonymous:
Anonymous:

http://JO][ZE][VZ][.US]
J
O
Z
E
V
Z.US. USA.US.USA!
J
O
Z
E
V
Z.US
http://JO][ZE][VZ][.US]

AMviennaVA:

"There is a paradox in the current situation in Iraq. We are told that the surge has worked brilliantly and violence is way down. And yet the plan to reduce troop levels—which was at the heart of the original surge strategy—must be postponed or all hell will once again break loose. Making sense of this paradox is critical."

It is a PARADOX only if you accept that the 'surge' is working. If you recognize it for the lie (or misdirection if you prefer) that it is, there is no paradox. We are very simply being misled and lied to, again. And again, the familiar cheerleaders (including Mr. Zakaria) are leading the charge.

Notice to cease & decist or risk being sued!:

Att: FAREED ZAKARiA, WAPO, PostGlobal, OnFaith, Onreligion, Newsweek etr al:

Please see SALLy QUINS BLOG with This :SERVICE OF "CEASE & DECIST' Warning and to restore 'WORDS' that You & Mr. Water's et al, and your Computer ADMIN's have deliberately descriminated against Us & ME et al, from posting a Philosophy in Healing of Nations, genuine Global/World Peace, etc..

Ye know what 'i" am talking about!

http://newsweek.washingtonpost.com/onfaith/sally_quinn/2008/03/our_friends_and_their_views.html

So, here above is the LINK to Sally Served 'Notice to Cease & Decist' or Court Action wproceeding will DULY & Rightly Result with "Punitive" damages etc...!!


Do not deny That Ye have been Both Served & Warned To Refrain from Certain unethical behavior/Edicot & Restore certain words, ALL & MORE that are 'Protected' & Covered' under these great Holy U.S.A. Constitution of AMERICA, It's Laws, Regulations, Codes, and Clause etc..!

Ya!


♥.J
♥♥..O
♥♥♥...Z
♥♥♥♥....E
♥♥♥♥♥....V
♥♥♥♥♥♥.....Z.us

Anonymous:

"There's alway's an Answer!"

J
O
Z
E
V
Z.us

“Thanks HUMATE KiND‘S!”

JRLR:

Anonymous writes: "... quickly drawing down troops is not a responsible solution...Iraq is flooded with... foreign fighters...They want instability and chaos... "

Quite. Iraq is flooded with foreign American fighters (both soldiers and mercenaries) who have so far brought nothing along but instability and chaos. That is why Iraq would only be better off without them. That is what the vast majority of Iraqis think and have been saying openly long enough.

Everything we have done in Iraq has been irresponsible. That military adventure has made us known all over the world as "the irresponsible ones par excellence"! We are last, in the whole universe, who can legitimately claim to know what a responsible solution for Iraq would be. We ought to leave it to the Iraqi people to decide for themselves, and to a third party to facilitate the execution of that task; assuming we can find such a third party... after having discredited and made "irrelevant" all existing ones, in the name of American unilateralism.

ADDENDUM: I love the ingenious techniques that have been developed so as to best sabotage crucial conversations and discussions, on this site. That too, is very telling: we have indeed become most creative at destroying everything, firstly what we do not want people to hear. Unmistakable signs of times to come.

Anonymous:

.......~~~~~~~~~~~~
...~~~~~....∧ -----___
.~~~~....(♥)...............\
~~~~~................]={|)...)
.~~~~....(♥).......___./
...~~~~~ ---∨-----
.......~~~~~~~~~~~~

Anonymous:

Whether any of you like it or not, the mistake of entering Iraq has already been made, and quickly drawing down troops is not a responsible solution.

Iraq isn't an island, it is surrounded by entities bent on the fall of its government. Iran wants to take advantage of the Shiite majority of Iraq in order to create another power in the region relevant to their interests, and majority Sunni nations like Saudi Arabia will do absolutely anything to prevent this. Iraq is flooded with the foreign fighters sent indirectly by these powers, who comprise the majority of insurgents.

They want instability and chaos because it is the only way to push us out. Once we leave, Sunni, Shiite, and Kurd communities throughout the Middle East will all rush to fill the power vacuum, and claim precious resources that come with it.

Anonymous:

~~~∧ ----
~~(♣) \
~~ ]={} )
~~(♣) /
~~~∨ ----

Anonymous:

~~~∧ ----
~~(o) \
~~ ]={} )
~~(o) /
~~~∨ ----

Anonymous:

~~~^ ----
~~(o) \
~~ ]={} ) ))))ha Ha Ha Ha Ha..
~~(o) /
~~~ ----

Anonymous:

♥J
♥♥O
♥♥♥Z
♥♥♥♥E
♥♥♥♥♥V
♥♥♥♥♥♥Z.us
♣♣♣♣♣♣♣J
♣♣♣♣♣♣♣♣O
♣♣♣♣♣♣♣♣♣Z
♣♣♣♣♣♣♣♣♣♣E
♣♣♣♣♣♣♣♣♣♣♣V
♣♣♣♣♣♣♣♣♣♣♣♣Z.us
♠♠♠♠♠♠♠♠♠♠♠♠♠♠♠J
♠♠♠♠♠♠♠♠♠♠♠♠♠♠♠♠O
♠♠♠♠♠♠♠♠♠♠♠♠♠♠♠♠♠Z
♠♠♠♠♠♠♠♠♠♠♠♠♠♠♠♠♠♠E
♠♠♠♠♠♠♠♠♠♠♠♠♠♠♠♠♠♠♠V
♠♠♠♠♠♠♠♠♠♠♠♠♠♠♠♠♠♠♠♠Z.us
♦♦♦♦♦♦♦♦♦♦♦♦♦♦♦♦♦♦♦J
♦♦♦♦♦♦♦♦♦♦♦♦♦♦♦♦♦♦♦♦O
♦♦♦♦♦♦♦♦♦♦♦♦♦♦♦♦♦♦♦♦♦Z
♦♦♦♦♦♦♦♦♦♦♦♦♦♦♦♦♦♦♦♦♦♦E
♦♦♦♦♦♦♦♦♦♦♦♦♦♦♦♦♦♦♦♦♦♦♦V
♦♦♦♦♦♦♦♦♦♦♦♦♦♦♦♦♦♦♦♦♦♦♦♦Z.us

Anonymous:

♥J
♥♥O
♥♥♥Z
♥♥♥♥E
♥♥♥♥♥V
♥♥♥♥♥♥Z.us
♣♣♣♣♣♣♣J
♣♣♣♣♣♣♣♣O
♣♣♣♣♣♣♣♣♣Z
♣♣♣♣♣♣♣♣♣♣E
♣♣♣♣♣♣♣♣♣♣♣V
♣♣♣♣♣♣♣♣♣♣♣♣Z.us
♠♠♠♠♠♠♠♠♠♠♠♠♠J
♠♠♠♠♠♠♠♠♠♠♠♠♠♠O
♠♠♠♠♠♠♠♠♠♠♠♠♠♠♠Z
♠♠♠♠♠♠♠♠♠♠♠♠♠♠♠♠E
♠♠♠♠♠♠♠♠♠♠♠♠♠♠♠♠♠V
♠♠♠♠♠♠♠♠♠♠♠♠♠♠♠♠♠♠Z.us
♦♦♦♦♦♦♦♦♦♦♦♦♦♦♦♦♦♦♦J
♦♦♦♦♦♦♦♦♦♦♦♦♦♦♦♦♦♦♦♦O
♦♦♦♦♦♦♦♦♦♦♦♦♦♦♦♦♦♦♦♦♦Z
♦♦♦♦♦♦♦♦♦♦♦♦♦♦♦♦♦♦♦♦♦♦E
♦♦♦♦♦♦♦♦♦♦♦♦♦♦♦♦♦♦♦♦♦♦♦V
♦♦♦♦♦♦♦♦♦♦♦♦♦♦♦♦♦♦♦♦♦♦♦♦Z.us

Anonymous:

♥J
♥♥O
♥♥♥Z
♥♥♥♥E
♥♥♥♥♥V
♥♥♥♥♥♥Z.us
♣♣♣♣♣♣J
♣♣♣♣♣♣♣O
♣♣♣♣♣♣♣♣Z
♣♣♣♣♣♣♣♣♣E
♣♣♣♣♣♣♣♣♣♣V
♣♣♣♣♣♣♣♣♣♣♣Z.Us
♠♠♠♠♠♠♠♠♠♠♠♠J
♠♠♠♠♠♠♠♠♠♠♠♠♠O
♠♠♠♠♠♠♠♠♠♠♠♠♠♠Z
♠♠♠♠♠♠♠♠♠♠♠♠♠♠♠E
♠♠♠♠♠♠♠♠♠♠♠♠♠♠♠♠V
♠♠♠♠♠♠♠♠♠♠♠♠♠♠♠♠♠Z.Us
♦♦♦♦♦♦♦♦♦♦♦♦♦♦♦♦♦♦J
♦♦♦♦♦♦♦♦♦♦♦♦♦♦♦♦♦♦♦O
♦♦♦♦♦♦♦♦♦♦♦♦♦♦♦♦♦♦♦♦Z
♦♦♦♦♦♦♦♦♦♦♦♦♦♦♦♦♦♦♦♦♦E
♦♦♦♦♦♦♦♦♦♦♦♦♦♦♦♦♦♦♦♦♦♦V
♦♦♦♦♦♦♦♦♦♦♦♦♦♦♦♦♦♦♦♦♦♦♦Z.Us

Anonymous:

♥J
♥♥O
♥♥♥Z
♥♥♥♥E
♥♥♥♥♥V
♥♥♥♥♥♥Z.us
♣♣♣♣♣♣♣J
♣♣♣♣♣♣♣♣O
♣♣♣♣♣♣♣♣♣Z
♣♣♣♣♣♣♣♣♣♣E
♣♣♣♣♣♣♣♣♣♣♣V
♣♣♣♣♣♣♣♣♣♣♣♣Z.Us
♠♠♠♠♠♠♠♠♠♠♠♠♠J
♠♠♠♠♠♠♠♠♠♠♠♠♠♠O
♠♠♠♠♠♠♠♠♠♠♠♠♠♠♠Z
♠♠♠♠♠♠♠♠♠♠♠♠♠♠♠♠E
♠♠♠♠♠♠♠♠♠♠♠♠♠♠♠♠♠V
♠♠♠♠♠♠♠♠♠♠♠♠♠♠♠♠♠♠Z.Us
♦♦♦♦♦♦♦♦♦♦♦♦♦♦♦♦♦♦♦J
♦♦♦♦♦♦♦♦♦♦♦♦♦♦♦♦♦♦♦♦O
♦♦♦♦♦♦♦♦♦♦♦♦♦♦♦♦♦♦♦♦♦Z
♦♦♦♦♦♦♦♦♦♦♦♦♦♦♦♦♦♦♦♦♦♦E
♦♦♦♦♦♦♦♦♦♦♦♦♦♦♦♦♦♦♦♦♦♦♦V
♦♦♦♦♦♦♦♦♦♦♦♦♦♦♦♦♦♦♦♦♦♦♦♦Z.Us

Anonymous:

♥J
♥♥O
♥♥♥Z
♥♥♥♥E
♥♥♥♥♥V
♥♥♥♥♥♥Z.us
♣♣♣♣♣♣♣♣♣♣J
♣♣♣♣♣♣♣♣♣♣♣O
♣♣♣♣♣♣♣♣♣♣♣♣Z
♣♣♣♣♣♣♣♣♣♣♣♣♣E
♣♣♣♣♣♣♣♣♣♣♣♣♣♣V
♣♣♣♣♣♣♣♣♣♣♣♣♣♣♣Z.Us
♠♠♠♠♠♠♠♠♠♠♠♠♠♠♠♠♠♠♠J
♠♠♠♠♠♠♠♠♠♠♠♠♠♠♠♠♠♠♠♠O
♠♠♠♠♠♠♠♠♠♠♠♠♠♠♠♠♠♠♠♠♠Z
♠♠♠♠♠♠♠♠♠♠♠♠♠♠♠♠♠♠♠♠♠♠E
♠♠♠♠♠♠♠♠♠♠♠♠♠♠♠♠♠♠♠♠♠♠♠V
♠♠♠♠♠♠♠♠♠♠♠♠♠♠♠♠♠♠♠♠♠♠♠♠Z.Us
♦♦♦♦♦♦♦♦♦♦♦♦♦♦♦♦♦♦♦♦♦♦♦♦♦♦♦♦J
♦♦♦♦♦♦♦♦♦♦♦♦♦♦♦♦♦♦♦♦♦♦♦♦♦♦♦♦♦O
♦♦♦♦♦♦♦♦♦♦♦♦♦♦♦♦♦♦♦♦♦♦♦♦♦♦♦♦♦♦Z
♦♦♦♦♦♦♦♦♦♦♦♦♦♦♦♦♦♦♦♦♦♦♦♦♦♦♦♦♦♦♦E
♦♦♦♦♦♦♦♦♦♦♦♦♦♦♦♦♦♦♦♦♦♦♦♦♦♦♦♦♦♦♦♦V
♦♦♦♦♦♦♦♦♦♦♦♦♦♦♦♦♦♦♦♦♦♦♦♦♦♦♦♦♦♦♦♦♦Z.Us

Anonymous:

♥J
♥♥O
♥♥♥Z
♥♥♥♥E
♥♥♥♥♥V
♥♥♥♥♥♥ Z.us
♣♣♣♣♣♣♣♣♣♣♣♣J
♣♣♣♣♣♣♣♣♣♣♣♣♣O
♣♣♣♣♣♣♣♣♣♣♣♣♣♣Z
♣♣♣♣♣♣♣♣♣♣♣♣♣♣♣E
♣♣♣♣♣♣♣♣♣♣♣♣♣♣♣♣V
♣♣♣♣♣♣♣♣♣♣♣♣♣♣♣♣♣Z.Us
♠♠♠♠♠♠♠♠♠♠♠♠♠♠♠♠♠♠♠♠♠♠♠J
♠♠♠♠♠♠♠♠♠♠♠♠♠♠♠♠♠♠♠♠♠♠♠♠O
♠♠♠♠♠♠♠♠♠♠♠♠♠♠♠♠♠♠♠♠♠♠♠♠♠Z
♠♠♠♠♠♠♠♠♠♠♠♠♠♠♠♠♠♠♠♠♠♠♠♠♠♠E
♠♠♠♠♠♠♠♠♠♠♠♠♠♠♠♠♠♠♠♠♠♠♠♠♠♠&spadesV
♠♠♠♠♠♠♠♠♠♠♠♠♠♠♠♠♠♠♠♠♠♠♠♠♠♠♠♠ Z.Us
♦♦♦♦♦♦♦♦♦♦♦♦♦♦♦♦♦♦♦♦♦♦♦♦♦♦♦♦♦♦♦♦♦J
♦♦♦♦♦♦♦♦♦♦♦♦♦♦♦♦♦♦♦♦♦♦♦♦♦♦♦♦♦♦♦♦♦♦O
♦♦♦♦♦♦♦♦♦♦♦♦♦♦♦♦♦♦♦♦♦♦♦♦♦♦♦♦♦♦♦♦♦♦♦Z
♦♦♦♦♦♦♦♦♦♦♦♦♦♦♦♦♦♦♦♦♦♦♦♦♦♦♦♦♦♦♦♦♦♦♦♦E
♦♦♦♦♦♦♦♦♦♦♦♦♦♦♦♦♦♦♦♦♦♦♦♦♦♦♦♦♦♦♦♦♦♦♦♦♦V
♦♦♦♦♦♦♦♦♦♦♦♦♦♦♦♦♦♦♦♦♦♦♦♦♦♦♦♦♦♦♦♦♦♦♦♦♦♦ Z.Us

Test 7-11:

♥J
♥♥O
♥♥♥Z
♥♥♥♥E
♥♥♥♥♥V
♥♥♥♥♥♥ Z.us
♣♣♣♣♣♣♣♣♣♣♣♣J
♣♣♣♣♣♣♣♣♣♣♣♣♣O
♣♣♣♣♣♣♣♣♣♣♣♣♣♣Z
♣♣♣♣♣♣♣♣♣♣♣♣♣♣♣E
♣♣♣♣♣♣♣♣♣♣♣♣♣♣♣♣V
♣♣♣♣♣♣♣♣♣♣♣♣♣♣♣♣♣Z.Us
♠♠♠♠♠♠♠♠♠♠♠♠♠♠♠♠♠♠&sapdes;♠♠♠♠J
♠♠♠♠♠♠♠♠♠♠♠♠♠♠♠♠♠♠&sapdes;♠♠♠♠♠O
♠♠♠♠♠♠♠♠♠♠♠♠♠♠♠♠♠♠&sapdes;♠♠♠♠♠♠Z
♠♠♠♠♠♠♠♠♠♠♠♠♠♠♠♠♠♠&sapdes;♠♠♠♠♠♠♠E
♠♠♠♠♠♠♠♠♠♠♠♠♠♠♠♠♠♠&sapdes;♠♠♠♠♠♠♠&spadesV
♠♠♠♠♠♠♠♠♠♠♠♠♠♠♠♠♠♠&sapdes;♠♠♠♠♠♠♠♠♠ Z.Us
♦♦♦♦♦♦♦♦♦♦♦♦♦♦♦♦♦♦♦♦♦♦♦♦♦♦♦♦♦♦♦♦♦J
♦♦♦♦♦♦♦♦♦♦♦♦♦♦♦♦♦♦♦♦♦♦♦♦♦♦♦♦♦♦♦♦♦♦O
♦♦♦♦♦♦♦♦♦♦♦♦♦♦♦♦♦♦♦♦♦♦♦♦♦♦♦♦♦♦♦♦♦♦♦Z
♦♦♦♦♦♦♦♦♦♦♦♦♦♦♦♦♦♦♦♦♦♦♦♦♦♦♦♦♦♦♦♦♦♦♦♦E
♦♦♦♦♦♦♦♦♦♦♦♦♦♦♦♦♦♦♦♦♦♦♦♦♦♦♦♦♦♦♦♦♦♦♦♦♦V
♦♦♦♦♦♦♦♦♦♦♦♦♦♦♦♦♦♦♦♦♦♦♦♦♦♦♦♦♦♦♦♦♦♦♦♦♦♦ Z.Us

Anonymous:

...~~~~~....O -----___
...~~~~~ ---O-----

Anonymous:

...~~~~~....O -----___
...~~~~~ ---O-----

Testing Testing Humans:

.......~~~~~~~~~~~~
...~~~~~....∧ -----___
.~~~~....(♦)...............\
~~~~~................]={|)...)..))h))e))l))l))o )♥)♥)♥)♥)♥
.~~~~....(♦).......___./
...~~~~~ ---∨-----
.......~~~~~~~~~~~~


Anonymous:

.......~~~~~~~~~~~~
...~~~~~....∧ -----___
.~~~~....(♣)...............\
~~~~~................]={|)...)
.~~~~....(♥).......___./
...~~~~~ ---∨-----
.......~~~~~~~~~~~~

Anonymous:

.......~~~~~~~~~~~~
...~~~~~....∧ -----___
.~~~~....(♦)...............\
~~~~~................]={|)...)
.~~~~....(♦).......___./
...~~~~~ ---∨-----
.......~~~~~~~~~~~~

Anonymous:

.......~~~~~~~~~~~~
...~~~~~....∨ -----___
.~~~~....(♦)...............\
~~~~~................]={|)...)
.~~~~....(♦).......___./
...~~~~~ ---∨-----
.......~~~~~~~~~~~~

Anonymous:

.......~~~~~~~~~~~~
...~~~~~....^ -----___
.~~~~....(o)...............\
~~~~~................]={|)...)
.~~~~....(o).......___./
...~~~~~ ---∨-----
.......~~~~~~~~~~~~

spiderman2:

Here's that Mormon again, Jovez, spilling his trash on this board. He is a Romney supporter. I'm just glad his candidate is now out.

Anonymous:

♥.J
♥♥..O
♥♥♥...Z
♥♥♥♥....E
♥♥♥♥♥....V
♥♥♥♥♥♥......Z.us

Anonymous:

♥J
♥♥O
♥♥♥Z
♥♥♥♥E
♥♥♥♥♥V
♥♥♥♥♥♥Z.us

Anonymous:

∞ ∞ ∞ ∞

⊕ ⊕ ⊕ ⊕

Ξ Ξ Ξ Ξ Ξ Ξ

Ω Ω Ω Ω

† † † †

Anonymous:

now available!

Anonymous:

Emphasized text

Strong text

Definition term

Computer code text

Sample computer code text

Keyboard text

Variable

Citation

Anonymous:



Anonymous:

Big text

Anonymous:
1 2 3 4
Anonymous:

not yet available. now available!


Anonymous:

a dozen is 20 12 pieces!

JRLR:

Thanks so much for the link, Jason.

Impressive, all one finds there. I imagine you are one of the men who testified. Takes a lot of courage to bear witness...

I now want to spend more time on that site.

I'll keep checking there for updates.

Thanks again and all the best.

Anonymous:

OPERATION

BOY

OH

BOY

MON

Anonymous:
1 2 3 4
Anonymous:
ONE TWO BUCKLE ME SHOE
Anonymous:

BEFORE AFTER

Anonymous:
  1. WARNING
  2. WARNING
Anonymous:

PEACE

PAZ

SHOLOM

AHIMSA

SALAAM

LOVE

LIFE

HAPPYNES

Anonymous:

POiNT

POiNT

Anonymous:
  • LiFE iS
  • MIRACLE
Anonymous:

Teletype text

Italic text

Bold text

Big text

Small text

Anonymous:
HELO APOCALYPTARIAN-NATION, SWEET U.S.A.
Anonymous:


HELLO!


WORLD!


))))))))))))))))))!

Anonymous:

This is some text This is some text

Anonymous:


tag has no end tag (or closing tag), it breaks one of the rules for future HTML (the XML based XHTML), namely that all elements must be closed.

Writing it like

Testing testing:
This is a heading This is a heading This is a heading This is a heading This is a heading This is a heading
Anonymous:



Oh, "i'm lovin this. Yeah!.

Thank You:

"i" & WE have been deliberately discriminated against O.U.R. APOCALYPTARIAN FAiTh!

"i" Have bee Isolated via key-word-blocking. "i" have been Exiled & Vanquished & Robbed etcc, by WASHINGTON POST, NEWSWEEK, NY-POST, NY-TIMES, NBC-Channel 7, NYC et al!

"i", nor any Blogger, is allowed to spell (normaly) Horizontaly, on one Line , either:


S
H
I
L
O
H
(which means Peace Bioblically) so WAPO is anti-Peace etc... AND

J
O
Z
E
V
Z.us
(Try Typing me name & hit the "post" button & ye will be rejected/Sensored!?????


or

T
R
A
N
S
F
I
N
I
T
Y
(The BOOK Of), yea, what are they hiding or running from? WHO IS BEHIND THIS WAPO???


or

E
C
L
A
T
A
R
I
A
N
(like saying 'JU" or "Christian" or Hindu or "Muslom" now Forbidden to say or write [ECL][AT][ARi][AN].

AND afew other 'KEY" words!

SHAME ON YOU WAPO, Shame Crying Shame:


NOTE: Soon "i" & et al, will sue them (their Prejudice & anti-Constitution & Anti-American) and PROVE O.U.R. Case in Federal Court in N.Y.C..

To start with: ONE HUNDRED MILLION DOLLARS, and with "PUNITIVE" Damages & Other remedy's, $$1,000,000,000 !!!

"i" divulged TOO MUCH InFO/HONESTY. Now they are trying to Steal The NEW SONG coming from all O.U.R. Old songs for Healing of Nations, WorlD PEace & Many more Prophetic, as Biblically Promised, good tidings, for Better never Worse etc...!

Guess it is a Dog Eat Dog World after all, especiall & Suprisingly at WAPO's "onfaith" (imagine blocking thoese words theirs??) "onreligion" & "postglobal" sites!

WE are Going to have OUR Day in Court Soon. I'll keep ye Posted ALL! Thank You for your Insight And Pattern Recognition ability's, CYBER FRIEND!

Note: They are in Outright Violation of FEDERAL LAW & ORDER(s)!!!!!!!!! Not un-JUSTLY their (O.U.R.) Sweet Sweet Holy Man Made "CONSTITUTION", aka THE-2nd-BIBLE!

"O.ne U.niversal R.eligion-Book Of [TRAN[S][Finity]" is 1st! aka "O.U.R. BOT!"

And HUMAN, not HUMATE made Bibles are 3rd in line of genuine importance, if any any more!

hence the "NEW-SONG"....

They have to correct their SIN's not "i" et al!


Eeeee Haaaaa!


Anonymous:

HELLO WORLD

jrlr-
you don't have to go foreign sources to hear about what's really going on in Iraq. Iraq Veterans Against the War testified in Maryland this weekend about our experiences there. The full archives of the testimony, three days worth, will be made available on our website soon. Later this year, we'll have a DVD and book (published by Haymarket) available also. In the meantime, keep checking there for updates. Click on my name for the website.

Ilyas Ali Khan:

Mr Zakariah,
The War is still unclear five years,hence.Why did the American politicians go into this War? Is it Oil or Is it to free Iraq? Is their a hidden agenda? Until all these questions remain unanswered, their will be no solution to Iraq.

Scott:

My words are stuck in the loop as well. It matters not that I spent a year there. The few times that I got to actually meet the people that live there and ask them what they thought, made me think that I was meeting someone back home, or in the university here. I did not get a chance to speak with the one's that shot at me, I am sure they did not want me to be there, or they thought that I was just from another tribe, and I was on their land. Interesting though, they do not share our sense of nationalism. The "bad people" that we consider... creating so much havoc do not have any work- ya know 9 to 5 and all that. And to kill another human being (for some) is not viewed the way we do, their worldview is so much different than we can conceive. All I see and think about in the here and Now, in our comfortable world here in the US; is so far removed from there. I will cite an example. a Nato soldier used a dog to sniff out weapons, once he was killed for his "offence" peace once again reigned. The tragedy was that he did not know the wordview, not the killing. Now after you swallow that, I want you to think for two consequtive seconds past your own worldview. What matters now is what is happening now. Not shifting blame or trying to create a deep conversation over expresso. There is no oil there by the way, we cannot afford to leave because we are on the biggest breakthrough in Human understanding since slavery was abolished. It is hard to see past our own arrogance. Maybe you should just go there and see for yourself, you still can you know.

Scott:

My words are stuck in the loop as well. It matters not that I spent a year there. The few times that I got to actually meet the people that live there and ask them what they thought, made me think that I was meeting someone back home, or in the university here. I did not get a chance to speak with the one's that shot at me, I am sure they did not want me to be there, or they thought that I was just from another tribe, and I was on their land. Interesting though, they do not share our sense of nationalism. The "bad people" that we consider... creating so much havoc do not have any work- ya know 9 to 5 and all that. And to kill another human being (for some) is not viewed the way we do, their worldview is so much different than we can conceive. All I see and think about in the here and Now, in our comfortable world here in the US; is so far removed from there. I will cite an example. a Nato soldier used a dog to sniff out weapons, once he was killed for his "offence" peace once again reigned. The tragedy was that he did not know the wordview, not the killing. Now after you swallow that, I want you to think for two consequtive seconds past your own worldview. What matters now is what is happening now. Not shifting blame or trying to create a deep conversation over expresso. There is no oil there by the way, we cannot afford to leave because we are on the biggest breakthrough in Human understanding since slavery was abolished. It is hard to see past our own arrogance. Maybe you should just go there and see for yourself, you still can you know.

Ken G:

The problem we face in Iraq is analagous to the one we faced in Vietnam, or the German Army faced in their invasion of the Soviet Union. Confusing operational success with strategic success! Unless your operational success has a defined strategic goal, and incrementally contributes to that goal, you're just winning battles that may not have any relationship to winning the war.

As an Army Officer, we study this problem in our various staff schools. See "Makers of Modern Stategy" (an excellent book) for detailed discussions of this topic.

JRLR:

Mr Zakaria,

Did we ignore that since even before the inception of that military adventure in Iraq to this very day we were, without interruption, lied to and deceived, many of the words and expressions you use, above, would sound to us surrealistic.

But then why do we still have to turn to the foreign press in order to read: “'We can't live like this' -- Playgrounds have become cemeteries. Bridges have become battlegrounds. Hopes for freedom and the spread of democracy are dead…. The overflowing graveyard in Aadhamiya is a microcosm of what has happened across Iraq in the past five years.” (Mark Mackinnon, Saturday's Toronto Globe and Mail, March 15, 2008)?

Why do we still have to turn to Britain’s “The Independent”, if we are to be informed that: “There WILL be a public inquiry into Iraq -- Brown: 'There is a need to learn all possible lessons from the military action ... and its aftermath'… Where are they now? The faces of the Iraq war five years on… There are so many questions over this inept intervention… A gross failure that ignored history and ended with a humiliating retreat…”?

Why is it that it is only thanks to “The Guardian” that people like Ghaith Abdul-Ahad return to Baghdad? “To mark the fifth anniversary of the Iraq war, the award-winning journalist returns to the city where he was born and lived for 30 years -- Death, destruction and fear on the streets of cafes, poets and booksellers”.

Doesn’t all that material, and much more that appears in foreign media, speak volumes on the current situation, in Iraq? If so, why does our vocabulary on Iraq, in this country, remain so surrealistic?

We have invaded, occupied, bombed extensively, and used even depleted uranium against civilian populations. Our achievements now stare us right in the face: innumerable people are dead, maimed, have disappeared, are being detained, tortured, and infants are suffering from malformations at birth. We did not even care to count, for “We’re not in the victims accounting business”, are we? Iraq and at least a generation of Iraqis have now been destroyed; and while social chaos prevailed, we have done everything so a civil war would ensue… with the result that countless Iraqi refugees have now left Iraq.

That, you may admit, is not your standard way to “build a sustainable (security) architecture” (!), let alone to “reconstruct” (!) a country we have meticulously destroyed for many years, as we were supposed to do: for apparently we only destroy to better reconstruct, don’t we?

So we broke it, and now we own it. We have made so many enemies in the process that for decades to come, the consequences of our criminal activities will come to haunt us. Not the least of them will be the large number of Iraq vets who will choose to put an end to their miserable lives, while, as was the case after Vietnam, nobody will even care to understand why.

Yes, every indication is we are in Iraq to stay; not for “an unending peacekeeping operation”, as you put it, but to do more and more of the same. Now what is the problem? Don’t we already have all the permanent military bases we need there? And are we not in the process of having, in Iraq, our largest embassy the world has seen? Some may have thought we would be staying, what do you think?

Lies and deception are the way to no future. Only truth will set us free.

If only, after more than five years, our media would come out of their unending self-induced coma! Alas, there is yet no prince to be seen, in the vicinity of Sleeping Beauty’s castle.

Rigged:

It's VERY encouraging to see so many people on this blog who really understand what's going on in Iraq:
-- Bush, Cheney, McCain etc say the surge is "working," but what does that really mean? Oh, now only about 30 Iraqi civilians are being killed EACH DAY, on average, last I read...though that number appears to be going up. The situation clearly shows that, ultimately, we have no prayer of leaving behind in Iraq anything but a deeply divisive society of sectarian religious factions that hate each other -- the Shi'ites and Sunnis have been killing each other since the 7th Century! ... and there is certainly no love lost between Arabs and Kurds in Iraq. There's been essentially NO "reconciliation" between the factions that the reduction in violence was supposed to encourage.
-- Any conceit regarding Iraq supposedly serving as a "guiding light of democracy" in the Middle East is a very cruel fantasy. What possible evidence is there over the past 5 years to give even the slightest indication that that might be feasible? Name just one factor? Not slaughtering each other as much as before hardly counts.
-- What could possibly happen in Iraq to justify the spending of trillions! of our dollars, and the waste of thousands of American lives and hundreds of thousands of Iraqi lives? There is absolutely nothing even remotely achievable that could justify the cost we've already incurred, much less the expense to come. As has been proven and proven and proven, Saddam Husayn did NOT have nuclear weapons, and would not have had any for any number of years. And, even so, was he any more crazed than Kim Chong-il in North Korea? I don't think so, and Kim is not lobbing nuclear weapons at us. (Even the looniest dictator has to know that firing a nuclear weapon at us would reduce their life span to a matter of hours. They may be crazy in a lot of ways, but they're not that stupid.)
-- I agree with the tenor of the comments by Janax. I don't think the Republicans will "push a Democratic president to get out of Iraq," but I'm convinced they are trying to ensure that they will be able to blame a Democratic president for the ultimate disaster and humiliation for the US in Iraq. Limbaugh, by the way, has already been reported as saying that he's inclined to vote for a Democrat over McCain...he doesn't like McCain anyhow, but would much rather see a Democrat take the flack for what ultimately happens.
We should remove our troops from Iraq, beginning immediately. While more killing might occur, I find it amazing how those who knew so little about what would happen before we invaded now have such higher wisdom to know for a certainty what would happen if we withdrew immediately. As Joseph Anthony says on this blog, it's up to the Iraqis to "settle" this...we've proven that they're the only ones who can, and our presence only makes things worse.

leo m:

zzim
Thats the other lie.OIL
Maybe These corporations that want the OIL should pay for it,like we do.

Shiveh:

Iraq has become a microcosm of the whole Middle East. The power imbalance that makes feuding parties distrust each other; American military as the guardian of the status quo; oil as the underlying reason for the outside interest, all are the same in both conflicts. The blood feud between Shia and Sunnis in Iraq resembles the one between Arabs and Jews. Refusal of the Shia to share their power and unwillingness of the Sunnis to accept the Shia dominance have the same underlying historical mistrust that make co-existence of the Israelis and Palestinians an improbability.

For over 60 years a military solution has eluded the Middle East. The same is proving to be the case in Iraq. Balance of powers and removal of forceful influence from outside the region are the prerequisites to reach a solution for both conflicts.

Tim F:

So often writers in Newsweek, WSJ, etc. talk about free markets in situations where free markets may not belong. In fact the last posting I read by Mr. Zakaria here was about NAFTA and I posted a comment that losing one's ability to manufacture things was more important than free trade.

But in Iraq, I am curious why free market ideas are not much more prevelant. What do the Iraqis have to look forward to? If peace broke out today it seems Iraq's prospects involve more civil war.

Why isn't anyone talking about Hernando de Soto anymore? The Peruvian economist who claims to have helped win the struggle against the communist rebels, the Shining Path, had a lot of ideas that would seem to translate perfectly in Iraq.

Get the economy moving! Put troops around the factories and reopen them, rehire baathists and the army. Get Iraqis working, or at least let them see some prospects for work, so that the average Iraqi sees a reason to put pressure on the government to get something done, or to tell the government to get out of the way.

Additionally, make the country a deal with their oil that will pay us back some but that keeps the money in Iraq. Although this war has cost us dearly, Iraq needs the money worse than we do, any way you slice it.

Putting government in charge of creating democracy is like putting the people in charge of creating a dictatorship, it is backwards. The people will get involved if they have something to do and something to look forward to. Believe that!

leo m:

When is the mainstream media challenge this bull about this continuation in Iraq.
The whole world knows its been an outragious lie from the begining.
You people in the mainstream media are either affraid to standup for the truth or the people you work for are bought and sold and will not allow to print it.
The picture of cheney and petreaus today in Baghdad says it all.
It says, all is under control and we will keep alqaeda alive enough in Iraq to justify our presence.

Walter Chin:

Killing a few Americans for the military industrial complex is no sweat to the majority of Republican. After all, those who enlist men are not draftees. Congressman Rangel was right when he said that the war in Iraq would be over tomorrow if there were draftees dying in Iraq.

kwieczerza:

The "surge" is better referred to as the "Petreaus Patch", as it's an unsustainable strategy designed in large part to let Bush ride his term out saying things had "improved" and that he'd be "vindicated", and furthermore to distract the attention of the public from Iraq during an election year.

Let's review what makes the Petreaus Patch a "success", shall we?

-An unsutainable level of troops (somewhere around 150,00) on the ground in Iraq - the size and cost of which continues to strain our military and economic resources (just what we need during a recession, right?)

-The Sunni "Awakening", which is code for "we'll pay you guys to stop shooting us and planting IEDs, we'll give you guns and ammunition, if only you'd give over your fellow Sunnis who you can identify as 'insurgents'". Yes - we pay and arm Sunni groups that we were fighting this time last year - that strategy ALWAYS works

-The continued hiatus of the JAM/Sadrists, which seems to be Moqtada's way of waiting out the surge of US troops and pulling the political strings from Iran - mind you, certain elements of JAM seem to be getting tired of the ceasefire


At the end of the day, we're playing Sunni against Shia in the name of "politcal progress" (which has worked wonders!), we're keeping a bloated and taxing force on the ground, we're ignoring the resurgent Talibs and Jihadis at the Pak-Afghan border, and we're relying on militant groups to do much of the hard work for us.

No tangible politcal progress. Continually deplorable humanitarian conditions. An admission that having anything other than this current flimsy strategy (which is, again unsustainable) in place will unleash hell once again.

Exactly what part of the Petreaus Patch can be called a success? That's easy!

-Media coverage of the war has slumped immensely during this, an election year

-Bush, Cheney, and their supporters have been granted the opportunity to blame whoever has the sorry task of dealing with the Patch's aftermath of ruining "a proven strategy". The nationwide Republican psyche is helped by this, and if a Democrat wins office, beings the necessary drawdown, and deals with the situation like an adult, the masses on the right will be able to cry out "See! The democrats hate victory and America!"

Only the simple-minded, jaded, and purely partisan believe that the Petreaus Patch constitues anything but a postponement of the inevitable - more Iraqi bloodshed, more wasted resources, and heaps of disgrace for Republicans (and more importantly, Americans).

Thanks, MSM, for making all of this so clear!

Anatomy of a Tribal Revolt by Dave Kilcullen, Small Wars Journal, 29 August 2007.

Anatomy of a Tribal Revolt by Dave Kilcullen, Small Wars Journal, 29 August 2007.

Julie W.:

Great comment Jaxas. You're exactly right. All Bush and company are trying to do now is stall and run out the clock. Then he will forever claim that it was his successor who lost Iraq.

ZZim:

Fareed, you see clearly. All that you talk about has indeed happened and your predictions will come true. However, you seem to be trying to tell us that these are bad things, therefore the war itself was a bad idea. I disagree with that. I think that these are all bad things, too, but I also think that these things a much, much less worse than the alternative - Saddam, etc.

So while you see the situation in sad, gloomy terms, I see it in much happier terms. We both see exactly the same things and foresee exactly the same future possibilities. But I compare that to the likely future we would have had to face if we had not deposed the Saddamist government. A nuclear-armed dictator with 70% of the world's economic life-blood (oil) either under his direct control or within reach of his missiles and warplanes.

Sure, if we pulled out of Iraq now, there would be horrible bloodshed, so we stay. If we had never gone there, Saddam would have finished unraveling the UN sanctions, re-started his mothballed nuclear program, and become an even greater menace than ever before.

Like it or not, oil is the cornerstone of the global economy. It is therefore worth fighting over.

rkerg:

Jaxas, I don't think that I could have said it better
myself. The Repubs, ever since the Korean war have portrayed themselves as the party that really knows
how to use the military effectively and their debacle in Iraq shows everyone what a lie that was.

frank burns:

Suppose that if we pulled out, they "suddenly" find a way to make things work?

Joseph Anthony:

I have not understood the long-term logic of the surge. Many of the Sunnis insurgents have allied themselves with us this past year. This alliance has driven many Shites against us. As the Sunnis become stronger, the Shites try to increase their own strength. Rather than buying time for a political settlement, the surge is giving both sides breathing time for an even more violent civil war. What is our interest in this? Our casualties, reduced but still painful(tell the families of the 10 Americans killed just last week that the the casualities are negliable) can only grow as one side or the other perceives us as opponents.
If we withdraw now, I imagine there will be a spike in violence. But John McCain aside, we are not going to stay the next hundred years, trying to keep the sides apart and suffering growing casualties along the way. If the Iraqies wish to avert a civil war, they are going to have to figure out a way to do it on their own. I feel some guilt. Americans, against my will but still in my name, have done tremendous damage to Iraq. But our staying there only prolongs the agony.

Joe de Snapper:

We're getting what we deserve--we followed the neocon idiots blindly and will pay and pay for their greed for generations. Maybe if we're burned badly enough we'll lear to demand rational thinking, rather than panicky knee-jerk neocon responses.

Jim:

Fareed Zakaria, Bush and neo-cons like them cannot grasp what the so-called ‘terrorist’ brings to the table. These so-called intellectuals are one-sided idiots who can only look at what is in America’s and the west best interest.

The problem is, was and will always be numeric and contiguous. You see Fareed (sic bush) there are more of them and they live there. The fight that America and the west involved themselves in started with the Crusaders nearly seven hundred years ago.

The military arrogance of America and the west convinced them that they could force a change of mentality on millions if not billions of people. We now see that this arrogance is laughable. We are witnessing a hand full ‘terrorist’ embarrass the most powerful country in the world and there is no way out due to arrogance.

‘Terrorist’ can bomb and destroy the priceless pipeline for infinitum. ‘Terrorist’ can send vest wearing suicide bombers at the west for infinitum. Bin Laden must have read the story of the tar baby and understood it. America and the west read this same story but didn’t understand it. Maybe they ought to re-read it, make an honest effort to understand it and begin figuring how to remove two hands and a foot before they make that final kick. END THE WAR IN IRAQ.

Anonymous:

i think they should send all our troops back because they are doing no good in iraq.most of our troops are getting killed. and bush is doing nothing to help our loved ones that are in iraq he just keeps sending them.i think we should have kept bush from being presedent hes done nothing but demolish our troops our loved ones our heros

jaxas:

Only when a democrat inhabits the Oval Office will you start hearing the right demanding some sort of permanent solution in Iraq. For the present, everything is in stall mode to give George W. Bush cover. Once Bush is gone and the dangers of a pullout no longer threaten him, you can rest assured the GOP will push a democratic President to get out of Iraq. Then, they can blame the democrats for what is almost a certain inevitability--a civil war in Iraq.

That is the Bush-Cheney-GOP strategy, just as the extraordinary Bear Stearns bailout is a Hail Mary pass to stave off a looming financial crisis until Bush is out of office. They know what is coming and McCain is nothing more than their fallback patsy if the dems implode. That way, the conservatives can skate away from their accountability for the mess they have created in the world.

Limbaugh can happily go about chirping historical revisionism that Bush had everything under control until the democrats--or a moderate to liberal republican took over. This is the neoconservative game plan. Watch and learn.

PostGlobal is an interactive conversation on global issues moderated by Newsweek International Editor Fareed Zakaria and David Ignatius of The Washington Post. It is produced jointly by Newsweek and washingtonpost.com, as is On Faith, a conversation on religion. Please send us your comments, questions and suggestions.