Sunday, February 18, 2007

Senate Resolution To Debate Iraq Surge Resolution Falls Short

Yesterday with just 56 votes, a resoltion in the Senate to begin a debate on the surge resolution fell short. But in many ways far more than simply this resolution fell short. What's missing is a very serious discussion in Congress about the war in Iraq, and offering some solutions that can restablize this nation enough that both Iraqi security is greatly improved, and most U.S. troops can leave Iraq. By this time, the 2003 Bush Administration and Pentagon war planners had actually expected that only 5,000 U.S. troops would remain in Iraq.

Up until today, the security situation had looked a little bit better in Iraq, with dead bodies with torture signs down to just 10 a day from the normal 40 to 50 a day. Today 3 car bombs hit Baghdad and the nearby Sadr City area. Perhaps insurgents merely held their powder to access the new security crackdown, and then found some holes in this security, and have been able to exploit them in these three new confidence shattering attacks.

But signs are that in general that sectarian violence is increasing into a serious regional problem as the result of the botched 2003 Iraq War policy of the Bush Admininstration. Iran has become the battle front in this expanding regional war of sectarian conflict, not only with claims of arms into Iraq, but also two spectacular attacks by Sunni insurgents associated with Al Qaeda targeting both Iran's Revolutionary Guards and an Iranian girls's school with terrorist bombings this week. Signs are that the war in Iraq has only unleashed Sunni vs. Shiite violence in the region, where Iran and Saudi Arabia may both become actively involved if the U.S. should leave Iraq, only creating a further power vacuum and struggle for power between the Sunni and Shiite Muslim world and a far more serious war in the region.

The UN has 15 peacekeeping missions in the world to prevent a steep slide into violence in many critical areas involving more than 80,000 troops and civilian staff including such nations as China, Denmark and El Salavador. As long as the U.S. is involved with boots on the ground in Iraq, and has been entirely responisible for all the instability problems in Iraq, then certasinly as General Colin Powell once claimed, that if we "break it", we will own it.

The debate in Congress seeems to ignore answers to preventing an increasing sectarian war in Iraq, and instead seems to have degenerated down to a basicly dumb debate of those so digusted with the war in Iraq, that they are willing to pull out U.S. troops out as quickly as possible, despite the huge growing humanitarian and regional possibility of war consequences, and another dumb debate that simply seeks to offer political support to the Bush Administration for giving the U.S. and Iraq this terrible war.

Why the debate about this war isn't far more intelligent in Congress, and debating some solutions, not just some sentiment that things went bad in Iraq, we want out as soon as possible despite whatever problems it creates, or silly cheerleading for the Bush Administration is a very good question. But Iraq is a very serious problem that deserves a very wise discussion to restabilize the region to stop the growing sectarian problem and to leave Iraq in reasonable condition so that U.S. troops can safely exit without setting up the region for next big war.

If a regional war between Shiite Iran and Sunni Saudi Arabia results and the Western world loses their oil supply from the MidEast and you cannot get gasoline to drive your car, or heating oil for your home, and the Western world gets sucked into a possible huge regional war because of this sectarain conflict in Islam, then little has been gained by the U.S. leaving only a power vacuum in Iraq. The U.S. clearly must leave some stability behind in Iraq, and some political resolution in place to prevent growing sectarism. This should be the center of the debate in Congress, not just political grandstanding by both sides that seems empty of any real discussion of some solutions so that U.S. troops can safely exit without creating more problems for the region. Otherwise the U.S. could certainly find themselves sucked back into the region before very long in a very big way if the growing sectarian conflict spreads into a huge regional war.


Post a Comment

<< Home