Sirs, you echo, not think, and your whole tone is insulting. You pronounce "your" views as if there is some hidden, magical sense to them, which you guard like a virgin's honor, but in fact there is none, never has been and never will be.
"Grasping a quagmire from the jaws of victory" very openly refers to the time Saddam's government (and statue) fell. Had there been enough troops deployed to the theater, and the right kinds, and had an insurgency been anticipated, as it should have been, then there was a good chance that the sacking of the museum and the consequent sense of lawlessness would not have developed into guerilla warfare: the dissident opposition arming itself and going to ground in a death-struggle occasioned, as much as anything, by early administration botching of the dictates of the "reconciliation" they so desperately seek now.
Rather than dwell on that, try addressing these questions, which I pose in good faith from another thread:
The way it appears to me, the politics in Iraq are headed for a resolution sympathetic to Shiite interests (in the worse case scenario, a frank Islamic Republic under al-Sadr) and hostile to Sunni interests, especially former Baathist interests. But in between, are there players in sufficient numbers capable of swinging the balance of power in the country to a more inclusive, reconciling model?
Perhaps th Kurds could act as brokers in this regard. But do they have any interest or capacity to do so? It would seem that their main interest is in protecting their own autonomous enclave, which they want to preserve through eventual independence or autonomy in a loose federation. Beyond the Kurds, are there any groups strategically situated to act as both a buffer and a catalyst for a more inclusive politics, that is without offering themselves as targets in their own right in the present civil war? Are the secularists numerous enough to offer ideas of resonating importance? (It would seem not.) How about Christians or other "exaggerated minority" groups? (Ditto.) What about "the believer but not the true believer" Muslims, both Sunni and Shiite, who might constitute that moderate core?
As to the latter, branching out beyond religious strictures, are the cultural bonds of religion too great to undergo a successful reconciliation? Indeed, do tribal loyalties supplant religion as the organizing principle for many? Indeed, what are the ideas in Iraq vying for preeminence as the "foundational or core principles" around which everything can organize?
Any comments? These are very basic concerns. The whole enterprise of reconciliation, which has to proceed if Iraq is to end this long night of the soul short of catastrophe, depends on these answers, or answers to ones of similar ilk.
