After Saddam was captured, the UN should’ve stepped in with a peace keeping force until the Iraqis could build and train their own police force.

End of story. Hindsight is beautiful!

Now, my problem…I still don’t think the war itself was a mistake, and despite his own words, I don’t think Goldberg does, either.

His problem doesn’t seem to be with what we knew ex ante, but what we should have known ex ante: namely, that the region would erupt, and make our larger goals (democracy & stability) sufficiently difficult that we shouldn’t have embarked on that path.

He’s vague enough that your reading is just as plausible as mine, though. Perhaps he should’ve thought a little harder, since his lack of clarity strikes me as a failure of thought, rather than a failure of articulation.

they simply cannot gather en masse. That is the next evolutionary step they must take if they are to succeed in having a more significant role in destabilzation.

Thier non-involvement will teach Bush, becuase he will need this knowledge for his two years left in office, and the Iraqis are irelevant.

What a noble world we have offended.

The nationalistic movement in germany is replaced by socialism/communism. WW II never occurs, but country by country, communism continues-violent overthrow and deaths of moderates contained within countries, so no one bothers to interfere, becuase they are not involved.

global apathy, regardless of your political convictions, is the greatest danger we face. If our actions made the world more apathetic to helping fledgling democracies, it is as much their mistake as the one goldberg alludes we made.

the truth is that the world has not changed in their commitment ot action, but Iraq has further cemented the belief of isolation. Sooner or later there will be another hitler, with bio/chem/ and nukes. The world will answer for its apathy on that day.

Pretty much the same troops we have now. There are a large number of Iraqi troops capable of handling many duties in many of the provinces, even in Bagdhad. In fact, I’d give them Bagdhad to secure and let them have at it. It’s THEIR capitol, after all.

Additionally, we don’t have to have a solid line like Hadrian’s wall there. Small outposts, linked together with comms and supporting battery fire would be ideal, and having large quick reaction forces deployed within 20 minutes would be, I believe, an ideal situation. Border patrol by airborne drones, cameras, land-based sensors, etc. I mean, it’s exactly what we are condiering for our own borders.

In other words, it’s time to tell our good Iragi froends that they need to take over a HUGE chunk of their defense and policing functions. We’ll help out where we can, but we’re gonna be busy cutting the supply lines for the terrorists and they can go after the snakes lurking around them. Seems fair to me. If they really want self-determination, and democratic rights, a strong secular government, then it’s time to put up or shut up and slink away.

The Iraqi army had some good soldiers. They had damned poor leaders under Saddam. Now they don’t have to worry about him, but it’s time they stood up and showed their real mettle. They can fight, they have the physical tools, but they need to develop those long-term leadership tools, the NCO’s and Officers that will provide the leadership the will need in the days to come. The best way to develop that is through battle, through strife. It’s their turn now. We can support, and lend a hand here and there, but we’re needed for other things in Iraq just now, and probably elsewhere in a year or two.

Respects,

Gwedd

Would Gwedd be so kind as to estimate the number of troops necessary to enforce his proposals? And where they would come from?

I was expecting the sentence following this one to be something more like . . . “They believe in violence when it targets Western politicians with whose policies they disagree (i.e., assassination of George Bush and/or Tony Blair), when its aim is to kill US and Coalition servicemen and -women, when it succeeds in silencing views contrary to their own, or when its goal is the destruction of a sovreign democratoc state and the murder of as many Jews as possible.”

If we knew in 03, what we do now…

of course Syria would still be in Lebanon. AQ khan would still be selling nuke tech(and our intel services would not have known), as Lybia would not have given up on the wmds. Israel would still be holding the land it gave back. As a nation, we would have obsessed even more over the next ’9/11′, becoming even more isolated.

I grew up watching the same science fiction that Goldberg did…incidents where the death of a mosquito at the hands of a time traveler leads to the death of the human race. Change one tile in a mosaic, changes the whole mosaic. If there are any other historical changes that goldberg might produce that would change the outcome of world hisotry for the better, I’d love to hear them.