FedEx overnight shipping and free prescription, http://MyRxPill.com

I would like to first agree with a previous comment that stated: "Denial is the hat of this administration. Arrogance is its attitude! With 500,000 plus casualties, I would have to believe that one can only overlook such atrocities when a hidden agenda is underway.
Therefore, the Baker report is wise to advise a pull out of American combat troops. As always, Goth gives well thought out suggestions and responses.

As for the previous lash out made by Ayan, I would like to point out that since you have mentioned that Goth is "consistently anti-Arab". I assume you are a frequent reader of his work. However, you have failed to mention what you agree or even disagree about his suggestions or comments. You immediately begin to speak of an "inferiority complex"...

Therefore, I'd like to say if for once people such as yourself, could get of the Crab Theory Syndrome, (the crab theory refers to the idea that you never need to put a top on a barrel of crabs to prevent escape, because they're all too busy pulling at each other's legs and climbing on each other's backs, instead of working together and pushing each other out), we could stop focusing on labeling one another and try to look at the broad picture. Then maybe we could achieve a common goal.

In this case, Goth, is not an Arab, nor Somali, he is journalist trying to share ideas, with readers who are genuinely interested. So, I suggest that you either bring your intelligent questions or comments to the table, or perhaps find another venue to bicker. Washington Post is clearly not it!

Too little too late-The Iraq Study Group (ISG)

Unlucky Iraq, is a beautiful country bestowed with rich, ancient history and tremendous natural resources. From 1921-1958, a British imposed Hashemit kingdom ruled the country. Though they were not the best of rulers, Iraq was a relatively peaceful country and had a constitution. In "1958", a group of so-called free officers led by brigadier general Abdulkarim Kasim and colonel Abdisalam Arif violently ousted king Faisal 11 in a military coup, the king and his family were all killed. Since "1958-2003", a number of brutal military juntas were ruling Iraq. Since the Republican rule and the end of the monarchy, Iraq went through a very tortured history of tyranny, repression, brutal military coups, endless wars and so forth. In "1963", a group of Baathists officers led by colonel Abdisalam Arif , Kasim's prime minister, staged another brutal coup against general Kasim, he and a number of his cabinet were all brutally killed. Colonel Abdisalam Arif became the president. He was killed in a mysterious plane crash in "1966". a grop of Baathist officers led by general Ahmed Hassan Al-Bakar installed colonel Abdirahman Arif, the brother of Abdisalem Arif and he ruled the country for two years.In "1968", a group of officers led by general Ahmed Hassan Al-Bakar peacefully ousted colonel Abdirahman Arif and sent him to exile. General Ahmed Hassan Al-Bakar became the president of Iraq and the chair of the Revolutionary Command Council. Ahmed Hassan Al-Bakar was Saddam Hussein's maternal uncle. Saddam Husein at the time a high offical in the Baath party peacefully ousted his uncle, general Ahmed Hassan AlBakar, and became the president of the Republic of Iraq and the chair of the Revolutionary Command Council. Saddam Hussein ruled ruled Iraq with an iron fist. During his reign, the country witnessed a measure of development. But in the meantime, his reign was marked with a great deal of repression, and he led the country into so many devastating wars-such as the invasion of Kuwait and Iran.Saddam Hussein was removed by the Angolo-American invasion of Iraq of 2003.

A synopsis of the history of Iraq, showed a country with a very violent history. The reality of Iraq today is an out of control, active volcano. Iraq today is a raging tectonic plates, which are unleashing unprecedented forces of chaos, confusion, so many different wars going on, a self-destructing society, a rapidly disintegrating national fiber and all the semblance of a cohesive nation disappearing by the hour. Iraq today,is a raging anger, a swiftly flowing and a roaring river from a very a steep elevation. Nobody in that country seems to be in his/her mind. Making things worse, Iraq is surrounded by nasty, narrow-minded, vision less, and brutal dictators, from the so-called Ahmednajid of Iran, Bashar Al-Asad of Syria, a horrible dictator who inherited the presidency, the autocratic kings of the gulf petro-banana dictatorships and the hapless king of Jordan.
With so many trouble makers from Al-Qaeda, other international misfits claiming to be Jehadists, criminal elements, terrorists, nationalists, secessionists and many others fighting in the country,Iraq is a slowly dying nation. At this point, there is no good option left to salvage this unfortunate country. I believe the Iraqi study group or any other prescription at this late time of the game is too little too late.

Too little too late-The Iraq Study Group (ISG)

Unlucky Iraq, is a beautiful country bestowed with rich, ancient history and tremendous natural resources. From 1921-1958, a British imposed Hashemit kingdom ruled the country. Though they were not the best of rulers, Iraq was a relatively peaceful country and had a constitution. In "1958", a group of so-called free officers led by brigadier general Abdulkarim Kasim and colonel Abdisalam Arif violently ousted king Faisal 11 in a military coup, the king and his family were all killed. Since "1958-2003", a number of brutal military juntas were ruling Iraq. Since the Republican rule and the end of the monarchy, Iraq went through a very tortured history of tyranny, repression, brutal military coups, endless wars and so forth. In "1963", a group of Baathists officers led by colonel Abdisalam Arif , Kasim's prime minister, staged another brutal coup against general Kasim, he and a number of his cabinet were all brutally killed. Colonel Abdisalam Arif became the president. He was killed in a mysterious plane crash in "1966". a grop of Baathist officers led by general Ahmed Hassan Al-Bakar installed colonel Abdirahman Arif, the brother of Abdisalem Arif and he ruled the country for two years.In "1968", a group of officers led by general Ahmed Hassan Al-Bakar peacefully ousted colonel Abdirahman Arif and sent him to exile. General Ahmed Hassan Al-Bakar became the president of Iraq and the chair of the Revolutionary Command Council. Ahmed Hassan Al-Bakar was Saddam Hussein's maternal uncle. Saddam Husein at the time a high offical in the Baath party peacefully ousted his uncle, general Ahmed Hassan AlBakar, and became the president of the Republic of Iraq and the chair of the Revolutionary Command Council. Saddam Hussein ruled ruled Iraq with an iron fist. During his reign, the country witnessed a measure of development. But in the meantime, his reign was marked with a great deal of repression, and he led the country into so many devastating wars-such as the invasion of Kuwait and Iran.Saddam Hussein was removed by the Angolo-American invasion of Iraq of 2003.

A synopsis of the history of Iraq, showed a country with a very violent history. The reality of Iraq today is an out of control, active volcano. Iraq today is a raging tectonic plates, which are unleashing unprecedented forces of chaos, confusion, so many different wars going on, a self-destructing society, a rapidly disintegrating national fiber and all the semblance of a cohesive nation disappearing by the hour. Iraq today,is a raging anger, a swiftly flowing and a roaring river from a very a steep elevation. Nobody in that country seems to be in his/her mind. Making things worse, Iraq is surrounded by nasty, narrow-minded, vision less, and brutal dictators, from the so-called Ahmednajid of Iran, Bashar Al-Asad of Syria, a horrible dictator who inherited the presidency, the autocratic kings of the gulf petro-banana dictatorships and the hapless king of Jordan.
With so many trouble makers from Al-Qaeda, other international misfits claiming to be Jehadists, criminal elements, terrorists, nationalists, secessionists and many others fighting in the country,Iraq is a slowly dying nation. At this point, there is no good option left to salvage this unfortunate country. I believe the Iraqi study group or any other prescription at this late time of the game is too little too late.

Too little too late-The Iraq Study Group (ISG)

Unlucky Iraq, is a beautiful country bestowed with rich, ancient history and tremendous natural resources. From 1921-1958, a British imposed Hashemit kingdom ruled the country. Though they were not the best of rulers, Iraq was a relatively peaceful country and had a constitution. In "1958", a group of so-called free officers led by brigadier general Abdulkarim Kasim and colonel Abdisalam Arif violently ousted king Faisal 11 in a military coup, the king and his family were all killed. Since "1958-2003", a number of brutal military juntas were ruling Iraq. Since the Republican rule and the end of the monarchy, Iraq went through a very tortured history of tyranny, repression, brutal military coups, endless wars and so forth. In "1963", a group of Baathists officers led by colonel Abdisalam Arif , Kasim's prime minister, staged another brutal coup against general Kasim, he and a number of his cabinet were all brutally killed. Colonel Abdisalam Arif became the president. He was killed in a mysterious plane crash in "1966". a grop of Baathist officers led by general Ahmed Hassan Al-Bakar installed colonel Abdirahman Arif, the brother of Abdisalem Arif and he ruled the country for two years.In "1968", a group of officers led by general Ahmed Hassan Al-Bakar peacefully ousted colonel Abdirahman Arif and sent him to exile. General Ahmed Hassan Al-Bakar became the president of Iraq and the chair of the Revolutionary Command Council. Ahmed Hassan Al-Bakar was Saddam Hussein's maternal uncle. Saddam Husein at the time a high offical in the Baath party peacefully ousted his uncle, general Ahmed Hassan AlBakar, and became the president of the Republic of Iraq and the chair of the Revolutionary Command Council. Saddam Hussein ruled ruled Iraq with an iron fist. During his reign, the country witnessed a measure of development. But in the meantime, his reign was marked with a great deal of repression, and he led the country into so many devastating wars-such as the invasion of Kuwait and Iran.Saddam Hussein was removed by the Angolo-American invasion of Iraq of 2003.

A synopsis of the history of Iraq, showed a country with a very violent history. The reality of Iraq today is an out of control, active volcano. Iraq today is a raging tectonic plates, which are unleashing unprecedented forces of chaos, confusion, so many different wars going on, a self-destructing society, a rapidly disintegrating national fiber and all the semblance of a cohesive nation disappearing by the hour. Iraq today,is a raging anger, a swiftly flowing and a roaring river from a very a steep elevation. Nobody in that country seems to be in his/her mind. Making things worse, Iraq is surrounded by nasty, narrow-minded, vision less, and brutal dictators, from the so-called Ahmednajid of Iran, Bashar Al-Asad of Syria, a horrible dictator who inherited the presidency, the autocratic kings of the gulf petro-banana dictatorships and the hapless king of Jordan.
With so many trouble makers from Al-Qaeda, other international misfits claiming to be Jehadists, criminal elements, terrorists, nationalists, secessionists and many others fighting in the country,Iraq is a slowly dying nation. At this point, there is no good option left to salvage this unfortunate country. I believe the Iraqi study group or any other prescription at this late time of the game is too little too late.

Too little too late-The Iraq Study Group (ISG)

Unlucky Iraq, is a beautiful country bestowed with rich, ancient history and tremendous natural resources. From 1921-1958, a British imposed Hashemit kingdom ruled the country. Though they were not the best of rulers, Iraq was a relatively peaceful country and had a constitution. In "1958", a group of so-called free officers led by brigadier general Abdulkarim Kasim and colonel Abdisalam Arif violently ousted king Faisal 11 in a military coup, the king and his family were all killed. Since "1958-2003", a number of brutal military juntas were ruling Iraq. Since the Republican rule and the end of the monarchy, Iraq went through a very tortured history of tyranny, repression, brutal military coups, endless wars and so forth. In "1963", a group of Baathists officers led by colonel Abdisalam Arif , Kasim's prime minister, staged another brutal coup against general Kasim, he and a number of his cabinet were all brutally killed. Colonel Abdisalam Arif became the president. He was killed in a mysterious plane crash in "1966". a grop of Baathist officers led by general Ahmed Hassan Al-Bakar installed colonel Abdirahman Arif, the brother of Abdisalem Arif and he ruled the country for two years.In "1968", a group of officers led by general Ahmed Hassan Al-Bakar peacefully ousted colonel Abdirahman Arif and sent him to exile. General Ahmed Hassan Al-Bakar became the president of Iraq and the chair of the Revolutionary Command Council. Ahmed Hassan Al-Bakar was Saddam Hussein's maternal uncle. Saddam Husein at the time a high offical in the Baath party peacefully ousted his uncle, general Ahmed Hassan AlBakar, and became the president of the Republic of Iraq and the chair of the Revolutionary Command Council. Saddam Hussein ruled ruled Iraq with an iron fist. During his reign, the country witnessed a measure of development. But in the meantime, his reign was marked with a great deal of repression, and he led the country into so many devastating wars-such as the invasion of Kuwait and Iran.Saddam Hussein was removed by the Angolo-American invasion of Iraq of 2003.

A synopsis of the history of Iraq, showed a country with a very violent history. The reality of Iraq today is an out of control, active volcano. Iraq today is a raging tectonic plates, which are unleashing unprecedented forces of chaos, confusion, so many different wars going on, a self-destructing society, a rapidly disintegrating national fiber and all the semblance of a cohesive nation disappearing by the hour. Iraq today,is a raging anger, a swiftly flowing and a roaring river from a very a steep elevation. Nobody in that country seems to be in his/her mind. Making things worse, Iraq is surrounded by nasty, narrow-minded, vision less, and brutal dictators, from the so-called Ahmednajid of Iran, Bashar Al-Asad of Syria, a horrible dictator who inherited the presidency, the autocratic kings of the gulf petro-banana dictatorships and the hapless king of Jordan.
With so many trouble makers from Al-Qaeda, other international misfits claiming to be Jehadists, criminal elements, terrorists, nationalists, secessionists and many others fighting in the country,Iraq is a slowly dying nation. At this point, there is no good option left to salvage this unfortunate country. I believe the Iraqi study group or any other prescription at this late time of the game is too little too late.

Too little too late-The Iraq Study Group (ISG)

Unlucky Iraq, is a beautiful country bestowed with rich, ancient history and tremendous natural resources. From 1921-1958, a British imposed Hashemit kingdom ruled the country. Though they were not the best of rulers, Iraq was a relatively peaceful country and had a constitution. In "1958", a group of so-called free officers led by brigadier general Abdulkarim Kasim and colonel Abdisalam Arif violently ousted king Faisal 11 in a military coup, the king and his family were all killed. Since "1958-2003", a number of brutal military juntas were ruling Iraq. Since the Republican rule and the end of the monarchy, Iraq went through a very tortured history of tyranny, repression, brutal military coups, endless wars and so forth. In "1963", a group of Baathists officers led by colonel Abdisalam Arif , Kasim's prime minister, staged another brutal coup against general Kasim, he and a number of his cabinet were all brutally killed. Colonel Abdisalam Arif became the president. He was killed in a mysterious plane crash in "1966". a grop of Baathist officers led by general Ahmed Hassan Al-Bakar installed colonel Abdirahman Arif, the brother of Abdisalem Arif and he ruled the country for two years.In "1968", a group of officers led by general Ahmed Hassan Al-Bakar peacefully ousted colonel Abdirahman Arif and sent him to exile. General Ahmed Hassan Al-Bakar became the president of Iraq and the chair of the Revolutionary Command Council. Ahmed Hassan Al-Bakar was Saddam Hussein's maternal uncle. Saddam Husein at the time a high offical in the Baath party peacefully ousted his uncle, general Ahmed Hassan AlBakar, and became the president of the Republic of Iraq and the chair of the Revolutionary Command Council. Saddam Hussein ruled ruled Iraq with an iron fist. During his reign, the country witnessed a measure of development. But in the meantime, his reign was marked with a great deal of repression, and he led the country into so many devastating wars-such as the invasion of Kuwait and Iran.Saddam Hussein was removed by the Angolo-American invasion of Iraq of 2003.

A synopsis of the history of Iraq, showed a country with a very violent history. The reality of Iraq today is an out of control, active volcano. Iraq today is a raging tectonic plates, which are unleashing unprecedented forces of chaos, confusion, so many different wars going on, a self-destructing society, a rapidly disintegrating national fiber and all the semblance of a cohesive nation disappearing by the hour. Iraq today,is a raging anger, a swiftly flowing and a roaring river from a very a steep elevation. Nobody in that country seems to be in his/her mind. Making things worse, Iraq is surrounded by nasty, narrow-minded, vision less, and brutal dictators, from the so-called Ahmednajid of Iran, Bashar Al-Asad of Syria, a horrible dictator who inherited the presidency, the autocratic kings of the gulf petro-banana dictatorships and the hapless king of Jordan.
With so many trouble makers from Al-Qaeda, other international misfits claiming to be Jehadists, criminal elements, terrorists, nationalists, secessionists and many others fighting in the country,Iraq is a slowly dying nation. At this point, there is no good option left to salvage this unfortunate country. I believe the Iraqi study group or any other prescription at this late time of the game is too little too late.

Too little too late-The Iraq Study Group (ISG)

Unlucky Iraq, is a beautiful country bestowed with rich, ancient history and tremendous natural resources. From 1921-1958, a British imposed Hashemit kingdom ruled the country. Though they were not the best of rulers, Iraq was a relatively peaceful country and had a constitution. In "1958", a group of so-called free officers led by brigadier general Abdulkarim Kasim and colonel Abdisalam Arif violently ousted king Faisal 11 in a military coup, the king and his family were all killed. Since "1958-2003", a number of brutal military juntas were ruling Iraq. Since the Republican rule and the end of the monarchy, Iraq went through a very tortured history of tyranny, repression, brutal military coups, endless wars and so forth. In "1963", a group of Baathists officers led by colonel Abdisalam Arif , Kasim's prime minister, staged another brutal coup against general Kasim, he and a number of his cabinet were all brutally killed. Colonel Abdisalam Arif became the president. He was killed in a mysterious plane crash in "1966". a grop of Baathist officers led by general Ahmed Hassan Al-Bakar installed colonel Abdirahman Arif, the brother of Abdisalem Arif and he ruled the country for two years.In "1968", a group of officers led by general Ahmed Hassan Al-Bakar peacefully ousted colonel Abdirahman Arif and sent him to exile. General Ahmed Hassan Al-Bakar became the president of Iraq and the chair of the Revolutionary Command Council. Ahmed Hassan Al-Bakar was Saddam Hussein's maternal uncle. Saddam Husein at the time a high offical in the Baath party peacefully ousted his uncle, general Ahmed Hassan AlBakar, and became the president of the Republic of Iraq and the chair of the Revolutionary Command Council. Saddam Hussein ruled ruled Iraq with an iron fist. During his reign, the country witnessed a measure of development. But in the meantime, his reign was marked with a great deal of repression, and he led the country into so many devastating wars-such as the invasion of Kuwait and Iran.Saddam Hussein was removed by the Angolo-American invasion of Iraq of 2003.

A synopsis of the history of Iraq, showed a country with a very violent history. The reality of Iraq today is an out of control, active volcano. Iraq today is a raging tectonic plates, which are unleashing unprecedented forces of chaos, confusion, so many different wars going on, a self-destructing society, a rapidly disintegrating national fiber and all the semblance of a cohesive nation disappearing by the hour. Iraq today,is a raging anger, a swiftly flowing and a roaring river from a very a steep elevation. Nobody in that country seems to be in his/her mind. Making things worse, Iraq is surrounded by nasty, narrow-minded, vision less, and brutal dictators, from the so-called Ahmednajid of Iran, Bashar Al-Asad of Syria, a horrible dictator who inherited the presidency, the autocratic kings of the gulf petro-banana dictatorships and the hapless king of Jordan.
With so many trouble makers from Al-Qaeda, other international misfits claiming to be Jehadists, criminal elements, terrorists, nationalists, secessionists and many others fighting in the country,Iraq is a slowly dying nation. At this point, there is no good option left to salvage this unfortunate country. I believe the Iraqi study group or any other prescription at this late time of the game is too little too late.

It will also show Bush's atonement for waging a domestically unpopular and internationally unjust war on the basis of lies and deceit.
------------
What about the lies and deceits of Saddam?

As for "unjust" - where is the outcry about what is being done in the name of Allah in Baghdad today, not by US troops? At the outset of Op. Iraqi Feedom, people were horrified - horrified - at bombs dropping on Baghdad, ancient city, revered citadel within the Arab world. Today, Baghdad is being torn apart, yet where is the condemantion of it from the 'Arab Street'? Hypocrits.

Ayaan,

You are either two young to know or must not know much about Somali histroy and its people. Somalis are not Arabs, for your information, nor do they claim to be one; except, of course, some confused few. It was Mohamed Siyad Barre, the Somali president from 1969 to 1992, who, forced our nation to become a member of the Arab Union. He did it just to get few dollars from the Arab Sheikhs. I am a proud Somali man and I will never let anyone label me as an Arab man; Hell Know!!
Hope you explore a little about us, Somalis, we are Africans!!!!

Bashir Goth is one of those Somalis who have a profound inferiority complex about being black Arabs, hence his consistently anti-Arab stance. I've seen the same attitude among other Somalis, namely that harridan Ayaan Hirsi Ali, who lied through her teeth about abuse by her family to get asylum in the Netherlands. Why don't Somalis just abandon this charade about being Arab and just proudly call themselves Africans? Maybe that might get rid of some of their bitterness aboout Arabs.

As for Goth's infantile analysis, all I can say is that the neo-con Washington Post loves to showcase "Arabs" like him who legitimizes their neo-con agenda.

Religion is mixed with Politics.
You are being selective.
History is replete with example of religion mixing up with politics.

Even the revolt of Jesus had political implications for the ruling class from Rome.
Religion of Islam under Mohammad resulted in the revolt and destruction of the Great Persian and Eastern Roman Empire.
Emperor Constantine used the flaming cross in the sky as a sign of his success in battle.
Europe for centuries was mired in religious wars.
The Conquistadors came in the name of Christianity.
Israel was establised as a promise from God of the Old Testament.
Pakistan was created in the name of Islam.
BJP Goverment in India won power in the name of "Hindutava".
The list can go on.
Tell me which political agenda is not dangerous or ominous or crazy or populist,if you intend to invade a country.
Invasion of Afghanistan by the Russians to promote Communism is same as invasion of Iraq to promote Democracy. Militarily superior nations find their own excuses sometimes it is to save the savages! To save their souls lets conquer and kill them. That's what happened to the native people of the new world when the Christian invaders came here from Europe.
Finally our own Dollar bill says it all "in God we trust". Thats religion my friend on your own dollar bill.

Sami, believing in a saviour is fine. Establishing it as your political agenda is not. Basing the policy of a nation that aspires to nuclear status on seeking to experience a world without the United States and Zionism and seeking the coming of the Mahdi is ominous.

"One objection [to the government] is they take advantage of Islamic religion and Imam Zaman [Mahdi] - they exploit them," says Grand Ayatollah Hossein Ali Montazeri, a ranking dissident cleric in Qom. "If the government uses religious slogans and religion as a tool [to gain power], this makes people fed up with religion and is wrong." http://www.csmonitor.com/2005/1221/p01s04a-wome.htm

"We don't shy away from declaring that Islam is ready to rule the world." President Ahmadinejad said.

According to the Koran the time in which the Mahdi will arrive is one of "unprecedented calamity". Only 60 years ago we had a war that cost over 60 million lives which would be a precedent calamity. Again as a personal religious belief Jews, Muslems and Christians alike are entitled to believe in the coming but forwarding it as a political agenda is dangerous, ominous and either crazy or populist.

Goran :
Sir, I did not really mean bringing back Saddam, with his felt hat and rifle standing on the balcony of his palace(That was from an old TV shot and was meant as a joke or a sarcasm call it a "botched joke").

JVD 70:
You said Ahmadinnejad was "seeking the coming of the Mehdi". So what is wrong with that. Unless you are of Jewish faith who do not believe in Jesus as the Messaiah. For them the Messaiah will be in the form of David.
The Mehdi or the 12th Imam of Shias is the Shia version of the promised "Messaiah" in the Koran. The Koran calls Jesus the Messaiah and all muslims believe he will come. The Koran also believes that Mohammad is dead but Jesus never died on the cross but was lifted by God into Heaven. By the way the Koran also believes in the miraculous birth of Jesus and the miracles he performed. And that Mariam (Mary)is honored and revered above all womenkind.
Marium is mentioned in the Koran many times more than in the christian Bible which has shut her out. Yes indeed as a Muslim we await the 2nd coming of Jesus or the Mehdi.
Actually it is the 3rd coming of Jesus if you are a Hindu (Hinduism is the 3rd biggest religion in the world). The first coming of Jesus was when he appeared as Lord Krishna of the Hindus. He appeared 1000 years earlier before Jesus of Nazarat and is regarded by the Hindus as a Man-God. His mother was Mira (that's rather close to Marium).He was also of virgin birth and he too died on the cross,rather he was nailed to a tree(wooden)and the Hindu Trident is so much like a cross if you bend the ends at 90 degree. Every nation is welcome to seek inspiration from Issa ibn-e Marium peace be upon him. He is indeed the truth and the light. I have no problem with Ahmadinegad on this.

Mr. Goth, thank you for your response and for engaging in debate with your readers.

There are so many unknowns; to what degree have the Iraqi (or even the Syrian) Baathists embraced the Al Qaeda ideology: would the Baathists still seek a Sunni dominated secular multiethnic Iraq or would they use Sunni Islam against the Shia? Can they be trusted to be moderate and seek a compromise with the moderates on the Shia side? Do the Baathists represent the Sunni? Does anyone within the Sunni or Shia leadership still believe in Iraqi unity itself? Who actually still believes in Iraq? Perhaps the time that Arabs believe that the European national model is any good for them is over.

If the Baathist army were to be somehow reinstated won't they be much more effective than the Badr brigades and Mahdi army? The latter two have no experience and very little military leadership (which is how Iran might like it) while the Sunni side informally may have an intact officer corps and has gained great understanding of terrorist tactics and guerilla warfare. Once US forces leave and if they can aquire heavy arms the Sunni will be able to take on the Shia militias with ease since they have the will and means and will not care about the humanitarian consequences of urban warfare, a restraint that time and again keeps US forces from really taking on the Shia militias. If Iran then would more openly support and organize the Shia militia then Sunni countries might provide those arms leading to a wider war. So, wouldn't you think that if re-establishing the Baathists as a counterweight to Shia ambitions fails to pacify Iraq, it would stack the pursuant conflict heavily in their favour?

And what does Iran really intend? The talk of seeking to experience a world without the United States and Zionism and seeking the coming of the Mahdi, both goals expressed by President Ahmadinejad himself, is ominous. Nuclear arms would allow them to bomb the oil fields on the Arab peninsula and by implying or threatening such action they can then force the Arabs and perhaps the wider world to align. The only nuclear ally (by shared interest) the Arabs would then have is Israel but the Lebanon war has shown how expertly Iran can turn the attention of the world on Israel and away from them. What would Iran practically want to achieve?

Much of the criticism leveled here against Mr. Bashir's writing is emotional rather than rational, there's something that can lead to peace in the middle east but it isn't rhetoric.

Both bringing Saddam back or Bashir's setting up tribal structure are considered as one step backward. The former is not justifiable considering the amount of money and blood that US has spent. If Saddam comes back then Bush and US administration will become a joke of
history.

Instead of bringing Saddam back one can think of bringing a less brutal Hashemi monarch back to Iraq (i.e. merging Jordan and Iraq recommendation). Tribalism is more compatible with the monarchy system and the monarch is the head of all
tribes. but Iraq is not like Africa, Afghanistan or Saudi Arabia and its urban structure is more advanced because of oil industry and Ba'th party. The closest model to it are the Jordanian system and Syrian system.

To bring back stability to Iraq, one needs to merge it with a compatible stable system in the region such as Jordan or Syria. Syrian Ba'th model is even closer to Iraqi system than Jordan, but Syria is on the black list and allied closely to Iran which does not agree with merging Arabic Iraq with an Arab country. That is the only scenario that Iran will lose the endgame.

Once Kurdish territory is out of Iraq, the chances of a successful Jordan and Iraq merger will be much higher than the chances of the earlier Iraq monarchy system. If nothing is done now, Jordan will be the first government in the region to fall to the Iraqi chaos. So it is a calculated risk for Jordan to take now
as a preventive measure.

For this to succeeed, Bush needs to coordinate with Jordan, Saudi Arabia and Kurds in the coming weeks instead of showing more weakness after weakness by surronding to Iran. The only deal breaker is Turkey which may try to spoil such a plan.

Bush is now at his weakest position, because he may be impeached. So Tony Blair is in a better position to lead such a merger and Bush may decide to delegate Iraq project to UK and take a back seat. Both Jordan and Iraq were in the orbit of the UK and Brits have a lot of intelligence and history there that can help the merger to succeed. Any argument against such a merger?

Put Saddam back on the balcony with his hat and rifle and I can safely predict Baghdad that peace and sanity will return within 30minutes! Give the devil his due. Like someone said "35years of tyranny and not a single day of chaos". It is truly remarkable that he ruled Iraq and kept it secular for so long. Of course he did not achieve it without bloodshed. But then even Musharraf has killed indiscriminately. The bombing of the School or Madrassah in Bajaur is an example where over 80 students were killed. Pushing a button from an aircraft just doesnot make it a just or a wise act. This is just as heinous as a suicide bomber.
The civil war in Iraq is an American creation.
And it suits Israel. This is how Imperialist forces work.They divide and rule. I know it because Iam from the Indian Subcontinent where the British ruled for 2centuries. But this is Iraq. And this is 2006. So there is bound to be some difference. The most obvious thing is very superior American weaponry.
The next thing is very effective Jewish lobby (which will ensure Americans sacrifice to preserve Israel).
Continued American presence is needed to fuel this internicine warfare.
Continued hatred between the Shia and Sunni is an added bonus for America and Israel.
The only question is does America have the will. The answer is a big Yes. The war costs only 2% of the GDP. Three thousand dead Americans, is nothing compared to 600,000 Iraqis killed (Johns Hopkins University).
Plus the whole region is impoverished. Imagine the problem Israel would have faced if this war had not taken place. It is a win-win situation for Israel.
The only bad thing for Americans (who are really steeped in self-rightousness) is the notion that Bush turns out to be a bigger killer of innocent people than Saddam
The other negative thing is the tremendous propaganda value Islam is getting in the western media. Before 9/11 few Americans knew about Islam.
Islam always attracts the poor and underpriviliged. This is dangerous in America because the gap between the very rich and the very poor is increasing.
BBC reported that more people have converted to Islam is Britain after 9/11 than at any time in the past.
Remember when the Great Ghengis Khan conquered Baghdad and put 80,000 of its citizens to the sword in one day. That was the end of the Caliphate of Islam.
The funny thing is what he did not know was that his grandchildren formed the first line of defence of Islam against the infidels for the next 600 years.
Who can predict the future ? Only Wolfowich can who now sits comfortably in his office as the world bank president (the real winner so far).I feel sorry for all the mothers in Baghdad. I also feel sorry for all Cindy Sheehans. May God give peace to all those who have lost their loved ones.

It seems that the aim of Baker recommendation is to strengthen the split between Sunni and Shiite differences in the region. The Sunni Arab governments have been slow in reaching out to Sunni Kurds in Iraq.

The Sunnis in Iraq will win in one scenario if Iraq is divided into Arabic and Kurdish parts and the Arabic part is merged with Jordan, and the Iraq UN seat given to Kurdistan.

Talabani, as the Iraqi president, can simply take such a move using his emergency powers in a civil war and sign out part of Iraqi territory to Jordan in return for monetary compensation by Jordan and Saudi Arabia of Iraqi debts. Jordan made a similar deal with Saudi Arabia in the past.

For this Saudi and Jordan governments need to reach out to Kurds. Among the steps taken can be the condemnation of Anfal genocide by Saddam against Kurds and covert negotiations and diplomacy
between Kurdish politiciations and Arab governments.

One of the key announced goals of al Qaida was to unite Islam against the West. While they haven't fully succeeded, they have made a good start - and its still early days.
Tom Powers

You're so right Bashir! But why not go the whole way -- put Saddam BACK in power! Be honest, this is what you really want.

At least the release of Saddam would have a positiv impact. Saddams Iraq, wasnt it much better fpr the majority? And was it much worse for the minority?

@MaryLou Harper, Senaca NY. You have some serious issuses. I would recommend therapy or prayer.

Thank you such an ept anaylsis. This was much better than the report. What can I do as citizen to let the administration know that I agree with these recommendations? Sometimes letter writing seems to futile.

Here is an alternative you did not mention. It is my favorite. The US vacates Iraq immediately. Upon leaving, the US launches a nuclear attack on Iraq. End result - no more al Qaeda, no more Shiite majority, no more Sunni minority, no more bothersome Kurds and no more al Qaeda. And if by chance you are there when the apocalypse dawns - no more Bashir Goth! Best of all, the fear of god is restored to the entire ME.

Bush will never let Saddam go into exile. I predict that if he is not dead when we leave, we take him with us to gitmo. Saddam will never be free while W is "in control".

What Bush has done to Iraq is a crime , Iraq was a great country at his best Saddam keep in control this great nation,
Then Bush and his oil barons and Texas cronies decide to atack and take the oil from the Iraqui people he acused Saddam for the crime of the Kurds that may be true but the reality with the Kurds is than Iran,Syria,Turkey and Iraq d'nt like them . Now we have today more dead inocent victims in 3 years than under Hussein in more than 20 years is that make any sence Mr. Bush.

Mr. Goth articulates some reasoned analysis and approaches to deal with the quagmire known as Iraq. He does make several points that I find ridiculous.

The first is that the Israeli-Palestinian conflict has no bearing on the current situation in Iraq. In truth, this long-festering and unresolved problem affects all aspects of our relationship with the Middle East. To deny the impact of this conflict is to be either ignorant, or worse, disingenuous.

Secondly, why in the world would Venezuela or Cuba (not to mention the other countries he lists) want anything to do with Mr. Hussein? To even suggest that either of these countries would accept him is patently absurd. This suggestion belies the political bias of the writer.

And finally, yes, we now have Al Qaeda in Iraq. If that 'organization' can claim a victory in Iraq, we can only blame the U.S. invasion since there was no Al Qaeda in Iraq before this disasterous war. As far as the U.S. ever 'winning' this war, that outcome was foretold the day we invaded.

The crimes of the United States Secret Government are so unforgivably horrific, that I shall be deeply grieved if we murder Saddam Hussein.

We are absolutely disqualified, to call it "justice".

Sincerely,

mike-egger@libt-social-dem.org

the unsaid, underlying rationale behind the war did not relate directly to securing or profiting from oil, nor even to so-called weapons of mass destruction. the war was viewed as noble and righteous from an American Wilsonian perspective that suggests America is especially anointed (by God) to bring democracy and tolerance of minorities to the world. while not as banal and blatant as other motives asserted, this one had America focused too much on itself and it's self-chosen mission, rather than the needs and conflicts of those in the Middle East. Still, the notion of resurrecting the Iraqi army and exiling Saddam Hussein to soothe the humiliation of the Sunni tribes only reflects the deepening sense of sectarianism throughout the Middle East that was fueled by the war in Iraq, but not it's root cause. There's not enough space here to outline the numerous, well-documented mistakes in the American administration of Iraq. Yet it bears noting, in particular, that the United States failed to understand that the Shia had so long been ruled by the Sunni and deprived of economic access that they lacked the political maturity to govern in a consensus fashion by including the Sunni. One sees this in the blind following of clerics and pseudo-cleric wannabes like Muqtada al-Sadr. It is clear that the only path now for America is to serve as a catalyst to broker the deal that brings the Sunni mainstream into the government and equitably shares oil revenues in a federal system. I'm afraid the U.S. will have to break Sadr's Mahdi army and lock down Baghdad to develop the right conditions for the deal, which would in turn, bring down Nouri al-Maliki (whose legitimacy depends on Sadr). The solution doesn't fundamentally involve Iran or Syria, who are opportunistically funding everyone and anyone (including the Sunni resistance) with the goal of pulling the Iraqi Arab Shias more fully into their orbit. A similar scenario is playing out in Lebanon. All to say, the self-centeredness and arrogance that brought the U.S. to start such a war does not, surprisingly, erase it's moral authority to defeat sectarianism and broker the peace. Articles like this one only point to the reality that the Middle East will not do so for itself.

It is my honor to respond to several comments:

To jvd70, Amsterdam, NL:
Apart from the Kurds who enjoy their autonomous status in their region, it is obvious that today the Shiites are the dominant group of the Arab Iraqi community. It is also clear that the Shiites cannot establish a peaceful Iraq without the help of the Sunni community. The Shiites have two of the most powerful militia's in Iraq today, the Mahdi army and the Badr organization. They also have the backing of Iran. The Sunnis are left with nothing but to resort to terrorist tactics to disrupt the proper functioning of the Shiite majority government. To recall carefully selected units and commanders of the old Iraqi army will give a strong signal to the Sunnis on the government's serious intention for reconciliation and forgiveness. With their army integrated to the national army, the Sunnis will have no need to seek help from neighboring Sunni Arab states and turning the country into a proxy battlefield between Iran and Saudi Arabia for example. The Shiites will also have no need to look to Iran for help.

To eatbees:
I hope you know that Al Qaeda has declared Iraq as their new battlefront after they were defeated in Afghanistan. The brigades of Abu Musab Al Zarqawi are still strong and active in Iraq. It is therefore obvious that with the American departure, the Al Qaeda sympathizers will descend to the country from all corners of the world. Just remember Afghanistan after the withdrawal of the Soviet troops. I didn't say Al Jazeera is a mouthpiece for Al Qaeda but I described Al Jazeera as Al Qaeda's favorite TV. No one can deny that all the breaking news of Al Qaeda came from Al Jazeera.

To: Asma Bint Marwan:
Yes indeed. A pan-Arab conflagration is what will happen if the Americans withdraw today from Iraq. It was wrong for American to launch the war particularly as the Europeans and Arabs were trying to find a peaceful way to settle the Iraqi WMD issue. It will be disastrous, however, to demand the Americans to leave now. The world will witness another Ruwanda and Bosnia if the Americans leave Iraq today.

To Gary Jackson:
You have to listen again to the all the statements of Bin Laden and carefully read the literature of Islamists from Afghanistan to Algeria and from Egypt through Sudan, Yemen and Somalia. Islamists don't hide their dream of restoring the Islamic caliphate in the Islamic world first and then to the rest of the world. An unrealistic dream, YES, but one they dream to achieve.

I clicked on the "lies and deceit" link and am confused. The link goes to a Colin Powell story wherein he expresses regret that the information they based their decisions on was innaccurate. They made a poor decision based upon poor information, a horrific error but an error nonetheless. Not a "lie". I would remind everyone that since the late 1980's the "fact" of WMD in Iraq was taken as gospel and many policy decisions including no-fly zones, sanctions, Oil-for-food (to alleviate the death toll casued by sanctions), occasional bombinfs and forced inspections, were taken based upon these "facts". What was the purpose of those policies and are the people who enacted them also "liars"?

...."It will also show Bush's atonement for waging a domestically unpopular and internationally unjust war on the basis of lies and deceit."

I think Bush would have listened if he agrees your characterization of his war. One can correct his mistakes only if he/she first admits his/her mistakes. Denial is the hat of this administration. Arrogance is its attitute! It practices violence and disregards the value of human life....665,000+ Iraqs died so far.

Let's see the Iraqis hurry up and take charge of their own country, already. The war's been over for 3 years, it's time for them to run it themselves. It's their country, their oil, their future, their responsibility etc., so........

Re: Al Qaida claiming victory - most commenters miss the point; it does not really matter if the US departure from Iraq is truly an AQ victory, but that they will spin it as one similar to the way the Soviet-Afghan conflict was used as a rallying cry through the late 90s and even today. Never mind that without the OTHER superpower they never would've chased the Soviets out, they have spun that event into history as a tremendous victory for the mujahadeen. I'm not saying the US should not pull out of Iraq for this reason, but they'd better have a darn good anti-propaganda plan for the AQ crowing about victory that will inevitably result.

We have their own words in regard to the popular delusion of a return to the glory days of their Caliphate. These people would do well to consider that their own ignorance is the true enemy.

As to exiling Saddam (hereinafter "the monstrous buffoon Saddam"), that is little short of idiotic. If the Sunnis feel humiliated, that is nothing compared to the shame they ought to feel for having brutalized their neighbors for so long.

Quite honestly, I have never bought into this notion that Islamic extremists are seeking some sort of global caliphate. It pleases the vanity of we here in the West to look at it that way. It makes the 9-11 attack a bit more palatable to us if we build up those who carried out the act as a dark, malevolent band of evildoers intent on world domination, sort of like the Nazis back in the 1930s.

I suspect that the goals of the extremists are much more limited to chasing Ccrusading Christians off the lands they consider Islamic soil. One of the major sources of violence in the aftermath of the surrender at Appammatox in our own country was those who resisted the very idea that foreigners (Yankees) were on their home soil. Commanders charged with restoring order were constantly complaining to the defiant rebels that the war was over and questioned why they would not lay down their arms. The answer was always the same: "Because, this is our land and you're on it!"

We might just take a lesson from that little bit of our own history.

It is difficult to see Bush follow on the Baker report. US politics is too much of a hostage to Republican right wingers, pro-Israeli lobbies and newborn Christians to heed most of the recommendations. The Baker recommendations, that he said shouldn't be cherry-picked, asks implicitly for return of Golan to Syria and resolving the Israeli-Palistinian conflict in addition to talking to Iran and Syria unconditionally. Bush adminstration will probably heed none of the recommendations and will bring the US in deeper trouble until his term is over. About democrats, I don't think that any democrat is ready to put any meaningfull pressure on Israel either. So what we will wittness will probably be more wars and bloodshed in the Middle East. US policies have the direct responsibility for increasing extremism and violence in the region. Also European leaders have shown again and again that they are not ready to oppose US views through deeds and actions. They could for example put pressure on Israel by introducing sanctions on the country. 80% of Israel's trade is with Europe. But Europe will never put real pressure on Israel independent of US decisions.

Edward

Asma: A Pan-Arab conflagration at least in my opinion wouldn't be beneficial to much of anyone. Inciting a full blown war between ME states would cause an oil shortage and demand , as always, is increasing exponentially. Iran is also steadily working its way to obtaining a nuke and a pan-arab war would create a situation where they'd want to use it, which is everyone's problem.

Inufnu: It would be fairly safe bet that China and Russia(and probably most of the world) would complain if America decided to monopolize ME oil. I'd even go so far as to say they might do more than complain.

We should act like the men with power and money that we are! Take what we need, the Arabs will understand that! We back down into the oil fields near the Gulf, and pump away. We employ our ridiculously under-used and over-expensive Navy to enforce the Gulf's shipping lanes. I don't see the problem, it's win win win. They've forced our hand, we are protecting the only real part of the whole area that matters, and doing it to stabilize prices and availability for the whole world.

Who of any military consequence would complain? We could sink every Iranian ship and flatten every one of it's bases in thirty minutes. I say take the oil, we've earned it.

Mr Goth:

Wouldn't a pan-Arab conflagration be good for North American and Western Europe. Sunnis and Shiites hate each other more than they hate the Kafirs (infidels).

Jihadists would be fighting each other, the repressive regimes in Egypt, Saudi Arabia, Jordan, Syria and Iran would have to be held accountable by their people.

As for the war being based on lies and deceit do you believe that BILL CLINTON was lying when he bombed Iraq in December 1998 for having WMD? It seems that many administrations and Western nations thought that Iraq had WMD so it's doubtful that Bush was the "only liar."

Archimedes, I hope you're right! Because it sounds like perfection.

I don't quite see how American withdrawl is a victory for Al-Qaeda, since it will leave in place a Shiite-controlled government, not the neo-Calipahte of Bin Laden. You are, I think, correct in your assessment of what will unfold once America leaves. It will in fact become a regional proxy war as the Arabian Peninsula counters the Iranian influence in Iraq. I don't, however, see the spreading of any type of caliphate throughout the region as at all likely. Rather what will most likely happen is that the Sunni countries will not mobilize their armies, but their mosques, sending jihadis to fight in Iraq and elsewhere. I don't think that America or the UN will lift a finger to stop it either, since it is, in my opinion, exactly what the US wants. Throughout the Cold War the US was quite good at getting other countries to fight its wars for it, to export its conflicts to other regions of the world. This I think is exactly what will happen post-Iraq. America will allow the fundamentalists to destroy themselves and their societies, weakening their ability to establish a caliphate as they become further factionalized and regionally unstable. The internal fighting will render them unable or severly limited in exporting their violence to American shores, which is the ultimate goal of the US Government anyway. The seed has already been planted in Iraq, opening a wound that the region isn't capable of healing and that the international community is afraid to touch. You will see a greater commitment to Israel as it seeks to disengage itself from the already fractured Palestinians, who aren't able to be diplomatic partners in any "peace" process. Further isolating the Palestinians while America extricates itself from the ME and lets it burn will allow Western countries, particularly America, to develop alternative means of energy, thereby deny the ME governments their only source of revenue and dooming them to not only violence but global irrelevence. Maybe Bush isn't so stupid after all.

Trust always in Reason

Archimedes

You say some smart things and some silly things in the same breath, and don't seem to be able to tell them apart. In what way is pulling out of Iraq, or seeking an Israeli-Palestinian settlement, a victory for al-Qaeda? Is it really helpful at this late date to be calling al-Jazeera al-Qaeda's favorite TV station? Al-Qaeda had almost nothing to do with the impeachment-worthy misconduct that got us into Iraq. There will be no victory for al-Qaeda, since Moqtada al-Sadr is likely to emerge with most of the cards. None of the stopgap measures you mention can remove the moral stain of the invasion, or answer the question, All this for what? Finally, given that the people you're calling Islamic extremists are a majority in that part of the world, what is your solution for the long term?

That the invasion of Iraq was a grab for oil reserves is underlined by the strategic fact that Bush and Co. have increased Iranian power and influence in the region by knocking out the major Sunni counterweight to Iranian power, i.e. Saddam. The financial times is reporting that the Iraqi government is apparently preparing to reverse the nationalization of Iraqi oil, in effect since 1972. It seems to me that the threat of nationalization of Iranian oil led directly to the CIA coup against Mossadeq. Once again, it seems to be intolerable that a country should benefit more than the oil companies from oil located in their sovereign territory. Imagine how much better things would be if we had allowed Mossadeq to stay in power and build a secular Iran. We just couldn't accept that he was a "socialist," meaning, I suppose that he wanted to nationalize Iran's oil. And look at how well that coup worked out. The media may be keeping the machinations around this oil war a secret, but eventually the truth will become known.

"Bush should press the Iraqi government to call the old Iraqi army back to service and to open a serious dialogue with the leadership of the disgraced Baathist party."

Bashir, what you said just there is that the exit strategy is to resurrect a Sunni Baathist Arab-Nationalist tool as the bulwark against Persia. Is the defeat of Husayn ibn Ali at the battle of Karbala a mere footnote in the wars along the faultline trench that separates the Persians from the Semites? Empowering the Baathists would drive Shia Iraq into an even stronger reliance on Persian force and would constitute a de-facto separation and perhaps cause a 2nd Iraq-Iran war.

To me it seems the US presence is the only way to cool the kettle over time, unless some grand conference can sanction ethnic cleansing and the division of Iraq into two or three parts.

Bashir this was a most interesting post with some very unique perspectives and views that I enjoyed reading. Although you do at times seem to betray your own identification with the moderate Sunni world I certainly wish more moderates like yourself populated this planet. Thank you.

Wisdom is unfortunately not a characteristic of the Bush administration. It is probable that oil interests are behind Bush's vanity and bluster. I do not mean that he in particular is concerned about the oil, rather those making the decisions are using his in