Wednesday, December 06, 2006
Last Thursday, Iraqi Prime Minister Nouri al-Maliki announced that his nation, after a meeting with Bush on Thursday, would take charge of its security in six months. This event is eclipsed by the fact that both Iraqi and Syria rejected a joint meeting with the U.S. president just days ago.
Recently, America has had no success sorting out the messes in the Middle East. Lebanon- dead cabinet member; Iran-still building nuclear technology; and let’s not forget Iraq, currently embroiled in sectarian conflicts and without an influential government. Seriously, is America going anywhere on its modern crusades? [Yeah, out of the hearts and minds and into the porcelain express. –Ed. Opin]
Even with its massive troop placements in Iraq and multi-billion dollar weapons, the United States has made no headway against terrorist remnants or the daily killings: In October alone, 3,709 Iraqi citizens have died from suicide bombers and Islamic infighting. Is it any wonder now why Iraq would not want America to ‘guide’ its security any longer?
Contrary to what my fellow liberals say, al-Maliki has the makings of a capable politician. Although a Shiite Muslim, he has successfully in his debaathification removed former officials from both Islam factions and included Sunnis in his unity government. However, he has also fought for his people as well: he resisted Sunni initiatives to take away Shiite and Kurdish autonomy in their regions. The prime minister also is according to US ambassador Zalmay Khalizard independent of the currently rampant Iran- a nation capable of independent rule and allegiance.
Sure, he may not be too friendly towards the Israelis, but does that mean the politician can’t handle the carnage in Iraq? Certainly, he can’t be worse than George Bush of the United States: almost everyone besides Jordan won’t even talk to the Dubya, what makes the world think that he can engineer an effective peace to the violence he escalated?
As Suriyawong in Shadow of the Hegemon said, an important task should only be given to those who can effectively manage it. Therefore, what the United States needs to do right now is not to increase its security forces in Iraq, but instead intensify the efforts on training Iraqi peacekeepers to take charge of their land. I for one cannot see how the United Sates armed forces can keep the peace in Iraq with its infamy, its lack of knowledge on Islam, and its incapability to take out Al-Qaeda. The democrats are right: The United States needs to leave, and put its self-mandated task into the hands of someone capable of positive change. If America wants anything out of its modern crusades, it must be responsible and allow those who can make peace to do so.
truth, freedom, knowledge