http://robertbluey.com/blog/2007/07/31/good-reasons-not-to-retreat/ Conservative blogger and journalist with a passion for politics, sports and family Thu, 28 Jan 2010 01:39:19 -0700 http://wordpress.org/?v=2.9.1 hourly 1 http://robertbluey.com/blog/2007/07/31/good-reasons-not-to-retreat/comment-page-1/#comment-948 fredko Tue, 31 Jul 2007 17:08:27 +0000 http://robertbluey.com/blog/2007/07/31/good-reasons-not-to-retreat/#comment-948 I hope they are right. This would seem to have substantial impact apparently coming from Brookings. But I am not familiar with the authors or their previous views. From what I understand we are successful in Anbar because the Sunni tribal leaders are helping us fight "Al Q in Iraq". They don't want them there either. "The enemy of my enemy is my friend". This is to the good - AQ in Iraq does not have a Taliband to provide aid and comfort. This is why I don't see Iraq as being the "central front in the War on Terror". AQ did not exist in Iraq before the invasion and I don't believe the Sunnis, Shia or Kurds would let them stay. Iraq is not Afghanistan in my view. What happens when the bad guys are run out of Anbar? Will the Sunnis turn on us because we "support" the Shia? It seems to me we will still be in the middle of a civil war diverting resources - diplomatic, ideological, as well as military - from the "central front" which is Afghan(militarily) and the Muslim world as a whole otherwise. How to extricate ourselves from the mess in Iraq so we can effectively deal with terrorism remains the central question. To me a diplomatic effort involving ALL interested parties is sorely needed but is woefully lacking. Major mistake #1 - invasion. Major mistake #2 - diplomatic inability (or will). It surely looks like the commander-in-chief just wants to hand this off to the next one and has no conscience about blood or treasure. I hope they are right. This would seem to have substantial impact apparently coming from Brookings. But I am not familiar with the authors or their previous views.
From what I understand we are successful in Anbar because the Sunni tribal leaders are helping us fight “Al Q in Iraq”. They don’t want them there either. “The enemy of my enemy is my friend”. This is to the good – AQ in Iraq does not have a Taliband to provide aid and comfort. This is why I don’t see Iraq as being the “central front in the War on Terror”. AQ did not exist in Iraq before the invasion and I don’t believe the Sunnis, Shia or Kurds would let them stay. Iraq is not Afghanistan in my view.
What happens when the bad guys are run out of Anbar? Will the Sunnis turn on us because we “support” the Shia? It seems to me we will still be in the middle of a civil war diverting resources – diplomatic, ideological, as well as military – from the “central front” which is Afghan(militarily) and the Muslim world as a whole otherwise. How to extricate ourselves from the mess in Iraq so we can effectively deal with terrorism remains the central question. To me a diplomatic effort involving ALL interested parties is sorely needed but is woefully lacking.
Major mistake #1 – invasion. Major mistake #2 – diplomatic inability (or will). It surely looks like the commander-in-chief just wants to hand this off to the next one and has no conscience about blood or treasure.

]]>