What wonderful questions. Isn't it sad that more Americans were not asking these questions 24 months ago?
I believe it will "END" with a 3 state solution.
The Turks will fight against an independent Kurdish state in the North, even if, in the end it is the best solution for them; possibly requiring that they cede some territory to the Kurds.
Baghdad and the 'Sunni Triangle' are going to continue insurgency, because they will be a minority in a 1-state Iraq. And the others may very well be interested in retribution.
Iran is working very hard to extend its influence over Basra, and the other predominatly Shiite areas in Southern Iraq. It may go so far as to increase the land size of the Iranian state.
Of course, this solution is talking about the 'Iraqi's', not the US position in Iraq. To better understand what our Adminstration is planning, we must ignore what they say and watch what they do. The answer to when does the US consider the mission actually accomplished, is, in my opinion,
never. So far, we have spent well of 200 Billion dollars, and we have very little to show for it. The Bush administration is looking to get perminant bases in the middle east. Staging 6 or 8 divisions in Iraq is easily conceivable, especially when we announce we are removing 2 of the 4 divisions from Germany.
Remember ... The Bush Adminstration told us that Iraqi Oil was going to more than be able to pay for our 'after-action' activities.
"Speaker: Bush, George - President
Date: 10/28/2003
Quote/Claim:
“I’ve asked the American people to foot the tab for $20 billion of reconstruction…Others are stepping up as well, 13 billion out of the Madrid Conference…The Iraqi oil revenues – excess Iraqi oil revenues, coupled with private investments, should make up the difference.” [Source: White House Web site]
Fact:
The World Bank and the UN estimate that $56 billion over four years is necessary to rebuild Iraq – leaving the total pledged by the U.S. and others (counting loans) $23 billion dollars short of what is required. The top civilian administrator in Iraq, L. Paul Bremer III, told Congress in September that “for the next two years, whatever revenue was reaped from oil production would not exceed the cost of Iraq's day-to-day operating expenses.” In 2005 he estimated “a surplus of only $4 million to $5 million.” - LA Times, 10/26/03; NY Times, 10/5/03
Speaker: Wolfowitz, Paul - Deputy Secretary of Defense
Date: 3/27/2003
Quote/Claim:
“The oil revenues of Iraq could bring between $50 and $100 billion over the course of the next two or three years…We're dealing with a country that can really finance its own reconstruction, and relatively soon.” [Source: Congressional Testimony]
Fact:
International Oil Daily reported on 9/23/03 that Paul Bremer said that current and future oil revenues will be insufficient for rebuilding Iraq – despite the Administration's pre-war promises. - IOD, 9/23/03
The WSJ reported on 9/5/03 that the Administration's oil estimates were “predicated on aggressively optimistic assumptions.” - Wall Street Journal, 9/5/03
Topic: Iraq - War-Cost
Speaker: Wolfowitz, Paul - Deputy Secretary of Defense
Date: 3/27/2003
Quote/Claim:
"There's a lot of money to pay for this. It doesn't have to be U.S. taxpayer money. We are dealing with a country that can really finance its own reconstruction, and relatively soon." [Source: Atlantic Monthly]
Fact:
"Our strategy in Iraq will require new resources...I will soon submit to Congress a request for 87 billion dollars." - President Bush, 9/7/03
With this as a track record, how can we believe anything the adminstration actually says.
The United States taxpayer is going to be paying for this war of choice for decades to come ... if we are lucky. If we are not lucky, it is going to drive the country into a depression that rivals 1935.
