Daniel Pipes
Mobile Edition
Regular Site

No easy way out
Reader comment on item: Let Iraqis run Iraq

Submitted by Daniel Too (United States), Oct 18, 2003 at 05:48

Dear Mr. Pipes,

I usually agree with your work, and we've met twice, at two of your speeches (It's OK if you don't remember...)

In your article above ("Let Iraqis run Iraq", 15 Oct 03), however, it seems that you are arguing for unilateral withdrawal by the US in Iraq, by Israel in the West Bank (a.k.a. Judea and Samaria), by Russia in Chechnya, and by India in Kashmir. Understandably, all people should bear as much of the burden and responsibility for running their own country as possible, but-- to paraphrase Einstein-- not moreso. Considering the terrorism and other national interests of the US, Israel, Russia, and India in the respective regions, is it reasonable just to "stand back" while things simmer, then go in full force when needed, as the US has now done twice in a dozen years, in Iraq alone? Wouldn't it be preferable to be able to prevent situations from going so wrong in the first place?

To prevent the situations that lead to terrorism and related problems, it will take active involvement. Rather than abandoning Iraq, the West Bank, Chechnya, and Kashmir, why not use more of the model of US assistance in Germany and Japan after World War II? Both Germany and Japan were devastated in WWII, yet-- with ample assistance afterward-- they rapidly became the world's #2 and #3 strongest economies, trailing only the United States itself, and rather good US allies and partners at that.

As you have said yourself, World War II was about destroying fascism, not about destroying Germany and Japan. Both Nazi Germany and Imperial Japan were rebuilt and restructured, though it took time and effort. Hopefully Iraq and Afghanistan, and elsewhere as needed, now will be as well.


Note: Opinions expressed in comments are those of the authors alone and not necessarily those of Daniel Pipes. Original writing only, please. Comments are screened for relevance, substance, and tone, and in some cases edited before posting. Reasoned disagreement is welcome, but comments are rejected if scurrilous, off-topic, vulgar, ad hominem, or otherwise viewed as inappropriate. For complete regulations, see the Guidelines for Comments. For informational purposes, we identify countries from which comments are sent.

Submit a comment on this item

Search by Enter name or date
Search Forum Comments:

Reader comments (36) on this item

Title By Date
AWESOME!!!!!!!!!!!!! [5 words]Logan BennettDec 10, 2003 07:12
true [16 words]slycooper542Jan 18, 2007 20:54
Not just the necessary thing but the right thing [126 words]David BarnsdaleNov 7, 2003 06:33
History provides a clue [105 words]Phil BramleyOct 29, 2003 18:26
Good, Fast, Cheap -- Pick any two [205 words]btk2Oct 26, 2003 22:20
hiding the truth, aren't you? [129 words]Yuval brandstetterOct 22, 2003 07:58
unclear [127 words]michael rosenbaumOct 20, 2003 20:49
But there ARE good reasons for being there [151 words]Dughall HallidayOct 20, 2003 05:08
Are Iraqis really capable of running Iraq right now? [212 words]David EOct 20, 2003 02:57
Please elaborate on your comments!
[w/response] [88 words]
SteveOct 20, 2003 00:28
Let Iraqis run Iraq [26 words]Jim HerrinOct 20, 2003 00:06
answer to your suggestion, "Turm Iraq over to Iraqis" [199 words]AnnOct 19, 2003 23:11
Let Iraqis run part of Iraq [128 words]Boris GalinskyOct 19, 2003 17:05
Analysis cannot be universalised [83 words]Praveen BoseOct 19, 2003 12:15
Referendum is the perfect mechanism [453 words]John HadjiskyOct 19, 2003 01:33
Disappointed by this article [153 words]Boris FrenkelOct 19, 2003 00:44
Give the Iraqis room to run [143 words]GlennOct 19, 2003 00:32
⇒ No easy way out [286 words]Daniel TooOct 18, 2003 05:48
Double bind [55 words]john W. mcginleyOct 18, 2003 00:37
re pulling out of Iraq [103 words]phillip baramOct 17, 2003 20:47
The secondary reason is the primary reqson,"Sweet Crude" [166 words]Ken HarrisOct 17, 2003 15:23
US cannot afford to give up fixing Iraq! [207 words]Philip BaltzerOct 17, 2003 14:07
You said it ! [55 words]R.IngalsOct 17, 2003 01:33
Risk of Saddam and/or Loyalists Returning to Power [40 words]Dr. Louis KleinOct 17, 2003 01:28
You are probably right [280 words]Tom PensylOct 17, 2003 00:44
We need to take this a step further - location, location, location [256 words]LlamaOct 17, 2003 00:18
What Happened to You!?! [206 words]AvrahamOct 17, 2003 00:00
Additional points [234 words]Scott McCluskeyOct 16, 2003 23:58
No Democracy in Iraqi Self-Rule [207 words]Mike RamirezOct 16, 2003 23:51
Singing a different tune
[w/response] [71 words]
Steven SternOct 16, 2003 23:46
What about Saddam?
[w/response] [148 words]
Philip J. CherryOct 16, 2003 23:18
I wonder [37 words]ForrestOct 16, 2003 22:49
Can the Iraqis Govern and Protect Themselves in 6 Months? [145 words]James in BoiseOct 16, 2003 21:24
You missed a spot [19 words]John DaviesOct 16, 2003 21:13
Governing Iraq [15 words]JerryOct 16, 2003 20:53
Muslim Opposition to Infidels [327 words]Peter LubinOct 16, 2003 20:25

Comment on this item

Name
Email Address (optional)
Title of Comments
Comments:

Note: Opinions expressed in comments are those of the authors alone and not necessarily those of Daniel Pipes. Original writing only, please. Comments are screened for relevance, substance, and tone, and in some cases edited before posting. Reasoned disagreement is welcome, but comments are rejected if scurrilous, off-topic, vulgar, ad hominem, or otherwise viewed as inappropriate. For complete regulations, see the Guidelines for Comments. For informational purposes, we identify countries from which comments are sent.

See the 25 most recent outstanding comments.

Back to top of page