Correct Strategy for Iraq
Reader comment on item: Tempering Ambitions [in Iraq]

Submitted by Chris Chrisman (United States), Nov 13, 2006 at 13:00

Dear Dr. Pipes,

You are right on target with your recommendation that the coalition plan for and implement an accelerated turn-over of Iraq to its own government. Yes, we should stay in remote areas to defend Iraq's borders so outside agents don't take advantage of their weakness, but they must take responsibility for their own internal affairs. Will there be bloodshed? Yes, but probably no less than a protracted, decades long, occupation by the coalition. Can Iraq find a suitable democratically-minded strongman? Yes eventually, but none of the present batch of leaders seems to fit the bill.

The U.S. government was naive and blinded by its own idealism (along with a touch of greed) to think they could forcibly impose democracy on this troubled country and turn it into a shining example for the Middle East. Americans value liberty enough to fight for it, and so do many Iraqis. The problem is that when we won our independence we weren't fighting an evil ideology heavily funded by oil-rich neighbors whose greatest fear is a democratic government.

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.