I think the Bush administration is blowing the rebuild effort

[Sabre]

DmdNexus said:

It's going to take multinational support to democratize Iraq.

I keep hearing this, but exactly what do you mean by it?  This question is not meant to be sarcastic or antagonistic in any way.  I really don't understand what you mean here.  There are thirty or more nations that have and are helping in Iraq.  If by mulitinational you mean the U.N., what could they do that the Coalition is not already doing?  What do they bring to the process that would make such a dramatic and/or immediate effect?  

Admittedly, I have little faith in or respect for the U.N.  They have failed (or simply failed to act) way more times than they have succeeded in such challenges as we face in Iraq.  It is a bloated, ineffective collection of states, many that have no true legitimacy to the governments, with radically competing agendas.  As has already been spectacularly demonstrated in Iraq over and over again, that body doesn't have the collective will to do what needs to be done.  Indeed, they up and left the first time a bomb went off too close to there offices in Bahgdad.  Many of the countries in the U.N. have no real interest in advancing the greater good, promoting peace and freedom, or helping the oppressed and down-trodden.

[DmdNexus]

Originally posted by Sabre
DmdNexus said:
I keep hearing this, but exactly what do you mean by it?  This question is not meant to be sarcastic or antagonistic in any way.  I really don't understand what you mean here.  There are thirty or more nations that have and are helping in Iraq.  If by mulitinational you mean the U.N., what could they do that the Coalition is not already doing?  What do they bring to the process that would make such a dramatic and/or immediate effect?  

You're right there are many nations involved with the Iraq reconstruction - Japan, Turkey, Italy, England - to name a few.

The situation needs unbiased legitamacy in accordance with international law and that comes from the UN because it's the largest multi-nation organization... and most importantly it includes arabs states as members.

So far the coallition is comprised of mostly European nations.

UN Right or wrong... whimpy... skittish... powerless.. whatever...
It's the best option to bring legitamacy to region.

perhaps the UN charter needs to be rewritten to eliminate the ability of one country having blocking veto power... in that case a 60 majority vote may allow the UN act move decisively in the future.....

More good can be served by working with and then changing the system then to abandon it altogether.

[DmdNexus]

Originally posted by Rude
If he doesn't get it done, it will  be because the majority of Americans today, do not have the stomach to handle anything difficult....our culture demands a quick and painless solution....that is until we get hit again in 9-11 fashion....then most libs will blame Bush due to Iraq or they will wish they would have kept him in office.

Kinda predictable.

that's a rather broad brush stroke... and if it were true... then that would mean the party which is currently in power...
which was elected by the majority of the people... because that's how elections work in America... isn't it? The majority wins....

So that would mean these representatives... represent the majority of the people... and who are they again? Oh yah the Republicans....

So according you your broad generalization then the majority of Americans (Republicans) don't have the "stomach to handle anything difficult"

I think Americans can handle and stomach difficult situations...

they also want to be told the truth by their government
They want to believe that what they are doing is for a just cause....
They don't want the lies and endless and senseless killing of Vietnam to be repeated.

They want this war to end as quickly as possible... who wouldn't...

So I find that your broad accessment of the American people to be patonly false...and has nothing to do with liberals.

[Westy]

Huzzah!

 Have no fear. If the US has another terrorist attack, or things get even worse in Iraq so that Bush's "approval rating" continues to plummet, that the US administration will attempt to resurrect any waning patriotic fervor (or poll points) by simply bombing the ever living snot out of some "dangerous" Arab country like Djibouti or Yemen.

[GtoRA2]

Westy
 Clinton is long out of Ofice!:aok

[Dinger]

You're talking Democracy in a country where the people have never had anything in common except the oppressing power. To get the Sunnis, Shia and Kurds  to work together to build a common nation is going to require serious social change. Enforcing that kind of social change from the top down is going to require some serious governmental intervention in daily life on a level that would make the most liberal democrat blanch.


It doesn't really help matters either the State Department's plan for a post-invasion Iraq, a year in preparation, was tossed out in favor of a competing plan that to me looks like it's based on the notion that the Iraqi people would recognize the Americans as their liberators and welcome Chalabi as their leader.

[FUNKED1]

I think the lessons of Vietnam needed to be heeded here. Fighting a half-assed war against Islamic Radicalism is not going to stop it. We either need to grow some balls and waste all of the mother****ers, not just in Iraq, or we get the hell out of there and deal with the consequences. Half-assing it is not going to cut it. It's just going to get lots of American boys killed for no gain.

[FUNKED1]

Originally posted by Dinger
To get the Sunnis, Shia and Kurds  to work together to build a common nation is going to require serious social change. Enforcing that kind of social change from the top down is going to require some serious governmental intervention in daily life on a level that would make the most liberal democrat blanch.

That's what I'm talking about.  If we aren't willing to err on the side of killing or jailing too many, in order to make sure we get all the bad guys, and if we aren't willing to kill 100 Iraqis for every US serviceman who is murdered, we shouldn't be playing at war.

[Mighty1]

I don't see how HE is blowing it.

I think things are not going as fast and as well as some had wanted or expected but I don't think that means HE is blowing anything.

[Ripsnort]

Originally posted by Mighty1
I don't see how HE is blowing it.

I think things are not going as fast and as well as some had wanted or expected but I don't think that means HE is blowing anything.

Commander in Chief. Nuff said.  He needs to start firing people then.

[miko2d]

Ripsnort: Any others who lean right of center feel the same way?  I think Bush is blowing it right now in Iraq.

 It only seems so, but in reality there was no way to do it any better. He blew it when he decided it could be done at all.

 miko