How We Can Leave Iraq

Quote of the day:
“I was gratified to be able to answer promptly. I said I don’t know.”
--Mark Twain

Ocean fact of the day:
Factor by which the average noise level underwater has increased since 1965: 3.
--Harper’s Index

Most of the news coverage about Iraq is yes/no. Should we withdraw or not? Should we increase troop levels or not? It’s easy to forget how complex the situation is, and that American interests are just one part of a long equation.

New York Times columnist Thomas Friedman addressed some of the complexities last week:

“Right now everyone in Iraq is having their cake and eating it--at our expense. We have to change that.

“The Sunnis, who started this whole murderous cycle, participate in the government, negotiate with us and also indulge the suicide bombers and the insurgents.

“The Shiites collaborate with us, run their own retaliatory death squads and dabble with Iran.

“The Saudis tell us we can’t leave, but their mosques and charities funnel Sunni suicide bombers to Iraq and dollars to insurgents.

“Iran pushes its Iraqi Shiite allies to grab more power, while helping others kill U.S. troops. Ditto Syria.”

Then Friedman proposes this solution:

“OK, boys, party’s over: we’re leaving by December 1. From now on, everyone pays retail for their politics. We will no longer play host to a war where we’re everyone’s protector and target.

“If you Sunnis want to go on resisting, we’ll leave you to the tender mercies of the Shiites, who vastly outnumber you. You Shiites, if you want to run Iraq without compromising with Sunnis, fine, but you’ll have to fight them alone and then risk having to live under the thumb of Iran.

“You Saudis and other Arabs, if you don’t use your influence to delegitimize Sunni suicide bombers and press Iraq’s Sunnis to cut a deal, we won’t protect you from the consequences.

“And Iran, you win--yes, if we leave, you win the right to try to manage Iraq’s Shiites. Have a nice day.”