Dick Cheney, in 1994, said going into Iraq is Bad Idea

I know it's really a bit late, and I supported the move to fight in Iraq in the beginning. In fact, a part of me still feels like it was the right decision, just done extremely poorly. Anyway, here we are. I hope we make the best of it.

Credit goes to MoveOn.org for finding this video. It basically speaks for itself.

Former vice president Dick Cheney was right about Iraq in 1994... what made him change his mind and why are we in this mess now? I don't know, but I pray do God, not nearly frequently enough, that it will all end peacefully soon. Again, for now, let's just try to make the best of it. We failed our secret war in Afghanistan against the Soviets because afterwords we didn't help them out with their problems so the people turned to the Taliban instead of to Democracy. Let's not make the same mistake again.

Praying for peace,

Christopher D. Osborn
Bergen, Hordaland, Norge

Iraq banned from Summer Olympics

This is a travesty! This does not only hurt the athletes, that's the very least of my worries. This hurts the Iraqi people! The Iraqi people need to be inspired, they need heroes, they need national pride. These things will help improve their country. Now they're being denied it.

I had a suggestion. I think I would cry if it happened, but I don't think it will. Anyway, my suggestion is that the U.S. Olympic Team add the Iraqi players to our team. The impact on the Iraqi people would be tremendous, for us to take in their athletes when their own government acts so stupidly would be an amazing gesture, especially if we had to put them on the team and replace an American who had already gotten on our team.

That would be tremendous, that would be what the Olympics are all about.

From CNN.COM:

BAGHDAD, Iraq (CNN) -- A few months ago, it seemed liked nothing could stop Iraqi sprinter Dana Hussain from representing her country in the upcoming Summer Olympics.

Then, the International Olympic Committee banned Iraq from competing because of what it says is the government's political interference in sports.

Hussain cried for hours after hearing the news, which arrived in the form of a letter to Iraqi officials.

"She hasn't stopped. It's like finding out that a close relative has died," said her coach, Yousif Abdul Rahman.

Abdul Rahman attempted to console Hussain by assuring her that she could compete in the 2012 Olympics. Watch Hussain react to the news »

"In this horrible situation," she said, "who can say I'll even be alive in 2012?"

CNN received a copy of the letter sent to Jassim Mohammed Jaffer, Iraqi minister of youth and sports, and Ali Mohsen Ismail, acting secretary general of the Iraqi general secretariat of the Council of Ministers.

"We deeply regret this outcome, which severely harms the Iraqi Olympic and Sports Movement and the Iraqi athletes, but which is unfortunately imposed by the circumstances," said the letter, signed by two IOC officials. Watch an official explain the decision »

The move stems from an Iraqi government decision in May to suspend the nation's Olympic Committee and form a temporary committee to handle its duties.

The Iraqi government thought the committee had not been operating properly and as a result undermined the sporting movement there.

The government said the original committee held meetings without quorums and had officials serving in one-year posts for more than five years. Many of the officials also lived outside Iraq, the government said. iReport.com: See a cartoonist's take on the decision

Emmanuelle Moreau, a spokeswoman for the International Olympic Committee, said it suspended Iraq's national Olympic Committee in June after the government removed elected officials and put in people the IOC didn't recognize.

She said the IOC proposed to the Iraqi government that officials come to the organization's headquarters in Lausanne, Switzerland, "to discuss possible solutions."

But she said they didn't respond. "We're extremely disappointed with the situation. The athletes have been ill-served by the government in Iraq," she said.

Moreau said Iraq missed a Wednesday deadline for the entry of athletes to compete in archery, judo, rowing and weightlifting.

She said there is a chance that track and field athletes could compete if the original committee is reinstated. The deadline for the track team to register is at the end of the month. The Games begin August 8.

A former official from the disbanded Iraq Olympic Committee said the IOC's decision was justified because the government interfered with the national committee by suspending it.

The former official spoke on condition of anonymity because of the sensitivity of the subject.

He said he believed that the government suspended the committee out of "jealousy."

The national committee was making great strides, and the government, namely the Ministry of Youth and Sports, wanted control of it, he said.

The seven Iraqi athletes who were to travel to China for the Games' start in August are disappointed by the decision, officials said. They include an archer, a weightlifter, a judoka, two rowers and two sprinters, one of whom is Dana Hussain.

Her coach called the decision unfair and said he blames "everyone": the Iraqi government and the Iraqi and International Olympic committees.

In the end, Abdul Rahman said, the athletes are paying the price.

"It's a shame after all the efforts, ambitions, risks and dangers," he said.

"I wish from the bottom of my heart they would reconsider this unjust decision for the sake of the athletes."

CNN's Mohammed Tawfeeq and Jomana Karadsheh contributed to this report.

All AboutSummer Olympics • Iraq • International Olympic Committee

Find this article at: http://www.cnn.com/2008/WORLD/meast/07/24/iraq.olympics/index.html?eref=rss_latest

U.S. Delaware Senetor Joseph Robinette Biden, Jr.'s Plan for Iraq

Alright, before I say anything else, let me be clear. This is not an endorsement of Senetor Biden for president in 2008. I don't know enough about the guy to endorse him completely. I like his opposition to the idea that money matters in an election campaign, and I like his plan for Iraq. That is all for now.

I am not a Republican, and definitely not a Democrat. I am a conservative independent and therefore usually admire Republicans more than Democrats, but the case is different here. Sen. Biden is the only one I've heard to not only have a plan, but have one that I like and think could work.

I'll post the main part of his plan here, but also give a link to his website, as well as some other related links.

A Five Point Plan for Iraq

1. Keep Iraq Together Through Federalism and Local Control

• Federalize Iraq in accordance with its constitution by establishing three or more regions - Shiite, Sunni and Kurd -- with a strong but limited central government in Baghdad
• Put the central government in charge of truly common interests: border defense, foreign policy, oil production and revenues
• Form regional and local governments that give Kurds, Sunni and Shiites control over the fabric of their daily lives: security, education, marriage, social services.

2. Secure Support from the Sunnis

• Gain agreement for the federal solution from the Sunni Arabs by guaranteeing them 20 percent of all present and future oil revenues -- an amount roughly proportional to their size -- which would make their region economically viable
• Empower the central government to set national oil policy and distribute the revenues, to attract needed foreign investment and reinforce each community's interest in keeping Iraq intact and protecting the oil infrastructure. Provide for an international oversight group to guarantee a fair distribution of oil revenues.
• Allow former Baath Party members to go back to work and reintegrate Sunnis with no blood on their hands.

3. Enlist Help from the Major Powers and Iraq’s Neighbors

• Initiate a major diplomatic offensive to secure the support of the major powers and Iraq’s neighbors for federalism in Iraq.
• Convene with the U.N. a regional security conference where Iraq's neighbors, including Iran, pledge to support Iraq's power sharing agreement and respect Iraq's borders
• Engage Iraq's neighbors directly to overcome their suspicions and focus their efforts on stabilizing Iraq, not undermining it
• Create a standing Oversight Group, to include the major powers, that would engage Iraq's neighbors and enforce their commitments

4. Responsibly Drawdown US Troops

• Direct U.S. military commanders to develop a plan to withdraw and re-deploy almost all U.S. forces from Iraq by the summer of 2008
• Maintain in or near Iraq a small residual force -- perhaps 20,000 troops -- to strike any concentration of terrorists, help keep Iraq's neighbors honest and train its security forces

5. Increase Reconstruction Assistance and Create a Jobs Program

• Provide more reconstruction assistance, conditioned on the protection of minority and women's rights and the establishment of a jobs program to give Iraqi youth an alternative to the militia and criminal gangs
• Insist that other countries take the lead in funding reconstruction by making good on old commitments and providing new ones -- especially the oil-rich Arab Gulf countries

Plan for Iraq
Biden President '08
Joe Biden wiki
Iraq's President Supports U.S. Senate's Plan to Decentralise Iraq wikinews
Bush apposes Iraq's Partition, reaffirms support of Maliki TOI
Turkey to Invade Iraq?! Fipher.net

P.S. No news on the water situation. Hopefully Lisa will be able to find out something today. God I love that woman. She brings an ecstasy to my life that just cannot be described in English any better than that- ecstasy.

If Iraq Falls

Not just as an American, but as a human being, I care a lot about what happens in Iraq. In fact, I care about Iraq just about as much as I care about Washington D.C. (my place of birth), Martha's Vineyard (the island off Massachusetts where I've lived the most of my life), or even Norway (where I currently reside with my wife and hopefully where I will some day start a family.) In fact, I care more about what happens in Iraq than if the Boston RedSox (Go Sox!) win the world series.

It is this that drove me to arrive at this interesting article by German writer and American foreign policy expert Josef Joffe on the subject. The Honorable president George Walker Bush of the United States of America recently gave a speech about how we have to have patience or else our withdrawal from Iraq will be like our withdrawal from Vietnam (very bloody and chaotic). The article, "If Iraq Falls," seems to be one of many responses to that speech. I like it, but you can decide for yourself. Here it is.

If Iraq Falls By JOSEF JOFFE August 27, 2007; Page A11

In contrast to President Bush's dark comparison between Iraq and the bloody aftermath of the Vietnam War last week, there is another, comforting version of the Vietnam analogy that's gained currency among policy makers and pundits. It goes something like this:

After that last helicopter took off from the U.S. embassy in Saigon 32 years ago, the nasty strategic consequences then predicted did not in fact materialize. The "dominoes" did not fall, the Russians and Chinese did not take over, and America remained No. 1 in Southeast Asia and in the world.

But alas, cut-and-run from Iraq will not have the same serendipitous aftermath, because Iraq is not at all like Vietnam.

Unlike Iraq, Vietnam was a peripheral arena of the Cold War. Strategic resources like oil were not at stake, and neither were bases (OK, Moscow obtained access to Da Nang and Cam Ranh Bay for a while). In the global hierarchy of power, Vietnam was a pawn, not a pillar, and the decisive battle lines at the time were drawn in Europe, not in Southeast Asia.

The Middle East, by contrast, was always the "elephant path of history," as Israel's fabled defense minister, Moshe Dayan, put it. Legions of conquerors have marched up and down the Levant, and from Alexander's Macedonia all the way to India. Other prominent visitors were Julius Caesar, Napoleon and the German Wehrmacht.

This is not just ancient history. Today, the Greater Middle East is a cauldron even Macbeth's witches would be terrified to touch. The world's worst political and religious pathologies combine with oil and gas, terrorism and nuclear ambitions.

In short, unlike yesterday's Vietnam, the Greater Middle East (including Turkey) is the central strategic arena of the 21st century, as Europe was in the 20th. This is where three continents -- Europe, Asia, and Africa -- are joined. So let's take a moment to think about what would happen once that last Blackhawk took off from Baghdad International.

Here is a short list. Iran advances to No. 1, completing its nuclear-arms program undeterred and unhindered. America's cowed Sunni allies -- Saudi-Arabia, Jordan, the oil-rich "Gulfies" -- are drawn into the Khomeinist orbit.

You might ask: Wouldn't they converge in a mighty anti-Tehran alliance instead? Think again. The local players have never managed to establish a regional balance of power; it was always outsiders -- first Britain, then the U.S. -- who chastened the malfeasants and blocked anti-Western intruders like Nazi Germany and Soviet Russia.

With the U.S. gone from Iraq, emboldened jihadi forces shift to Afghanistan and turn it again into a bastion of Terror International. Syria reclaims Lebanon, which it has always labeled as a part of "Great Syria." Hezbollah and Hamas, both funded and equipped by Tehran, resume their war against Israel. Russia, extruded from the Middle East by adroit Kissingerian diplomacy in the 1970s, rebuilds its anti-Western alliances. In Iraq, the war escalates, unleashing even more torrents of refugees and provoking outside intervention, if not partition.

Now, let's look beyond the region. The Europeans will be the first to revise their romantic notions of multipolarity, or world governance by committee. For worse than an overbearing, in-your-face America is a weakened and demoralized one. Shall Vladimir Putin's Russia acquire a controlling stake? This ruthlessly revisionist power wants revenge for its post-Gorbachev humiliation, not responsibility.

China with its fabulous riches? The Middle Kingdom is still happily counting its currency surpluses as it pretties up its act for the 2008 Olympics, but watch its next play if the U.S. quits the highest stakes game in Iraq. The message from Beijing might well read: "Move over America, the Western Pacific, as you call it, is our lake."

Europe? It is wealthy, populous and well-ordered. But strategic players those 27 member-states of the E.U. are not. They cannot pacify the Middle East, stop the Iranian bomb or keep Mr. Putin from wielding gas pipelines as tools of "persuasion." When the Europeans did wade into the fray, as in the Balkan wars of the 1990s, they let the U.S. Air Force go first.

Now to the upside. The U.S. may have spent piles of chips foolishly, but it is still the richest player at the global gaming table. In the Bush years, the U.S. may have squandered tons of political capital, but then the rest of the world is not exactly making up for the shortfall.

Nor has the U.S. become a "dispensable nation." That is the most remarkable truth in these trying times. Its enemies from al Qaeda to Iran -- and its rivals from Russia to China -- can disrupt and defy, but they cannot build and lead.

For all the damage to Washington's reputation, nothing of great import can be achieved without, let alone against, the U.S. Can Moscow and Beijing bring peace to Palestine? Or mend a global financial system battered by the subprime crisis? Where are the central banks of Russia and China?

The Bush presidency will soon be on the way out, but America is not. This truth has recently begun to sink in among the major Democratic contenders. Listen to Hillary Clinton, who would leave "residual forces" to fight terrorism. Or to Barack Obama, who would stay in Iraq with an as-yet-unspecified force. Even the most leftish of them all, John Edwards, would keep troops around to stop genocide in Iraq or to prevent violence from spilling over into the neighborhood. And no wonder, for it might be one of them who will have to deal with the bitter aftermath if the U.S. slinks out of Iraq.

These realists have it right. Withdrawal cannot serve America's interests on the day after tomorrow. Friends and foes will ask: If this superpower doesn't care about the world's central and most dangerous stage -- what will it care about?

America's allies will look for insurance elsewhere. And the others will muse: If the police won't stay in this most critical of neighborhoods, why not break a few windows, or just take over? The U.S. as "Gulliver Unbound" may have stumbled during its "unipolar" moment. But as giant with feet of clay, it will do worse: and so will the rest of the world.

Mr. Joffe is publisher-editor of Die Zeit, the German weekly and will be teaching foreign policy at Stanford University this fall. His latest book is "Überpower: The Imperial Temptation of America." (Norton, 2006).

If you want to discuss the article and related subjects further other than here, another good spot is at bones3dmb.com. Here's a direct link to the discussion thread where I've posted this article.