May 2008

Sun Mon Tue Wed Thu Fri Sat
        1 2 3
4 5 6 7 8 9 10
11 12 13 14 15 16 17
18 19 20 21 22 23 24
25 26 27 28 29 30 31

« Famous Last Words | Main | Imagination »



Um, aren't we already in this situation? We've made it clear that once violence levels go down, we're outta there. (Tragically, that's become our definition of "success." It hasn't made much difference, and neither will IPSOP, because both plans rely on the assumption that we're dealing with logical people. The people we're fighting would rather kill each other over something that happened in the 7th century than take on the challenge of joining the 21st century.


Im not sure if this is a joke or not. The flaws in your so-called plan are immediately apparent. You cheapen the loss of life by saying that the US and the UN would do nothing to stop the bloodshed of a full-scale Sunni-Shiite civil war, instead cynically watching like vultures to steal their oil when the millions of "inevitable" deaths arise. Where is your spine? Where is your human compassion?

If this is a joke, it is possible the worst I have ever seen, and if it isnt, then it is a joke, if you know what I mean :)


The only problem is the US does not have a nuance of right to Iraqi oil.


All of the pipelines have to exit via hostile territory. The insurgents have cut back on attacking pipelines because the pipelines aren't getting repaired. All it takes is a single RPG or grenade. Heck, the Alaska pipeline leaked a huge amount of oil because of a single bullet. When the US invaded in 2003, they left all the armories and ammo dumps unguarded for 2 weeks as they raced to Bagdad to secure the oil ministry. During that 2 week period, 250,000 tons of weaponry was looted. At 2005 levels of insurgency, those 250kt of weapons will last about 200 years of fighting.

This scheme looks like the oil-for-food scheme that turned out to be utterly corrupt. And one of the participants in the scandal, Chevron, actually had a committee to prevent the diversion of funds that this scandal was about. And just *who* was the person heading this committee? Why our very own condalezza rice was that very person. Chevron is looking to pay about $25 million in fines/penalties as a result of her negligence in this matter.

The Iraqi legislature isn't going to vote on the hydrocarbon law, and cheney going to Iraq to complain about them "going on vacation" isn't going to make them vote for a US-written law that guarantees foreign investors 162% profit per year for decades while preventing Iraq from being a member of OPEC. As if there are enough legislators in the country to have a quorum anyway.,0,1229455,full.story?coll=la-home-center

As for the "civil war" it was rumsfeld who initiated the Salvador option, bringing El Salvador style death squads (called "volcano brigades") that started this whole mess.

Saddam Hussein may have been a brutal, evil, murderous bastard, but bush seems to be killing more Iraqis than Saddam did, and making life more miserable for the Iraqis than even the sanction period under Saddam. 1 in 7 Iraqis have already fled the country, thanks to bush.


Perfect Plan! The only problem is you need to be sure to find some loopholes for those non-US European types to skim some bucks off for the top for themselves or they'll make up some other garbage like global warming

(They always get creative and start making up things when you don't find a way to subsidize and explain away their uncompetitive nature... God forbid the have to meeting us the field of commerce in a fair fight, or consider giving up their 5 weeks of vacation... But in their defense, they need all the bribes to pay those communi.. Oops... socialist taxes their governments impose on them so they can support the brain-dead part of their population that votes left, thinks freedom, independence and liberty are bad words, and never knew hard work in their life...)

Oh and on the defending the oil fields we temporally appropriate, they would be very easy to defend if we did it the "Red State" way, as opposed to the Clinton/Kerry/Blue State way... If anyone comes within 500 yards they die via a hail from the guard's choice of weapon de jour. No warnings. No capture. Just instantaneous death (With Pig’s blood dipped bullets?). To reinforce the off-limits mantra, we then deal with any settlements that were in the general direction the pile of jerky… Oops… former attacker approached from would be carpet bombed (I'd say nuked, but you want some survivors to spread the fear...)


Another easy solution: give every suicide bomber a virgin and that should be the end of terrorists and insurgency.

Not sure whether IPSOP would work though. The Iraqis could ust pretend to be nice for a while until they get the oil wells back. Then they could start fighitng over it again.

Or they'd go the western way. They'll play nice for a while. While they're playing nice, a couple of rich Iraqi's take over the wells and make multibillion $$$ profit. Then there would be a class warfare, and communism will be born in middle-east (w00t).


Has anyone read the Watchmen? I think Baghdad/Tehran is going to be like New York.


That would work if the UN was a federal US organisation, the US an empire bent on world domination, and big oil in control of the US economy.

Of course, none of the above is true, is it ?


Insurgents won't care what america claims they are doing with the money, they would treat any claim as propaganda and attack the oil fields anyway.


You're missing the point on the pan-arab situation. FUBAR

These rag heads are the bast@rd spawn of ishmael w/ one overriding concern above all else - even at the expense of their own children - they want to kill jews and any allies of the jews. FUBAR.

These rags heads will eagerly kill one another just to claim 'allah's favor' as the most murderous jew killer in all of jew-killer-dom. FUBAR.

Did I mention 'fubar'? The best hope of the West is to savagely contain these wanton killers and their indisciminant hate. It's not a breakeven scenario. It's notmorally neutral. It's FUBAR.


I agree that you don't have to take it all, but you need to take some from the South and some from Kirkuk, because it's the Shi'i and to a lesser extent the Kurds that are blocking compromise in the government.

But the principle of increasing leverage is a good one. There are clearly many in the government who believe that the ongoing Sunni exodus whether by car or by coffin, is necessary and that the killings, both given and received, are an acceptable price.

It would be quite fiendish to give the money to the UN to do with as it liked, as long as it didn't return it to Iraq. It's easy to get used to spending someone else's money. Alternatively, we could apportion it among the mostly Sunni refugees.


You're famous*&Query=Dilbert


I would not put it past the terrorist forces and insurgent forces who share the terrorist ideology and desire to propogate a war on the west to put palestinian children in harms way economically or physically. They are interested in one thing alone and that is the establishment of a Islamic Caliphate ruled by Sharia law, as cruel and oppressive as anything Saddam would have the iraqi people living under.
The children, after all, would die for "a just cause" in the name of allah. The koran makes allowances for a martyrs deaths to muslims inadvertently caught in the crossfire of another martyrs actual death. However, it's ambiguous whether that secures you a place in heaven or not.
So again I say that its a shitty situation, where war crimes are pending for bush, his cronies and every member of congress and the UK government for deriliction of duty (i.e. passively allowing the slaughter of a quarter of a million iraqi's) if they withdraw, and a quagmire if they stay with only a glimmer of hope and the death of a few more thousand troops and the waste of billions of dollars.
Incompetence on the command front is the biggest killer here, not the terrorists.


I agree with your analysis of your halucination.

Jörg Sprave

You Americans are always so politically correct...

What you suggest is nothing but the good old "conquer-then loot-then install a government of choice" strategy.

Come on, why give the oil money to lazy foreigners? Haven't you got enough widows and orphans in the US, husbands and fathers killed by Iraqi terrorists? Why don't you sell the oil and give the money to those who have directly suffered?

If the American government really wanted to help the poor people in this world, then that could have happened before, using tax dollars. Spending tax dollars for protecting the oil and then donate the proceedings from selling it is exactly the same.

So do what a true victor would do. Take everything that has value for yourself, then leave the smoldering, worthless ruins behind.

This would probably not be noble, fair and ethical, but at least it would be honest and straight forward. Plus, it's tradition.

Darius Trunk

This is in response to Saturday's post about the Near Jokes. Sorry this is late, but I love Near Jokes, or as Mad Magazine used to call them, "No-Joke Jokes."

My favorite from the mag was, "Your sister is so fat, it takes her TWO buses to get downtown."


People will always fight, so long as they believe in eternal after-lives and wierd supernatural entities bellowing devine war cries. Since it looks like people are going to believe in all this BS for some time to come (maybe forever) then we have a lot of war and bloodshed to look forward to.

The important question is not IF there will be war, but WHO it will be between. The choice is: united Islam vs the rest of the world (with nuclear weapons) or Sunni vs Shia (with sharpened sticks).

I know what I would choose.


Why would the UN want to get in on this? It's the Americans that caused this problem. We're the war criminals. Why would the UN want to get our funk on them? The UN still has some credibility. They'd lose all that if they help us out.

The Pentagon estimates that 75% of the "terrorist" activity in Iraq is directed at getting the United States out. 3-5% is AlQaeda and AlQaeda related groups. The remain 20% or so is civil war stuff.

By leaving most of the violence in Iraq stops.


Well - despite all the nay sayers, I think your plan is a lot better than Bush's. Oh wait... he doesn't have a plan!


Richard said:

"the UN doing something useful????? now there's someone who needs to have their chair kicked, they've falling asleep typing again! the UN is half as useful, and a quarter as effective as the typical small town PTO/PTA....."

I think that's part of the ingeniousness of Scott's plan. Everyone but the UN knows that the UN is useless.

Since the UN is useless, it will take a LONG time before the US has to leave the Iraqi oil fields. Even longer than the time it would take the Iraqis to stop fighting on their own.


Dogbert for Imam of Iraq.


Girlfan and Mohammed Secret? That's what's happening now.


If the Iraqis have a choice between keeping the oil for their future use (by attacking the pipeline) and "giving" the Palestinians lots of oil money (by not attacking the pipeline during their civil war), I am confident that they will choose to keep the oil for their future use. They can always claim that they will help the Palestinians later.


Wrong, Scott. We need to rid the Middle East of all American presence. In 10 years, the warring Muslim factions will have found a way to kill enough of one another that there will be no one left to oppose America and the West returning to take over the Sandbox -- oil and all.


I have an even simpler solution. If the objective is withdrawing from Iraq with as few civilian and US forces deaths as possible then take a leaf out of Israel’s paraphrased book – make everyone in Iraq a soldier from the moment they are borne. This is the best bit… you don’t just make them Army – you make them American Army! Just give them a number and a small salary – I wouldn’t go giving them guns or anything. They have enough.
It doesn’t matter which of the 20 or so sides they fight for. In the end, as US borne boys and girls get on a flight home to their loved ones and gun crime, the Other US Army will be there, flying the flag, metaphorically, slowly winning a war of attrition for the west. At the same time, even though they may not be in uniform, each and every death would be a combatant, ergo no more civilian deaths. Give all property to the army, schools, hospitals, shopping centres – no more collateral damage. As a Scott, it seems to me that the US already turns a blind eye to friendly fire, so you don’t need to worry about that side of the equation as your adopted guys and galls kill each other. That has got to be a political winner!?

The comments to this entry are closed.