Post #62

Subject: Iraq's Future and America's Interests

Senator Joseph R. Biden, Jr., Chairman of Senate Foreign Relations Committee, gave a speech before the Brookings Institution in Washington DC, advocating revisiting the original 2002 Iraq War resolution. Senator Biden also said that although leaving Iraq is necessary, we should also focus on what we leave behind. The important thing now is to manage the aftermath of the greatest blunder in our history.

Remarks prepared for delivery. My responses and additions – in [brackets]….

* * *

"Iraq's Future and America's Interests"

The Brookings Institution

February 15, 2007

This is a time of tremendous challenge for America in the world.

We must contend with the on-going war in Afghanistan, the genocide in Darfur, nuclear programs in Iran and North Korea, the rise of China and re-emergence Russia, the growing insecurity of our energy supply, the fragility of our climate, and the threat posed by radical fundamentalism.

[Yes, we continue to bleed in Iraq, making the War on Terror longer and harder. The Iraq War itself is giving aid and comfort to the enemy – we are losing the ability to respond militarily to other threats. It is no wonder that Osama wants us to stay in Iraq, bleeding and taking our eyes off him.]

But one issue dominates our national debate: Iraq.

If we deal with it successfully, we can recover the freedom, flexibility nd credibility to meet these other challenges

Listen to the debate about Iraq here in Washington. It centers on a false choice that is also a bad choice: Do we continue on President Bush's failing course and hand off Iraq to the next President? Or do we just leave and hope for the best?

[The Iraq War was winnable – our military objectives were obtainable, and they were! However, George W. Bush’s “democracy that’s an allay in the War on Terror” is a political objective – an inappropriate use of our military. We can still get a positive outcome. But only if Bush shows some leadership and gives up his “utopian” dream.]

[I find or a “New Way Forward” to be morally reprehensible. So does MSNBC’s Joe Scarborough on his show, “Enough is enough. … You know, if you look at the number of Americans who died after the Tet offensive in 1968, it‘s just—at some point, it becomes immoral continuing in a war that you know your country can‘t win.” Sending 21,000 more American targets for a slow motion defeat as Bush tries to hand off responsibility for his mess to the next President is morally reprehensible – nothing short of murderous.]

[Let’s just declare victory and come home. From my Post #27, “I saw on TV the other day a ‘talking head’ ask somebody who was in favor of an immediate withdrawal – forget whom [blush] – about the potential problems of withdrawal. He said ‘We’ll see.’ In other words, it is better to leave now and face the consequences now than to leave in, say, 10 years and face what definitely will be even worse consequences. And, yes, we will be leaving at some point.” Since no one seems to be interested in doing the hard work to get a positive ending in Iraq – indeed, Bush’s “New Way Forward” is just an effort to hand off responsibility for his mess to the next President, I think we ought to get out… now!]

I believe there is a better choice. It is still possible to bring our troops home without trading a dictator for chaos that engulfs Iraq and spreads to the Middle East.

That must be our goal.

Leaving Iraq is necessary -- but it is not a plan. We also need a plan for what we leave behind.

Nine months ago, with Les Gelb of the Council on Foreign Relations, I proposed just such a plan. Go to "PlanForIraq.com." to read its details.

Our plan recognizes that there is no purely military exit strategy from Iraq. Instead, we set out a roadmap to a political settlement in Iraq -- one that gives its warring factions a way to share power peacefully and offers us a chance to leave with our interests intact.