Corruption is a big issue there. If some special care is not taken the baddest ass in the area will swoop in and take over Iraq's oil revenues and kill off everyone who opposes the action. Most likely it will be Iran or Iranian backed Shiites who would love to cozy up to the ayatollah like a nice security blanked so they could keep as much oil revenue as possible.

Whether you like it or not the US is there. To walk out would be like conquering a country and abandoning the spoils when the whole area is surrounded by thieves and bandits. One difference is that the bandits are regional governments or supported by same. Nobody is going to maintain power there without support in the area. Support in the area is greed driven.

Now maybe the US might be said to have no claim to the resources or revenues of the area, but after the American lives lost I am beginning to feel differently about even that. In any case leaving the resources and revenues for thieves and bandits is simply foolish.

Steady economy depends to some extent on a functional system of trade in the oil industry. Design a car that runs on water if you don't like it, or walk to work. Walk to the fields and pick your own beans for that matter because without oil you are not going to buy groceries at a grocery store.

Sound management of the oil resources and the revenues they generate requires force unfortunately, for the time being. I expect as long as Iran has its present leadership that will not change. Also as long as the hatred between the sects in Iraq remains, one group will try to destroy the other. Working that out requires force, management and fair dealing.

They can attain a peace in Iraq. To say otherwise is a slight at mankind. Somebody has to keep the bullies apart and not give either side the bomb, then teach them to deal fairly with one another and stick around until the model is shown to work for the vast majority.

I think you have to take the opposition down a notch though by managing Iran a little better, more swiftly. When Iran is settled Iran's people will concentrate on rebuilding their own country instead of trying to take over Iraq. Then the Iraqis will only have themselves to sort out.

Corruption is a big issue there. If some special care is not taken the baddest ass in the area will swoop in and take over Iraq's oil revenues and kill off everyone who opposes the action.

I agree!!!!!!

Bush!!!

well i happen to rave read about a civil war

that france got involved in yep

i think it was about 278 tears ago

Fanta that was a very glib response. You can do better than that.

There is zero oil coming out of Iraq!

Regardless, we need to spend that billions of dollars finding an alternative energy source. Not stealing it!

Yes France was indirectly involved in our revolution with England!

Kinda like Iran is in Iraq's fight to rid their country of another occupying force!!!!

France funded our independence and supplied weapons. Barely!!!

Kinda like Iran is in Iraq, but neither the French Army or the Iranian Army were directly involved!

What can I say Philosopher? I'm in a GLIB kinda mood!!!

the french navy was a threatening force just of the coast

in what would be considered (british) american waters

yes, key word=threatening!!!

i agree

hehehe

i don't know what you were referring to when you asked about civil war fanta but the corruption i was talking about is with the sectarian affiliations that divide the national security force. i don't know that dealing with the sectarianism can be combated with force but giving them all equal representation would be a start and that includes a equal shares of the oil revenue. i think one of the main problems there is that they never had a lot of national pride because of the dictatorship and people turn to their sects as a point of pride. i don't think there will ever be peace in iraq until everyone is working together for a unified iraq unfortunately that may never happen. we should have never went there in the first place but the fact is we are there now. we will always have a military presence in iraq now but i don't think that we can even begin to bring any of the troops home til their security forces are a little stronger. a stronger iraqi national security force will only help the remaining U.S. troops(the ones left behind to handle terrorist groups)in being able to focus on those groups and not have to deal with the civil war as much.

I agree king.
I was talking in refrence to the secretarian violence!
Its a civil war, and we are backing one side!
Thus a protective occupation.
We, or Bush, is trying to shape the internal politics of Iraq and direct them down a path we, or Bush, wants for them to follow!

And Americans are dying for it, not 9/11!!!

We should leave!!!!!

"This is an Iraqi affair, and we will not accept interference by anyone in such work, whether the Congress or others," Majid told The Associated Press by telephone. "The report is inaccurate and not official and we consider it interference in our internal affairs."

"The al-Maliki government will do this with all state agencies. We will not take dictation from reports," he said.


We should let them have at it!!!!

There goes that conservatively controled press again!

i'm unaware of the U.S. backing one side in the sectarian violence fanta. what side are we backing? are'nt there 3 sides since there are 3 sects?

never mind fanta, i found some info on it.