[Thermodyne]

“Can America deliver a good peace?” Very good question Tesco. But one that only time can answer. The only thing we can do is look at history, and hope to develop a scale against which to measure the chances.

A quick look brings a few prime indicators to light; economic development seems to be a good marker. Developed countries recover more quickly than undeveloped ones. Also the Education of the population seems to have some importance. On the other hand, religious hatred and tribalism seem to prevent recovery and the building of nations that have a sound respect for basic human rights.

Iraq has a good level of education, along with a fair level of industrial development. But they also suffer from religious zealots and tribalism. The trump card is oil. With oil they can finance a strong recovery, and make their first gains in the area of living standards for the common man. Happy people are more apt to work for the stabilization of the government, rather than against it. I think that the model that was used in Japan can be adapted to work in Iraq. Take away the ego of one man, and it was a very good plan.

I think Iraq must remain as one state; to partition it would destabilize the region. Also instead of worrying about which sect will have power, they should form a coalition right from the start. All Iraqi’s not actually in positions of great authority should have amnesty. And any that are going to be punished, should receive it swiftly. The one compelling rule should be to always move forward. This of course rules out much involvement by the UN. They take years to do what can be done in weeks.

Personally, I think that the current Army of Iraq should be retained in a reformed entity. They will be well suited for maintaining order, US troops will not. Also, US forces should be withdrawn to specific bases ASAP. There should be a strong presence, but not a highly visible one. The Iraqi people need to build their own government based on acceptable standards already set by the UN.

Lastly, I do believe that America and her allies should create a PAX Americana/Allies in Iraq. Those who were not against Saddam should be frozen out of the post war revitalization of Iraq. It is time for the west to abandon the colonial ideas and aging ways of empire. We must accept the new nations as equals, not clients.

As a side bar I would like to address the “what about all the other places and other dictators” point that has been brought up. Three things determine the level of our involvement. Strategic considerations, spheres of influence, and public opinion. Let’s take Nepal for example. The west could have taken the Chicoms to task and expelled them from Nepal. But at what cost? Nepal would be rubble, and in all likelihood, several cities would be people free zones right now. Glassed over by fusion fires. Would that have served the people of Nepal? I don’t think so. Also, history tells us that they are a breakaway republic that was part of China in the past. Who has the valid claim? Does a successful revolt guarantee unchallenged independence? How for back do we apply modern law? An awful lot of questions and danger to be found in this problem, and for what gain? Unless Nepal finds linkage to another world problem, they will remain part of China so long as the Chicoms choose to hold them.

The point here is that each situation has its own set of risks and benefits, that in and of themselves have no linkage. To merely try to use their weight in numbers as a plank in your position has very little merit. It is not unlike the kid, who when caught red handed, rats out his peers in an effort to lesson the punishment that is about to be applied. To say that the US is wrong for only addressing one of the world’s problems is not sporting. The fact is, that we are addressing several of them at this time, who will step forward and address another? France? Belgium? Canada? There are plenty to go around. And 50 years of talking has not found a solution yet.