Ahh.. like father, like son..
George has begun to do what he can to minimize the damage Iraq is causing the Republican Party itself, and is now planning on withdrawing American troops from Iraq, without finishing the job. The withdrawals announced by George slated for next year, can only be seen as a recognition of the US's inability to bring stability to Iraq without maintaining what would essentially be a permanent presence in the country..
The report from General Petraeus hasn't helped bolster confidence in leaving Iraq with a government that can effectively hold it's own against 'terrorist' factions, and the American public is fed up, just as it was back in 1975 in VietNam, and 1993 in Iraq.. The American man on the street would sooner believe that withdrawing from the area, and leaving a situation that will certainly lead to civil war, will lessen the danger they face from radical Islamists..
It would appear once again, to paraphrase the Bishop of Citee during the Albigensian Crusade, to be a case of 'leave them to themselves, God will sort His own out'..
The facts are, that both British and American armed forces are over stretched.. reaching the limit of what can be financially supported..
One possible solution, yet to be expressed, is a division of the country, with the Sunni's taking control of the north of the country, and the Shi'ites control of the south.
After all, splitting countries into factional governments is historically supported.. the establishment of the Islamic State of Pakistan, separate from India itself, back in 1949.. The proposed division of Israel into a State that allowed both an Israeli homeland, with Palestinian involvement..
But, examine those two examples. Pakistan is training Islamic terrorists to fight both in Iraq and Afghanistan, and Israel has failed to reach any sense of equity with it's Islamic Palestinians..
It would be nothing short of naivety to expect an American pullout from Iraq, to be anything less than an opportunity for Iran to 'fill the void', in the words of Ahmadenejad..
But, such has been the record of the US in the past 50 years or so.. to walk into a situation that has been drastically underestimated, and leave before any solution has been resolved..
It must be stressed however, that as previously mentioned, the radical factions of Islam will not allow themselves to be blackmailed by public opinion into abandoning it's anti-Western stance.. What we have managed to accomplish has been nothing more than stirring even more antipathy.. more disrespect, for Western policies and resolve.
This should now be passed into the hands of the United Nations, for it would seem the only stance we can take, at this point, is to show the Middle East that they are part of a worldwide community. And that, would of necessity, demand an united front from those opposing terrorism and a Caliphate.
For therein lies the basic problem. Europe, the West, have never shown determination of attacking terrorism, and those who support it, with determination and full agreement.
Whereas, Islamic countries have shown the West nothing but their determination to bring their ideology to all those who disagree.
We are between a rock, and a very hard place.
And it's time we took our ideology as seriously as those who follow Islam.
We have the economic clout.. We have an institution in the United Nations which could step in, and take this conflict to the next stage.
We seem to lack the basic understanding of what we are facing, or of what it's going to cost in starting something we don't finish..
Seperately, or in small coalitions, we have no chance, and frankly never have. This requires an united statement, that while we will respect the faith of others, but will not allow any other faith to dictate, through it's radical factions, changes to our way of life.
It is a surety that if we leave Iraq without a resolution, we will regret for generations that which we have failed to have the moral strength to maintain.. that being our own values.
Our own society.
Our own way of life.