PDA

View Full Version : Proposal for withdrawal in Iraq (MUST READ)


TSA
12-13-2007, 05:31 PM
Proposal For Iraq Withdrawal
In the wake of the current situation in that nation of Iraq, it is only probable that an effective solution to the firestorm of solutions we face be implemented in the immediate future. In analysis the conflict in the nation, and the wilderness layers of conflict and tension have created, I have proposed a blueprint intended to stabilize the nation with the primary objective of an American military withdrawal. This solution is based on establish a stable government in Iraq, which will be our primary mode of action used to reach our set objective.

In order to do this we must fully understand the nature of a government to its people. Government exists when the people allow it to exist, or in other terms, view it a legitimate. Legitimacy is the crown jewel that allows people to submit to a government and give it the power needed to handle the decisions and threats they cannot.

Therefore, the key to successful execution of our plan of action will be to legitimize the post war government of Iraq. A problem that will be faced in the post-war era is constant threat of a popular coup d’etat. The threat of such an action is more realized when facing the facts that post-war Iraq will have little in the form of economic activity, and will feature rampant poverty and unemployment. This will fuel an already widely held discontent for condition, the government, and the US as the three will be linked. Therefore as the U.S. is seen as the “cause” of these problems, the post war U.S. established government will be seen as “continuation” of the problem and nationalistic seizures of control will not only be very likely, but also, viewed as the “end” of the problems.

As a result of its symbolism in ushering change, a nationalistic anti-American coup will be held as legitimate, which could be catastrophic to US interests in the country and the region.

To avoid this outcome, a legitimate government must be put in the place of our occupation that will find it’s legitimacy the same way a nationalist coup would. The key factor of interest in the previous scenario is the fact that the nationalistic government found it’s legitimacy for being a symbolic “end” to the US cause “problems” of the country.

It’s from this that we learn in order to establish a legitimate government, we must
Paint it as a symbolic “end” to the US caused problems. The government we establish must indeed be nationalistic, and must indeed come in through force or a revolutionary “end” type scenario that will usher in a new age post war age. The benefit of establishing this government rather then having it establish its self is that the one we establish will be able to be influenced, or rather, controlled and thus protect our interests as well as help avoid the unpredictability of nationalist governments. This entire plan must therefore be articulated into reality by a series of symbolic events that must in essence be staged and secretive in it’s true nature.


The plan must begin with the establishment of a government viewed as illegitimate. The one established by the 2004 elections is one that already plays this role and thus its ineffectiveness and adherence to the US must be amplified, publicized, and propagated to Iraqi citizens. It is then, as we stage a planned withdrawal from the country that a radical organization of our construct headed by a charismatic figure of our choosing, training, and alligence. This organization will stage a coup in Baghdad, followed by a heroic “battle” against US forces that will last a period of time long enough, and cause a plethora of devastation vast enough to eliminate all traces of cooperation. Therefore a 24 day battle would be seen as practical. This battle will end in the surrendering of power by current administration which will be brought about by any degree of force or bribery needed. Shortly after the US forces which are to be painted as only fighting to protect the efforts of the first administration will respect the surrender and end the fight, therefore bringing about surrender without seeming like it is our direct defeat.

Following the battle, or battles, a 3 head meeting of the first government, the “nationalistic” government, and the US government will be held. To hide any sense of cooperation, the talks must fall apart 3 to 5 times before a resolution is reached. The resolution will thus be in our complete controlling. The agreements of the peace treat are to be made as following


There is a withdrawal of US forces as an occupying power but they are allowed to maintain a base to protect interests as we do in south Korea, Japan and Germany.

There must be a theocratically influenced government similar to that of Iran only more liberal, democratic and constitutionally based. This will ensure legitimacy is established and maintained for years to come thus leading to stability and restricting any attempts at a counter coup by a more radically theocratic force. Fundamentalists will therefore participate in government rather then fighting it because they will see this as a victory for their cause. The advantage is if they participate civilly in government, it is easier to impede or marginalize their success.

The US must provide capital for the reconstruction of the country. This will not only be a way to ease anti US sentiment, but also and open floodgate for our businesses to invest and establish in Iraq, therefore making the government more dependant of us economically and less likely to irrationally attack or negate our interests.

The government be molded in the fashion of a liberal democracy with a theocractic judiciary, and a new constitution be drafted that respects human rights and basic freedoms.
As an end result, the heroic “coup” government will have the legitimacy in needs in the short run to stabilize, and unite the Iraqi people “against” the US, but in a fashion more friendly to our interests. Also, to further burn bridges of suspicion, it will be a effective to use the media as a tool of propaganda. To halt conspiracy theories it is probable to leak stray pieces of information suggesting a coup. The key in using the release of truth as a way to protect a lie is to make the entire plot sound “crazy”, and come first from media sources that lack credibility. The surge of conspiracy theories in inevitable, therefore it is wisest to control what theories are leaked and detach them far from realistic as possible.


As a result, we will have the option of withdrawal at our hands. Though the means are initially unethical, it is our only option in order to build a legitimate government, rebuilt infrastructure. It will also unite the country, allow investment opportunities for our businesses that will curb the unemployment that may dethrone out “coup” government, and maintain a long term but secretive influence over the country that will be stronger then an occupation could and more popular. In the end, it is the best option for allowing a withdrawal without the feared backlash, and this madam secretary is my proposal for a route of withdrawal for then Iraq war.































































i bet there's like 1000 spelling errors in there....at least i found some...:learning:...hbu?

TSA
12-13-2007, 11:38 PM
well, the mods have recognized i have more clout then them to have not Dan Cooley'd this intially...tho idk what this lacks in Knowtheledgehood?


a conehead-masonic-secert-jewish-racist-5% inventor of white ppl that funds bin laden?

what's the matter mods? scared of the prestige?

DR. NICK RIVIERA
12-19-2007, 04:58 PM
http://bigeyedeer.files.wordpress.com/2007/02/yoko.jpg

SID
12-19-2007, 05:20 PM
ahhh how lovely they want to leave now they have plunged the country into a bloddy horrific civil war, muthfuckin coward scumbags, i hope karma comes and slaps america off the map, they killin everyone for the sake of dollers, it hurts.......it hurts man

TSA
12-20-2007, 12:07 AM
honestly, i only type this so one of you guys can proofread my int. relations paper in attempts to find flaws..in typical wucorp fashion


but in typical wucorp fashion, your failed


close thread.

maestro wooz
12-20-2007, 12:26 AM
theocratic judiciary? IF there were to be a religious influence(like iran) i would rather the executive have some sort of religious backing and the judiciary would be (as) free (as possible) of outside influence. The judiciary is supposed to uphold the constitution, i wouldnt trust it to do that when you are putting it under someones influence.

Sources???? I dont know the requirements of your teacher, but you make a lot of statements and you didnt include any sources to back it up.

How do you feel about sharia islamic law? You mention that the government should have some sort of theocratic influence.

Saying iraq should be more like iran might not be the best idea, we're trying to keep it from becoming like iran.

I recommend looking into the structure of turkey's government for a positive example.

Your writing style is a little awkward. Youre trying to use too many big words and phrases. Just write like you do on forums. It may not be proper, but itll be natural for you and will read better.

Though, you probably already handed this in.

TSA
12-22-2007, 03:15 PM
^well i got a 94% so it's all good.



plus i support Theocracy because it achieves the primary pupose of law, maintain order.

and does it very well.


ppl don't like it cause they don't want to sacrifice jacking off for saftey.


which i can understand, but still, oh well.

TSA
12-22-2007, 03:17 PM
and why do you and the hindu kid in my class have a problem with me using words bigger then 5 letters?

how am i "trying" to use big words, it's either you did or didn't, and ppl that mention the "big words" of a paper are dimwitted.

what the fuck is as "big word" anyways.."government"?

maestro wooz
12-22-2007, 03:37 PM
its mostly just the first paragraph for me, example "firestorm" "wilderness layers" that are an actual problem. But sometimes, the words you use work, but not perfectly, example "rampant poverty" "articulated" "plethora" "amplified". Its not that it takes away from your meaning, you can still get the point, but i dont think it exactly captures what youre trying to say. And since theyre words are out of the common lexicon (pun maybe intended) it comes off like youre "trying to put big words in there"

i read through it again and i do like your idea, its too bad that politics doesnt use ideas that would actually work.

TSA
12-22-2007, 09:17 PM
^maestro wooz is mad cause the word wilderness flattened his boner

maestro wooz
12-23-2007, 01:55 AM
its a dark and dangerous wilderness, i just want good sentence structure.

TSA
12-23-2007, 02:02 AM
nah nigga, you want pussy


trust me

TSA
12-23-2007, 02:11 AM
nah im just being a dick, i see what you mean, i write to flowery at times