Sullivan's Iraq Solution

I've read it, and I don't agree. The thing that stands out strongest for me is the "accept the limited victory we have and let the rest sort itself out" result.

He also suggests a certain type of division of Iraq.

But my view right now is that we should withdraw most combat troops by the middle of this year; and leave a remaining force in the Kurdish region and along the Iraq-Turkey border. Protecting the fledgling democracy in Kurdistan and reassuring Turkey should be our top priorities. This will force Iraqi indigenous forces to come up with their own leader, a man who has real power and a capacity to restore order, however brutally. We may get another dictator. In fact, we may have witnessed his unofficial swearing-in at Saddam's execution: "Moktada! Moktada! Moktada!" So be it. The current chaos ties the U.S. down in a hideously tightening vise. We have to change the dynamic and actually do something we can accomplish. We cannot win this civil war for any side, and we shouldn't. We can, however, withdraw.

I'm still of the opinion that the will of the US citizenry is lacking, and will never be sufficient to win a war based on popular support. Iraq is one of those situations where the US government has to do the right thing with respect to the future. Securing Iraq and leaving something stable behind will help stabilize the region and will aid in the globalization effort. With more rights and freedoms in Iraq, the rest of the theocracies and miscellaneous plutocracies should start feeling the pressures for reform. Added security in the middle-east will make energy sources more secure and will then aid the global economy to spread and stabilize.

Go read it yourself. Then read the commentary at The Belmont Club and Prof Bainbridge. I'm certain there are others, but I think these two gave pretty concise arguments against the idea of helping Kurdistan alone and letting the rest of Iraq go to hell.