3421 Good, must read summary of Iraq options and politics

Although the Wall Street Journal is rated the most liberal among MSM for its general news coverage, you can find an alternate view on the editorial page and Readers' Comments. Today has two excellent editorials, one by Bret Stephens on "Options in Iraq," and the other by Fouad Ajami on "The American Iraq."

Stephens points out the five most popular options for the war: 1) Withdraw immediately (Murtha); 2) Cap the troop levels at 140,000 and withdraw by January 2009 before she takes over as President (HR Clinton); 3) Redeploy with limited missions and seek diplomatic openings with Syria and Iran (Hagel and Biden); 4) Advocate for partititon of Iraq (Peter Galbraith); 5) Surge troop numbers in toughest areas and keep them there indefinitely (President Bush), the only strategy of the five that aims at victory, or gives the Iraqi people a chance not just for democracy, but a life.

I never hear the war protestors or the peace advocates count the cost of the Iraqi people for the first four options. Terrorists and insurgents are Muslims (Sunnis and Shia) killing each other--many women and children. Why would they stop if the US troops left? This has been going on since about the 7th century--long before George Bush looked at the Clinton administration's intelligence information for WMD and decided in Saddam's hands they were a threat. The anti-war types hide behind a phony concern for "our troops."

There are centuries of hostility between Shia and Sunni according to Ajami's article. Even if we left tomorrow, the Genie will not go back in the bottle. "The old notion that the Sunnis of Iraq were a martial race while the Shia were marked for lamentations and political grievance has been broken for good."