Is there a solution to the War in Iraq?? Damn Right there is a solution. The pentagon presented three options for this war this week: "Go Big, Go Long, Go Home". I feel like these are the same options that have been present since the war started but I do agree with the options and that we must choose an option, be united about the option, and execute the option.
Now clearly there is a "right" option. While the democrats are wanting troop with drawl, we have heard over the last month many people weigh in on the issue and saying that option #3 is no real option. Option #3 would call for a swift withdrawl from the Iraqi region. This option has been criticized by many saying this would just leave that region unstable and worse than when we went in. Going Home could mean more potential problems hear on the Home land. Not only are republicans not in favor of this option, but neither are the commanding generals or the Iraqi President Jalal Talabani (who wants US troops there for at least three more years). Going home would be a good thing in that it would be safty for our loved soldier fighting this war, but this country would be left more vulnerable. Senator Barack Obama (D-IL) says that he supports troop reduction but in gradual terms. Iraq Timetables have been a hot topic issue for the go home option not defining what is time for "gradual" or "swift".
Many would say the real debate is between "going big" or "going long". Senator McCain (R-AZ) defends his prior theory of more troops in Iraq will bring home stabilty in this war but is he in favor of "going big" or "going long". These options focus more on bring down the violence in Iraq. But what is the difference in "going big" and "going long"?
This option of "going big" would be most likely considered from those who want to win the war in a hurry. The strength in numbers policy would reinforce the troops we have already in Iraq with more troops and hope for a good senerio with power in number. A down side to this option is that "going big" wouldn't be able to be sustainable for a long period of time. We would be going all in and hope that we get the cards that make us win. Over the course of this 3 year war, our military has been stretched so in order for this plan to work, we would need to have a ground plan that worked too.
The other option "Go Long" is looking to be the heavy favorite by leaders of the war and sounds remarkably close to "Stay the Course". The difference would be an increase in troops to bring down the violence there in Iraq but then gradual withdrawl but have soldiers there for longer time. This is looking to be the middle ground of the two extremes and a more realistic chance for long term success. This option is favored by most analysist but the question of Time comes up again and what does long actually mean.
The real issue isn't what are we going to do with our troops but what are we going to do with their troops. The Iraqi military and police are the stability in the region we are hoping for but the training of their troops and officers is what is holding up this war. What we need to do is debate over how we can more effectively train the military and police force to hold their own ground and give us a foundation that is sturdy enough that we can allow withdrawl. They have to beable to take over their own security... this is where the success of the War lies.