Term 'Civil War' is inadequate term for Iraq

A new Pentagon report said some elements of the war in Iraq fit the definition of civil war, but the term “does not adequately capture the complexity of the conflict.

What I read from this is that the situation in Iraq is much worse than a simple civil war. In fact, with the meddling ways of Iran and Syria it probably is much worse than a simple civil war. Throw in a little religion and a thousand years of bikering and you’ve got yourself something that the term ‘civil war’ “does not adequately capture the complexity of …”.

The problem, of course, it’s that it’s our complex conflict. We’re the ones that messed everything up and we’ve got to at least try to fix the mess, which is why I don’t support an immediate troop pullout. What I do support:

  1. Actively engage Syria and Iraq on all fronts.
  2. Add strict deadlines to a phased reduction of forces so the Iraqis are forced to step up and start policing their own state.
  3. If all else fails, bribe Turkey into letting us create three states out of Iraq. If you didn’t already know, Turkey is vehemently against an independent Kurdistan.

General of 82nd Airborne Division wants Rumsfeld out

There is a growing chorus to oust Rumsfeld and it’s coming from a large group of retired generals. Possibly the funniest part of this ongoing story is the White House’s response.

The White House has defended Rumsfeld, saying he is “doing a very fine job.”

Who is in a better position to critique how well Rumsfeld is performing as the leader of the Department of Defense? A bunch of policy makers who’ve never fired a gun in their lives or the leader of one of the most elite fighting forces in the world who’s been fighting wars for 30 years?