Iraq: where we go from here

Okay, I'm about to go out on a(nother) limb and propose what I'd do in Iraq, moving forward.

I'm not a politician and don't own a TV set, so take that into consideration, please.

Here's the executive summary:
1. Seems to me that we're really good at the military side of things, but don't really have quite the force that's designed to put things back together once operations are over/move forward (this could also read, we're willing to spend the $$ to destroy stuff, but not so willing to put it back together again).
2. Money (in this case, in the form of what people need) is a good way to amend behavior...if it's *NOT* tied directly to bending to the political and moral will of the United States.

Soooo....

What I'm proposing is that we explore ways to activate the Iraqi citizenry at large. I'm working through this as I write, but I'm thinking that it would be cool if we say:
--"okay, we're currently spending x billion dollars per year on military operations to secure your country."
--"we'd rather give you that money in the form of food, water, infrastructure, and other things that you need."
--"so, if y'all can begin to work together and can reduce the violence in the neighborhoods where you live, you'll get two rewards (instead of the one we offer now).
--currently, we offer: 1. The military will go away. I'm proposing that we add a second incentive: 2. Instead of leaving a vacuum of destruction, you'll begin receiving the goods you require for survival...in direct proportion to how much/little violence there is in your region.

Also, I think that we should *not* attempt to secure the entire country. Instead, we should concentrate our resources on creating 'Safe Zones' in which law and order -- which reflects the local taste of the people who'll live under it -- can flourish. There would be no-man's zones around these areas (and if someone violated them, we'd pound them into submission) but the idea would be to help the locals to not feel like victims any more...instead, they could *take ownership* of their cities again, perhaps.

Also...

I'd propose the creation of a civilian reconstruction corps. Again, this is formative, but the idea would be to teach numbers of willing American citizen ambassadors the language and customs, and then send them 'in country' to the Safe Zones to assist with the reconstruction. I'm not sure what they'd do specifically, other than to reduce the 'foreign-ness of Americans...

And we, at home, would have to sacrifice a little, too.

By structuring our efforts in this way, it makes it lots more clear that we're really willing to put Humpty Dumpty together again, after shoving him off the wall in the first place.

 

<div class='quotetop'>QUOTE(huskers @ Nov 7 2006, 03:20 PM) [snapback]345181[/snapback]</div>

Before I got rid of 'em, I asked myself the same question...

Now I'm saving nearly $100/month by not shelling out for cable. That's $1,200/year.

Honestly, I truly believe that the fever pitch of the media, and the way messaging is delivered, is inciting us to anger and making us short of temper. And I simply refuse to allow myself to be manipulated in these ways.

Now, I have to read to get my news and information...and so there's no one potentially spinning information with the tone of their delivery or their personal appearance (not to mention the messaging of the surrounding commercial pods).

That's not to say that papers don't have a slant all their own (the Chronicle here is notoriously liberal, for example). But the reality of it is that the average TV news spot contains about three paragraphs of information, which is simply not enough for us to even begin to base decisions upon.

The irony of the whole situation is that I used to work in advertising, producing television spots for regional and national clients.