Strategies and Goals for Iraq

Re “Bush Defends Iraq Policy,” June 29: If our president won’t give a date for transitioning Iraqi security to the Iraqis themselves, then he should give some other measurable, definable benchmark.

How many trained Iraqi security officers will be the goal? How many billions of dollars spent? How many permanent bases we are currently building for an occupation we supposedly don’t want?

George Bush is trying to avoid being pinned down to a real promise, but Americans want a real, definable goal from our president, not just some vague “when I say so” answer that you might give to little children.

Bill Manhart

San Bernardino

*

After World War I, the British created modern-day Iraq by combining three disparate and irreconcilable populations -- those who surrounded Basra in the south (Shiites), Mosul in the north (Kurds) and Baghdad in the center (Sunnis).

It is not surprising that a country so formed proved difficult to rule, and that only a strong, ruthless leader such as Saddam Hussein could maintain a semblance of order.

Also, it is likely that for any Iraqi government to survive, it must be just as brutal as the deposed Hussein.

The U.S. finds itself in an impossible position. It must support an inevitably repressive government in Iraq -- which could, in free elections, vote itself into a theocracy -- or it could “lose face” by pulling out of the country.

But there is a third way: Let the American military cease all offensive operations and adopt, as its only mission, the protection, operation and upgrading of Iraq’s oil industry, to be turned over eventually to the government that stabilizes Iraq.

Hopefully, Iraqis would find a solution short of civil war. But civil war might be the only course, as it was in the United States, to establish a free nation with a centralized authority acceptable to all.

David Dart

Los Angeles

*

We should gather 25,000 to 50,000 young Iraqi men who are willing to volunteer to serve their country, place them on cargo planes, transport them to safe, secure Army and Marine bases in the United States, whip them into fighting shape in 90 days or so, arrange them into companies with capable leaders and send them back to Iraq to replace American troops.

Michael Wiener

Encino

*

Re “The United States Sobers Up,” Commentary, June 30: I wonder what type of history Timothy Garton Ash teaches as he cannot even seem to get current facts straight.

Take, for example, the statement that “the audience interrupted [the president] with applause just once. Once!”

A military official has said that before the president gave his speech, the audience of soldiers at Ft. Bragg was instructed to refrain from applause so that a serious speech didn’t become a pep rally.

Another example is the statement that the U.S. is “letting” the E3 [Britain, France and Germany] take the lead on Iran. Considering that the E3 banks provide about 90% of the loans to Iran, it might be nice if they did get involved with the nuclear mess they are helping to correct.

If Ash cannot deal with current reality, how is he slanting and mangling history?

Barry J. Klazura

Long Beach