The polls indicate that a tsunami effect is expected, with the loss of 40 Republican seats in the House and enough in the Senate to shift control of both Houses to the Democrats.

However, I am sticking with my prediction that the Republicans will hold both Houses, because the Republican base made up of the Christian right and evangelicals is, for ideological reasons, more committed to voting than the Democratic base. I have said continually that the Democrats should be running on the issues they do best — Social Security, comprehensive medical insurance, abortion (choice), education, housing, fair taxation, and not engaging in Bush-bashing as the major reason to elect them.

My position on that war is that unless our regional allies — Egypt, Saudi Arabia, Kuwait, Jordan, and Turkey — all Sunni nations — join us with boots on the ground, we should announce an ultimatum that we are leaving Iraq in six months. A similar ultimatum should be given to our NATO allies, some of whom have joined us in Iraq — Great Britain and a few others — most of whom, however, led by France, have not. When we leave, all of those nations will be compelled to support the government of Iraq because the existing civil war will escalate, the regional countries with common borders with Iraq will fear the flow of millions of refugees crossing into their countries, along with terrorists threatening their governments. NATO nations and others at the U.N. will be called upon for both humanitarian and security reasons — fear of escalating terrorism — to join in the rescue of the Iraqi civilian population from the ongoing horrendous civil war.

It being quite clear that the Bush administration has not accepted my proposal and given the necessary ultimatum, I now propose that an ultimatum be given to Iraq’s Prime Minister Maliki. The New York Times reported on October 21st, “Iraq is awash in killings, and many are blamed on the Mahdi Army, the militia commanded by a glowering Shiite cleric, Moktada al-Sadr. An indignant Mr. Sadr called his men to fight against the American military twice in 2004. It was bloodied, but survived. Since then the Mahdi Army, and a growing criminal breakaway element, have grown into one of the government’s biggest problems and are a major obstacle to the success of the American enterprise here. Despite its new rogue fringe, Iraqi Shiites see the Mahdi militia as their most effective protector against the hostile Sunni groups that have slaughtered Shiites and driven them from their homes. Shiites say that as long as the government cannot keep them safe, they cannot support the disarming of militias.”

Maliki was elected by Sadr whose party gave its votes to him. When the U.S. army recently captured one of his senior aides whom the army believed was directing the death squads used to kill Sunni citizens of Baghdad, they were compelled to free him on the order of the prime minister. The Times reported, “But in a measure of just how complex Iraq has become, it is impossible to tell where loyalties to Mr. Sadr end and criminal activity begins. Rogue groups of his former followers now run underground fiefdoms of sectarian killing and kidnapping — and even a special market for victims’ cars. One of his senior aides was arrested by the American military earlier this week on suspicion of having directed the killing and torture of Sunnis. The Americans later reluctantly released him at the request of the Iraqi government.”

Sunnis are killing Shiites as well and probably began the civilian violence, but we should also recall that just before the U.S. invasion of Iraq, Saddam Hussein emptied his prisons, releasing tens of thousand of hard-core criminals onto the streets. The Shiites responded to Sunni violence, as described in The Times, “But that reaction spilled over into open carnage in February, when Shiite mobs rampaged through Baghdad, dragging Sunnis out of their homes and mosques and killing them. Shiites’ patience had snapped, and they began to take systematic revenge.”

Every observer of Iraq, those critical of Bush and those supporting him, believe that the Sunni minority has to be both brought into government in larger numbers than is now the case and made to feel that the government is committed to stopping violence perpetuated by both Sunni and Shiite militias. Instead, it appears that the government is supporting the Shiite militia headed by Sadr.

If Prime Minister Maliki lost support from the U.S. government and the U.S. troops on the ground who are doing the fighting for the Iraqi army, he could not remain in power. CNN reports that solely for the month of October, as of October 23rd, American military casualties are 86 dead and 580 wounded. Maliki recently called President Bush to ask whether the U.S. President was seeking to unseat him and was assured to the contrary. That response should have been different. Maliki should be told that unless he is willing to come to terms in power-sharing with the Sunni and arrest Sadr and his terrorist minions, we will leave. That is my third proposed ultimatum.

Under the U.N. mandate authorizing the U.S. to maintain troops in Iraq, the U.S. has committed to leaving whenever Iraq’s government asks us to do so. The Iraqi government has continually publicly stated that it wants the U.S. to stay. Why not, since our troops are dying in seeking to provide Iraqis with security and services, while the Iraqi army and police force are engaged in the rising civil war and killing and torturing the Sunni population, all undoubtedly in revenge for what the Shia suffered when the Sunni supporters of Saddam Hussein were in charge.

While Iraq can ask us to leave and we will go, we surely have the right to demand that the Iraqis take the measures needed for us to stay, particularly ending the Prime Minister’s support for the terrorist Shia militia and arresting them. Failing which, we will leave. That’s my advice.

Print this Article

Email this article

Free Headline Alerts