> What if most of the Iraqi people DON'T care if a true peacekeeping
> and re-building force is exclusively 'Islamic' or from 'Islamic'
> countries
We have to let Iraqis decide if they want any outside force at all and what kind of force they would want.
>This perceived need for an Islamic force seems to be more
> a fantasy of the Gulf States, Saudi Arabia, Egypt, Jordan (and
> even Syria), who betrayed Iraq but who now think that somehow >they
>can still help the US finesse a success in Iraq.
There are other Islamic nations like Indonesia, Malaysia, Bangladesh. But it's hard to see other countries risking their soldiers' lives with the current level of violence in Iraq.
> What's important is that the force be seen as controlled,
> respectful of local communities, NEUTRAL and, beyond immediate
> self-protection, being there for peacekeeping, enforcing
> agreements. They wouldn't be there to run combat missions, air
> strikes, and ultraviolent raids on Fallujah, Najaf, Samarra, or
> Sadr City, Baghdad.
Yes. There are UN Peacekeeping contingents in other parts of the world anyway. e.g. Chinese troops are in Congo. How is Iraq different from other locations?
> As I've said before, the only forces for liberation and getting
> the USuk alliance out of Iraq are coming from the Iraqis. A
> solution would have to work with the liberators and acknowledge
> their victory.
Yes, but Iraqis have gone through wars and sanctions for 25 years. They may (or may not) be exhausted/war weary with this mammoth effort. It should be left to them to decide how and how long they want to fight.
Ulhas