Magnetic Poles
New Member
With the failed policy in Iraq not changing anything, and the U.S. stuck in a civil war in that nation, here are three options offered as a strategic and metal exercise only. Note that the third one does the heretofore unthinkable . . . using America's nuclear capability, and would be akin to Truman's decision to use the A-Bomb on Japan, with the exception of other nuclear powers being around, and the bombs being many times more powerful than those of Nagasaki and Hiroshima.
Please note: I am not advocating any of these, particularly Option Three, but submit these as a stimulant for discussion only.
Option One – Declare Victory & Leave
In this scenario, the United States declares that the goals of the invasion have been met, in that Saddam Hussein is gone and there have been free and democratic elections in Iraq. Declare that there is no further need for U.S. troops and the Iraqis must work out their own destiny now.
Possible negatives include continued sectarian bloodshed, and the possible takeover of Iraq by Iran or Al Qaeda.
Option Two – Partition Iraq & Leave
Partition the country along ethnic borders, leaving a Shia state, a Sunni state and a Kurdish state. Either keep U.S. troops or place U.N. troops to monitor elections in each of the new countries, then withdraw as in Option One.
As in Option One, possible negatives include the takeover of the Shia state (and possibly the others) by Iraq or even Al Qaeda, giving it an actual state of its own as a base of operations.
Option Three – Tactical Nuclear Demonstration & Warning
This is extreme, but evacuate all U.S. personnel, and then give notice that a city in Iraq; Tikrit, Mosul, or even Baghdad; will be destroyed in 7 days by a theater-level tactical nuclear weapon. What will be demonstrated is a small scale of what will happen to the entire region if all hostilities are not brought to an immediate halt. Also comes with a warning that if any US territory, ally, or installation anywhere is the world is the target of a terror attack, the hell that will rain down will make “Shock and Awe” look like sparklers on the Fourth of July.
Negatives to consider (and these are highly risky) would be the likely immediate cutoff of oil from the region; the ostracization of the U.S.; and the possibility of the threat of a retaliatory nuclear strike against the U.S. if it carries out its plan of a tactical demonstration, by perhaps Russia or another nuclear state. Also, this option could (even likely) trigger a global nuclear war resulting in the deaths of millions, including here in the United States. Another risk is that Al Qaeda would purposely attack the U.S. again in order to provoke America into carrying out its threat to destroy the region.
Please note: I am not advocating any of these, particularly Option Three, but submit these as a stimulant for discussion only.
Option One – Declare Victory & Leave
In this scenario, the United States declares that the goals of the invasion have been met, in that Saddam Hussein is gone and there have been free and democratic elections in Iraq. Declare that there is no further need for U.S. troops and the Iraqis must work out their own destiny now.
Possible negatives include continued sectarian bloodshed, and the possible takeover of Iraq by Iran or Al Qaeda.
Option Two – Partition Iraq & Leave
Partition the country along ethnic borders, leaving a Shia state, a Sunni state and a Kurdish state. Either keep U.S. troops or place U.N. troops to monitor elections in each of the new countries, then withdraw as in Option One.
As in Option One, possible negatives include the takeover of the Shia state (and possibly the others) by Iraq or even Al Qaeda, giving it an actual state of its own as a base of operations.
Option Three – Tactical Nuclear Demonstration & Warning
This is extreme, but evacuate all U.S. personnel, and then give notice that a city in Iraq; Tikrit, Mosul, or even Baghdad; will be destroyed in 7 days by a theater-level tactical nuclear weapon. What will be demonstrated is a small scale of what will happen to the entire region if all hostilities are not brought to an immediate halt. Also comes with a warning that if any US territory, ally, or installation anywhere is the world is the target of a terror attack, the hell that will rain down will make “Shock and Awe” look like sparklers on the Fourth of July.
Negatives to consider (and these are highly risky) would be the likely immediate cutoff of oil from the region; the ostracization of the U.S.; and the possibility of the threat of a retaliatory nuclear strike against the U.S. if it carries out its plan of a tactical demonstration, by perhaps Russia or another nuclear state. Also, this option could (even likely) trigger a global nuclear war resulting in the deaths of millions, including here in the United States. Another risk is that Al Qaeda would purposely attack the U.S. again in order to provoke America into carrying out its threat to destroy the region.
Last edited by a moderator:
