Nice feedback from the CIO cruise ....

You buy 41 copies of my book, I don't let your comment get buried here.

No, no, my new best friend. You go to the head of the line.

Hi Tom,

I think you'll be pleased to know that I just ordered 41 copies of The Pentagon's New Map on Amazon to send to the 41 executives I met with at the CIO forum this week.

Your speech was electrifying. It was a much discussed subject at dinners and lunches. I figured it would be perfect way to start the follow-up process from these business meetings. Even those who didn't attend the speech heard enough about it they will be pleased to receive this book.

Thanks again for the great presentation.

Paul

FYI: I have been telling friends and others 2 things about Iraq I saw reflected in your speech:

1) Where is it written that Iraq has to be one nation? It is better to split it up and we just securel the oil fields to ensure each nation gets its fair share. I believe the Sunnis will quickly kick out the terrorists and insurgents if they have a country to build. Even the Bagdad problem can be dealt with. There is a river running through the middle ... helloo!! Sunnis on the left, Shiites on the right, and just one bridge. Mission accomplished!

2) The war was won 4 years ago. It is an occupation with resistance. If only Bush would change the rethoric from war to occupation it would be so much easier to get out. Indeed, it is far easier emotionally to end an occupation than to end a war without having clearly won it. The U.S. just can't deal with that (yet). Why Bush decided to keep calling it a war is beyond me. He wasted the opportunity to claim a war victory.

Not bad. The best part being Paul came out of just that one talk with that much confidence in his ability to describe what's going on.

I honestly feel like my briefs are more mental workout than content dump.

You want the content, you do what Paul did. You buy the books.

Comments

[MountainRunner]

I'm not onboard that Paul has that much knowledge on what he's talking based on #1 and #2. The "civil war", if we may call it that, is not, of course strickly based on a religious divide. The detailed answer isn't necessary here, suffice it say that #1 ignores Shia on Shia, Sunni on Sunni, and plain criminal acts. Number 2 fails to acknowledge the reality of modern conflict and peace. If the world was so simple. But then again, if he bought 41 copies of my book -- I have a chapter in a book coming out later this year, cost: $140 each... ouch (thank God I get a free copy) -- I'd be happy to post his comments as well.

[Tom Barnett]

Didn't say Paul had much knowledge.

Said he was engaged to offer his own opinion.

Writing a blog and allowing comments, I have a very high tolerance for that--coming from all angles.

[D Molloy]

The United States is not in the position anymore to dictate terms in Iraq. We no longer have the political leverage to push federalism or any other suggestion for Iraqi democracy. Instead we are like Libya's nuclear program in '03; latently waiting for an opening to delare victory (in our case) or preserve honor (in Libya's case). The best case scenario is a new POTUS in '08 removes troops immediately. Any dragging out of the issue loses the initiative. At this point the United States' wishes are irrelevant.

[Brandon Winters]

Nobody's talking about dictating terms--Iraq's dissolution will happen one way or another--that's inevitable. What's still an open question is how much violence will accompany the breakup. If each piece of Iraq has a stake in its own future, the breakup is more likely to happen w/ a minimum of violence. As far as initiative goes, to truly take the initiative would be for the new POTUS to lock the regional players in WRT the goal of a (relatively) peaceful dissolution of Iraq

[MountainRunner]

Point taken. Agreed.