Thursday, January 18, 2007

Are any Iraqis reading the Federalist Papers?

In today's WaPo, Prime Minister Maliki says that America could just leave if we armed his troops better. Does anyone really believe this guy has the same priorities as we do? He's already looking to the civil war that will break out and he wants to make sure that his side is ready to fight. Has anyone ever suggested that the Iraqi army and police are ready for combat, but lack the necessary weapons? Come on. Don't waste my time. Let's give Maliki some hard targets and deadlines to meet and the get out of there.

The impending civil war is an absolute tragedy. The breaking up of Iraq into sectarian divisions and the possible division of Iraq into 3 separate countries will also be a tragedy. If only the Iraqi leaders were reading John Jay's Federalist Paper #3:
At present I mean only to consider it as it respects security for the preservation of peace and tranquillity, as well as against dangers from FOREIGN ARMS AND INFLUENCE, as from dangers of the LIKE KIND arising from domestic causes. As the former of these comes first in order, it is proper it should be the first discussed. Let us therefore proceed to examine whether the people are not right in their opinion that a cordial Union, under an efficient national government, affords them the best security that can be devised against HOSTILITIES from abroad.

The number of wars which have happened or will happen in the world will always be found to be in proportion to the number and weight of the causes, whether REAL or PRETENDED, which PROVOKE or INVITE them. If this remark be just, it becomes useful to inquire whether so many JUST causes of war are likely to be given by UNITED AMERICA as by DISUNITED America; for if it should turn out that United America will probably give the fewest, then it will follow that in this respect the Union tends most to preserve the people in a state of peace with other nations.

The JUST causes of war, for the most part, arise either from violation of treaties or from direct violence. America has already formed treaties with no less than six foreign nations, and all of them, except Prussia, are maritime, and therefore able to annoy and injure us. She has also extensive commerce with Portugal, Spain, and Britain, and, with respect to the two latter, has, in addition, the circumstance of neighborhood to attend to.

It is of high importance to the peace of America that she observe the laws of nations towards all these powers, and to me it appears evident that this will be more perfectly and punctually done by one national government than it could be either by thirteen separate States or by three or four distinct confederacies.

Substitute Iraq for America and I think you've got a very persuasive argument that Iraq should stay together and not separate into 3 individual nations.