Yes, I know.

My words do not count.

I'm a citizen of a country that resisted joining the Coalition of the Willing. On the other hand, I work in a country that joined. But even if I were a voter in the United States, I realize that my advices would be totally out of the loop.

Anyway, let me state my own humble opinions:

• As long as the invasion forces remain present, they will be considered at least partially responsible for the security, or the lack of security, in the land.
• Seen from an American perspective, it's crucially important that everything is done to avoid creating a Dolchstoßlegende like after the Vietnam War. Foreign policies is the responsibility of the White House. The Congress better give the Commander-in-Chief what he points at, and concentrates on oversight - not obstructing.
• Remaining in the area will be very tempting for this U.S. administration - and likely so for the next one too. To discuss total withdrawal is thus a dead end.
• The Congress' need to investigate the road to this disaster must be kept separated from America's (and, indeed, the World's) need to see the Iraqi adventure get the smothest possible ending.
• The idea of training Iraqi police and army forces was probably not very intelligent to start with, but by now, we clearly see that this is a tactics that doesn't work.
• Iraq is fractioned, and the fractioning may well continue further. The fractioning began, if not before, with the U.S.-instigated Shiite uprising and the No-fly zones that created a semi-autonomous Iraqi Kurdistan.
• With regard to what to do in Iraq, it can be argued that plenty of mistakes were done by the occupation authorities, but it's rather irrelevant to discuss that today. Today, the relevant issue must be, do we, or do we not, care for the civilians who suffer in the ongoing Civil War, for which the Coallition bears more blame than anyone else?
• Also if we do not care at all about the civilans' plight, we might wish the situation to get calmed down in order to avoid adverse effects outside of Iraq. Hence I disagree with the argument that "we" must step back and let the Civil War be concluded by the warring parties.
• Prolonged, and/or intensified, sectarian terror and ethnic cleansing will increase the temptation for neighboring nations to engage volountaries or regulary troops in the Civil War.
• Involving the neighboring governments in diplomatic agreements aiming at stabilizing the situation would be an ideal, although it is not very likely that the U.S. government would be able to contribute to this before 2009.
• Involvment of the neighboring countries without diplomatic agreements may be impossible to avoid, but in my opinion this ought to have the highest priority, since such involvment would open the gates to widening and escalation of the war, arousing the feelings of the Arab street and further pitting the Muslim World against the Christian West.
• Relocating most of the Coallition troops to Iraqi Kurdistan may fit both the needs of the Kurds and of the Americans. The Kurds need allies and protectors against predatory neighbors, and such de-facto protection would give the U.S. some leverage to mitigate Turkish fears for attacks over the border.
• In Iraq, even the Bush-administration ought to be able to recognize the locally powerful militias, at many places different from town to town, and in larger cities even from district to district. These militias are in fact the legitimate power on which (local) government resides. The notion of a "Iraqi Army" ought to be forgotten, since it distorts the perception of the reality on the ground.
• By recognizing, acknowledging and respecting the local powers, the occupation power knows whom to start talking to.
• Regardless of if the civilians' plight or the fear for spread is the driving force, the sectarian terror against civilians with the wrong ancestry must be, if not ended, at least minimized.
• The ethnic cleansing is on-going, irreversible and unavoidable. Better to contribute to an orderly relocation of people of the wrong faith or ethnicity than to let them be victims of terrorizing torture and assassinations.
• Finding new places to live will not be easy for the refugees of this ethnic cleansing, but U.S. economic wealth could here maybe come to good use?