the outcome of the election

[Armin]

Some thoughts from another perspective:

1)  We need as much support in Iraq as possible to try to create some semblance of security before the scheduled elections in January.  In the areas that are somewhat secure, basic reconstruction has to get better.

Iraq has long seized to be the #1 problem (and it has only ever been because the Bush admin was so insanely determined to wage war againt Iraq, no matter the reason). Currently, there's such an immense amount of anti-American resentment and open hatred being built throughout the Arab world that you will, tragically I fear, suffer for generations from it.

[Note: I use the word "problem" here as in "Place where something can be or must be done to worsen or better the situation". Of course the situation in Iraq is disastrous, but the damage is done and undoing it will be a long term process and changes for better or worse being small and of little immediate payoff]

In a recent "Internet-Fatwa" (A Fatwa is kind of an "official letter" on religious matters from high ranking muslim clergy) 26 high-ranking members of the Saudi Arabian islamic clergy have stated that "Fighting the occupants is a sacred duty for all able-bodied, resistance a legitimate right and the laws of Islam oblige the Iraqi people to defend their honor, their Oil and their future against the colonialistic alliance." (translated from Arabic to German and then to English, so probably badly mangled)
Again, this coming from Saudi Arabia, your most important ally in the Gulf...

Also, security in an arabic country is not improved by bashing down people's doors, storming their houses at night, shouting swear words at them in English and treating the men like dirt in view of their women and family.
One clip like this and one picture from Abu Ghraib would have done enough damage, but add to that a potential 100.000 civilian deaths and the collective shame of the invasion and you'll be facing 3 generations of NEW potential terrorists.

I know that probably no nation on earth has bigger problems to deal with foreign mentalities and ways of thinking than Americans, but let me assure you, you're dealing with people who, historically, are quite used to holding a grudge not for years but for centuries.

I can personally understand EVERY government that does not want to be drawn into the quagmire you created...

No, the Iraqi situation is there and is gonna stay there, but the real problem is that THIS time (unlike during the cold war and the perceived communist threat) there might be an actual "domino effect", and that the first stones have already toppled.

Fundamentalist and extremist movements are currently gaining support and momentum in Morocco, Tunisia, Algeria, Egypt, Jemen, Jordan, Sudan, Pakistan, Indonesia, Malaysia, even Turkey (NATO member!) and probably a dozen other countries that don't come to mind right now. Tragic thing is, in some of those countries they were actually dwindling prior to King George II's recruitment campaign.

3)  The nuclear threat in Iran needs to be assessed.  If it is significant, the diplomatic response needs to be immediate, aggressive, and broadbased.  Ideally, the United States would not have a leading role in this.

I think the "nuclear threat" from Iran is currently completely exagerrated while more REAL threats are conveniently ignored. (Btw.: the EU has been negotiating a possible solution to the dilemma for months behind the scenes and I'd wager my money on Europe to be more able to reason with Iranian diplomats than the "Satan America" :P )

But here's a probably much more severe threat:

http://www.fas.org/nuke/guide/pakistan/nuke/

Frightening side note: Abdul Qadeer Khan, long-time head of the Pakistani nuclear program is also an avid and outspoken admirer of Usama bin Ladin...

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Abdul_Qadeer_Khan

But as Pakistans military dicta... err, pardon, PRESIDENT Musharraf is currently being nice to the US, this potential threat is ignored and rather the old grudge against Iran revisited...

4)  Resume negotiations between the U.S. (well, if someone else actually thinks they can do it, that would be great...), Israel, and Palestine.  Palestinian leadership is currently in flux, so who knows when this can happen.  It needs to happen and continue until Palestine is a recognized nation with mutually accepted boundaries.

Of course it would help a TON, if US involvement in these negotiations were not always perceived as being so completely biased towards the Israeli side. (I do admit, that only some bias is real and some merely perceived, but again in the Arab world perception can be as -if not more - problematic!)

Perhaps, simply stopping the dull "Auto-Veto" against every single UN resolution that would criticize Israel would be a first step...

5)  When future terrorist acts do occur in western nations, we need to be able to cooperate with each other, share intelligence, try to trace back the equipment/money/etc., and find out exactly who is responsible.  What happens once you get to that point is a tricky matter.  I think it is basically up to the country that gets attacked to make that decision. 

Agree on all THESE points.
Strongly disagree on "lets go to war against someone who had nothing at all to do with it"

I understand why Europeans feel fear and anger towards the approaches Bush has taken in the Middle East.  However, this is not a spectator sport.  The role that Europe plays in this will determine whether anything is a success or whether the whole thing becomes a bigger mess. 

The mess the Bush admin has created is already so disastrous, that we'll probably all pay the price for generations. Prior to 9/11 there were a few thousand radicals in the islamic world hating the west with such an intense determination that they were ready to die killing "infidels". Today, there's probably hundreds of thousands and MILLIONS of sympathizers.

Probably if Europe had taken a more active role prior to the Iraq war, they could have prevented it from ever occurring, but it is too late for that now.  At this point, it is critical to do everything possible to make Iraq and Afghanistan liveable.  If we can make it through that, perhaps someone other than the U.S. can take leadership in determining what else needs to be done.  Although personally, I'm not sure the E.U. is ready for that kind of leadership, and the U.N. is only good for preserving the status quo (and not very effective even for that).

People like Bin Ladin and radical islamists in many other countries hate us not for things the Europeans have NOT done but for what the US has done. Supporting Israel, bombing Beirut, toppling the Iranian Government and bringing Shah Reza Pahlavi back, the first Gulf war, the support for the Saudi and Kuwaiti royal families (all while claiming to bring freedom and democracy to the region <_< ) and countless other blunders of the "Oil must flow" age...

Whatever we do, creating more hatred CANNOT end terrorism, and waging war on weakness cannot work.