Since I work in Jordan since 2001, and visited the region every year for about 3 months, I think I know the Arab world quite well. I've visited Israel, Palestine, Egypt, Syria, Turkey and Lebanon. Sorry about a longer comment, but I think too many people have wrong ideas about the region.

Now one thing is clear: the very vast majority of Arabs and Muslims was against the war and is against the occupation. Here's a recent link to prove it: about 85 % of Iraqis want the U.S. to leave according to a secret poll http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/main.jhtml?xml=/news/2005/10/23/wirq23.xml&sSheet=/news/2005/10/23/ixworld.html This means that also a majority of Kurds and Shiites wants to see the foreign troops out of the country (which does not surprise me, to conclude from the Iraqi people you meet in Amman).

There is no doubt that the war was a grave political mistake that undermines the position of the west on the long run. On the short run, it helps the terrorists.

The question is not whether Iraq will become a western democracy - everybody working in the region knows that the Arab world will need some decades of civil development before such a goal can be achieved. And it will only be achieved if it develops from inside, supported by peace and prosperity, and not if imposed by foreign troops.

But the question is whether and when a pullout of troops from Iraq is possible. I was very afraid of the negative consequences, and thought that even if Kerry became president, he would be stuck in the war. This is why some Democrats believed it might be better that Bush is still president, so he has to bear the consequences himself.

However I have to say that Odom convinced me that a fast retreat is the best that can be done. In fact, visiting the above mentioned Arab countries, you can physically feel the tension that is brought there by the presence of US troops in Iraq. Considering how expensive this military adventure is, not to speak about the poor soldiers who are sacrified, every chance to reduce the troops should be used.

Comparing the state of the Arab world, its relations to the western world, terrorism and the Israeli-Palestinian conflict before and after the war, I conclude that nothing has improved, but a lot has become much worse. See an interesting link about recent moves of al-Quaeda, which was only possible as its general support in the Arab and Muslim world grows (thanks to Iraq): http://www.debka.com/article.php?aid=1091

It seems this gnosis reached the democratic leadership: http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2005/12/01/AR2005120101491.html and I'm very happy that a real political alternative may be available in the future.

Talking about reasons of the war - have a look at a video summarising some frightening funny interviews in the U.S. regarding Iraq ;-) http://www.uniquepeek.com/fusion_pages/index.php?page_id=213

As a lot of people like to draw historic parallels to WWII, here's my one: I wonder whether it resembles to some extent the German attack on Russia in 1941 . We were also told many nightmares about the evil eastern babarians, believed in the moral superiority and honour of our troops, and some people may even have believed we were bringing civilisation there. There was a lot of talking about patriotism, strength, and necessary sacrifices (including that some people could not be afforded to be treated well). But I think you all know who comitted the worst crimes.

As a German, and looking into history, I'd say it can't be surprising that imperialistic aggressive wars do not solve problems. Removing dictators may be wise, but there's no unlimited subsequent occupation needed to accomplish that. All in all, this war questioned the identity of the west, in my opinion (just remember the word torture - can such an issue really be an option? I thought this dispute was settled since the 18th century).

Dear Pierre, dear Rosemary,

I think you should have a look at the rethorics and paroles, and you'll see that Iraq is well-comparable with Barbarossa. Some of the keep-it-going paroles are in fact identical. It is never possible to really compare historical wars with present ones, as operations, technologies and motives always differ. But I am aiming at the "feeling" and rethorics in the aggressor's country. It is misleading the public systematically (and this U.S. government loves it so much to draw historical comparisons, so we whould help them to target the right event).

If you disagree, I suggest you should volunteer to serve in Iraq, because the U.S. is in desparate need of troops and civil personnel there. It is, by the way, well paid (in the end, by your taxes).

By the way, it is a little bit like in Germany in 1942 and 43: So many people had strong words how to win at the east front, but nobody was willing to go there.

I'm afraid that too many Americans have very limited knowledge about the Arab world. I met many ppl. who were even afraid to go to Jordan, Lebanon or Syria and thought I am crazy. Well, I have always felt very safe there, safer than for example in Israel. Going to Iraq is crazy, because you enter a war zone, and every foreigner is a target.

However in one aspect I changed my mind: although I oppose wars, I now strongly support the draft we have in Germany. A drafted army is not so easily sent to conquer foreign countries, at least not if decision are made in a democratic way. And the only thing that made some of my American friends think twice was when told them they might be drafted to Iraq.

If you think the bulldozer-policy of the present government is of help, go ahead, but be ready to pay the price. In my opinion, there will never be democracy in the Arab world, as long as the west (we all) support dictators and illusive republics. The truth is: while the U.S. and Europe are talking about more democracy, we are arming and paying the present leaders to keep them in place. I don't believe any word of this democracy-talking of the Bush administration, and I wonder whether they believe it themselves. They are trying to change puppets and to extend their influence.

If the Arab states would really have democracy, I give a bet they would become much more Islamic, kick a lot of westerners out and launch another war against Israel. I am very sure that Iran is in fact the only democracy in the Middle East, or at least the country that comes closest to the idea of democratic power. If Egypt now has free elections and the Muslim brotherhood becomes strongest party, it will be interesting to see which reasons will be found why they can't govern the country.

What is needed to shake your faith in the phrases in this U.S. government? Are invasions, torture and secret concentration camps not enough?

Here are 2 more links very worth reading. However, subscription is required to see the full text. For those really interested in first-hand reports & analysis:

http://www.theatlantic.com/doc/200512/iraq-withdrawal

http://www.theatlantic.com/doc/prem/200512/iraq-army