A Plan to Help the US

Minister Norbert in the Ladonia Cabinet has worked out a plan for ending the US war against Iraq. We are thus handing it over to the Democrats!

The war must end

Ladonia’s gift to America and the Democrats, a Plan of Action


The Iraq Debacle, a Prescription for Healing

Presidential Rhetoric: “We must attain Victory”

Forgive my ignorance but I was under the impression that victory can only be won in a ” Just War,” not just in war.

Under the Republican concept of morality America is a Christian society grounded upon the precepts of God, law, ethics, and morality. Under the concepts of Law in a just society, as touted by the phrase “America is a country of Laws,” and, “no one is above the law.” We need to return to those concepts based in ethics, morality, and justice for all. The pendulum of paradigms is again returning to its sense of reason, and for this we need to seize the day through an effective review of our collective sins and arrogance, and/or looking away while infractions of the laws go unabated. Through this review, we must consider the consequences of our actions as well as our complacency to act, and what it has done to erode our place in history as a shining beacon of hope for humanity. Our multiculturalism, acceptance and tolerance for others not like ourselves, demonstrated to the world that there is hope for a unified country with relative peace, effective in its ability to care for and nurture a responsible society that does not subjugate, but rather, integrates all into a collective that benefits the whole. This status was not achieved easily as we too had our fears and suspicions of others, but we learned to tolerate the differences and accept others as our equals, regardless of their personal ideologies, and created forums for ideas and change. That is what makes the United States of America great, united in the states of mind as well.

Victory for a war based upon fear of the unknown, fueled by false accusations and manipulated data, is a mission of the impossible. From the onset, the war was suspect in its motives. It was divisive, and motivated by greed and subjugation of a society that did not adhere to our concepts of governance, or religious ideologies. At first, it was grounded in perception that there were Weapons of Mass Destruction (WMDs); of which were dispelled by the UN weapons investigators. The imputes to war was etched into our minds that Iraq was the Terrorist and acted with Osama bin Laden to murder our citizens as well as preparing to launch an offensive against our US interests. This was also dispelled at the onset and therefore the war machine of propaganda, controlled by the intelligence community, manufactured fictitious evidence in order to create a mob mentality of first strike retaliation for a crime not committed. Never was there a mention from Iraq citizens, in Iraq, to liberate themselves from their dictatorship. Therefore, the war was effected to prevent WMDs being used against our US interests, or the USA itself, and nothing else. It was not for regime change, because that is against international law, as the government exists by the will of the people, not the desires of other countries, or corporations.

If Victory is measured on benchmarks set by the achievement of an objective that prompted the war, then we are victorious. We have insured to our satisfaction and knowledge that no weapons of mass destruction are in Iraq. If Victory is measured by the adaptive approach to why we attacked Iraq as inclusive of the concept to a tie with Osama bin Laden, then again, we are victorious as there is no tie to Osama bin Ladin and his minions of followers. If we continue with the adaptive cause to war to include a regime change, then again, we have attained victory, as the state of governmental affairs in Iraq no longer resembles the Republic that we destroyed. Yes, we are victorious in all modifications of the imputes to the war with Iraq, …unless there is more that was not impressed upon the minds of Americans, withheld by reasons of greater importance than the PEOPLE should be made aware “…our interests.”

What are “our interests” in Iraq that are so important that it is shielded from our collective knowledge and consideration for review, or to hold our government accountable should “we…the PEOPLE” find them not worthy to sacrifice our sons and daughters? This can be the only explanation for the desire to continually seek “VICTORY” for that of what we have already achieved, a victory in all that we were made to be aware! Could that lack of victory be in specific US interests confounded in the midst of truths, deceptions, and lies of a few of us “…the incorporated collective,” of the policy builders in the American Government? A concern for who controls the OIL is what was one of the last statements of the President before the mid-term elections. It then appears, with considerable proofs of circumstances (the number of Oil Monarchs in the Presidential Cabinet and other presidential appointments), that the real issue of the war was for the control of the Oil, without which victory could not be achieved. It is a concept of mindset. We are victorious for all that we were led to believe were the causal factors for the invasion of Iraq. We have won on all fronts for what we were officially told. Therefore, we can leave with the knowledge that we are truly victorious in the Iraq War.

The place

We were told by the President, that [he] determined the oil of Iraq as being the property of the PEOPLE of Iraq, not its government, thereby injecting a nationalized status of the Oil prior to the War. However, since the war ended, he is requiring the PEOPLE of Iraq, the owners of the Oil, to pay for the destruction of their country, its infrastructure, and its disabled, that was created by our rush to persecute (remember the Shock and Awe bombings), rather than prosecute the activities that led to war. We were led to believe that we were fighting a corrupt government and dictatorship, not the PEOPLE themselves. For this we must re-evaluate our responsibilities as a civilized society to return their lives to normalcy through a positive reconstruction of their cities, infrastructure, and economy. We must hold ourselves accountable for the destruction of their cities, and the care of their wounded.

Positive reconstruction is specific to the very fabric of their society. Therefore, it means that reconstruction must occur simultaneous at all levels, and not incrementally based on our perceived standards of achievement in their governmental development. We must remember that we owe nothing to the previous or current Iraq government. We owe everything to the PEOPLE of Iraq who are suffering because of our actions and deeds. Without nurturing the PEOPLE in a restorative fashion to develop their basic needs of FOOD & SHELTER, Safety and Security, the government is doomed to failure because it is perceived as SUBJUGATIVE and IMPOSED upon them. It needs to be constructed from the ground up and not top down. A good carpenter knows that a roof is necessary to ensure that the house is protected from the elements; however, s/he also knows that the roof is constructed LAST within the scheme of things. What we are attempting to do in Iraq is to create the Roof first and without regard or thought to the building materials necessary to complete the shelter that is protected by the roof (government). Many parts of a building can be constructed simultaneously, but assembled from the ground up. Our present course of action in Iraq is a to attempt to construct a roof (government) without any blueprints of the structure…or size of the house.

There are many leaders in Iraq that are not included within the equation of reconstruction. These leaders are the clerics as well as tribal leaders. They can be likened to the electrical wiring and or plumbing of the structure, without which our modern technology in socio-political and economic development could not exist. Instead of utilizing them constructively, we have divided them, cutting them from the very government that [we] have installed. Yes, we installed the government, as it is foreign to their mindset and [we] forbade a class of people from inclusion at the onset. This is not a government of the PEOPLE, but rather, a government to the people, and of which they were required to accept our specifics as a requisite to self-governance. Today we see the strained fabric of the Iraq government to the point that it appears there will be three countries rather than one Iraq. Why, because current reconstruction is formatted from the top down.

The prescription to the healing of the Iraq war is as follows:

1) Formally declare the Victories have been achieved

Rationale: This signifies to all concerned that the War itself is over, all objectives that prompted the War have been achieved, the government has been replaced by a constitutional democracy, and the socio-economic reconstruction is in place. The US military and their families will be comforted in the knowledge that the war, while divisive in nature, had achieved the objectives that were perceived at the time of the action, and that their sons and daughters will be returning in victory. There is finality to the chapter, not like the activities of the first Gulf War or the Vietnam War in which it appeared that we cut our losses by leaving without a conclusion.

2) Institute a program of reconstruction that utilizes Iraq Citizens for all levels work, with equal pay to that of foreign nationals doing the same work.

Rationale: This signifies to the Iraqi worker that s/he is viewed as an equal in workmanship. It instills pride of the self while providing additional incentive for others to participate for their own self-interests in creating their own society, not emulating the desires of a foreign government.

3) Institute a program to rapidly phase out foreign workers from US government contracts, replacing them with Iraq workers

Rationale: Every foreign worker deprives an Iraqi citizen of an ability to work toward his or her own betterment. Reconstruction can be accelerated through the employment of 10 or more Iraqi citizens for the cost of just one American worker in Iraq.

4) Institute a program to conduct a phased withdrawal of US and foreign troops from Iraq through the use of direct replacements by trained Iraq Military personnel.

Rationale: It has been four years since the war against the Republic of Iraq under Saddam Hussein ended. It takes 8 weeks to train a US or Foreign National to be competent within the basic skills of military conduct. It takes an average of 16 weeks of advanced training to train a US service member in specific Military occupations to function to the level of engagement in war activities as well as security of a perimeter. Most US Service personnel leave the active component after 3 years of service, but are also identified as competent soldiers. Therefore, it in inconceivable that the Iraq military, which is trained by the US Military under the same requirements as US soldiers, is less capable of functioning than that of the foreign nationals that are in the US military. The Iraq military must replace the US and foreign military as soon as possible or will be relegated to dysfunction based upon the perceptions of US Commanders that they are incompetent to protect their own country. It must be noted that the protection of their country is paramount to the success of their military. As they are Iraq citizens, their concern would be for their country, not the perceptions and desires of the American government. If they fail or succeed it will be because of their personal desires and cannot be placed upon faults of the US.

5) Consider the possibility that the government of Iraq is not a government of the PEOPLE, and that is why it is failing to function as a democracy as we perceive it.

Rationale: If the NEW government fails, it does so because it was not a true democracy created and empowered by the will of the PEOPLE of Iraq, but rather, imposed by a foreign mentality. Allow it to stand on its own, sensing its strengths as well as acknowledging its weaknesses. To become self aware, the government must be allowed to falter by its own devise and repair its wounds from an internal source …it’s PEOPLE. Only then can it stand on solid footing. Only then will the WILL OF THE PEOPLE ORDAIN it.

6) Remove US Military and foreign Civilians from positions of leadership or influence in the NEW Iraqi government.


Rationale: Current levels of violence in Iraq are created for the most part in a desire to throw out the occupiers, or more specifically, the US Military. With the Military withdrawn, there is no focus on the occupation and therefore the levels of hostility related to that issue would be abated. While there will be continued clashes, this will not be the reason for the activities.

7) Negotiate with the militant factions to resolve differences.

Rationale: The militant factions are largely composite of the disenfranchised citizens of the former Republic of Iraq. They cannot be considered terrorists in that they believe that an invading force wrongfully destroyed their government. They have international law on their side with this regard. The fact that there was a vote for a new government and to establish such under the requisites of the US Occupation Forces, carries no more force of law or governance than any activity of subjugation of an aboriginal citizen by a foreign government. This must be understood from this perspective in order to start the dialogue towards a unified Iraq. Since it must be accepted that their activities are to be likened to freedom fighters of a deposed government, deposed not by the will or desire of the people, but rather, a foreign entity, one must accept that they have legitimacy of purpose. Therefore, they should be granted respect for their desire to remain free from subjugation by a foreign entity. This grant of respect does not condone their activities, but opens the door to dialogue in order to air their concerns and attempt to mend their wounds of pride and to quell their prejudice to the new government. They must be engaged into the process so that they can become a part of the solution towards a strong and Unified Iraq.

8) Consider the possibility of at least three United States of Iraq, similar in unity as that of the several states of the United States.

Rationale: Tensions between socio-political and religious adherents could be reduced if autonomy of a region is created. While the region (State) has its own specific laws, such is subordinate to the National Laws & Constitution. For this activity to be functional and fair to the three main culture groups, there must be reasonable consideration given to resources to be included within any State so created. Specifically, oil reserves should be equally reserved to a specific state so there would remain an equal economic stature for each state. Should there be a desire for more than three states, consider the prospect of subordinate autonomy for the various factions of political and culturally motivated communities. While each state would remain subordinate to the Nation, within varying degrees of size and population, they all would have equal standing within the government for matters of National concerns. This again, could reduce the potential of civil unrest by allowing for flexibility of differing political, religious, and cultural factions to become self-determinant, but unified in purpose. This concept should be on the table within any withdrawal from Iraq in order to preserve its national integrity ever the while offering a solution for inclusion of the fractured communities into the fabric of the new Nation of Iraq. This concept should not be considered as an end all or demand, but as a tool for negotiation in order to resolve differences and reduce potential future conflicts.

The above listed recommendations provide a path to healing from the atrocities of war. This can be implemented within weeks with the troop withdrawal beginning within a month of positive negotiations. Changes in the dynamics of the government could be implemented via amendments to the constitution, based upon agreed principles of the negotiations held with the militant factions. This concept is to keep face, pride and dignity of all parties concerned. Prior to any council/negotiation proceeding, one must leave their pride at the door. Logic, compassion and reason exist separate from pride. Only then can the issues be resolved equitably.

Respectfully submitted for your perusal.

Norbert Johnson
and yes… Ladonia’s MPUTS

Lars Vilks

Lars Vilks was the artist behind Nimis and Arx, and the Founder and State Secretary of Ladonia. He also served as Editor Emeritus the Ladonia Herald.

Related Articles


Check Also
Back to top button