Well, it’s not quite how we acted when the French came to help us with the British. :P
I am also going from the viewpoint that Iraq was hardly “perfect” before we came there.
Is that a good fall-back position though? Regardless of what happens - ah well, it was shit anyway, doesn’t matter if it gets more shit.
Or does it just make it slightly less worse?
According to the Iraqi Red Crescent, the total number of internally displaced people has jumped from 499,000 to 1.1 million since the start of the surge.
That sure is a big surge. At that rate in a few years there won’t be anyone left in Iraq. Which will mean no violence. Which has got to be a good thing. /typical pro-war circular argument
According to the UN, more than 2.2 million Iraqis out of a population of 27 million have fled their country, most of them to Syria and Jordan, and another 1.9 million have been internally displaced.
http://lrb.co.uk/v29/n17/harr04_.html
So 15% of the population has either fled the country or have had to leave their homes and cities/towns.
Can you imagine if 45 million Americans had to leave the US, or had to flee their city or town?
And yet within all of Bush’s press conferences and speeches since the surge intensified in June he hasn’t mentioned the refugees once.
CM, In or Out. Pick one. Then accept the consequences of the choice.
It is not that they “don’t do what I want.” It is that they are proving either unwilling or incapable to take the steps that justify continuing to spend American lives and treasure. Even according to your own articles the apparently saw the deposition of the ruling and hated tyrant (except for Sunni) not as a chance to rebuild a shattered nation with an opportunity for American largesse and technical skill to help and with 3rd party brokers in tribal feuds but rather as a chance, to loot, murder, revenge, kidnap, bribe, extort and blow themselves back to the 6th century.
You want to be snide and shove that jackass Fisk at me then have the balls to take a position and accept the consequences. Stay there and “oppress and occupy” or pull out and let self-determination flood the streets in severed limbs, smoking ruins and streams of blood. Then we can take bets on whether or not it spreads beyond the Iraqi borders.
Frankly, I no longer think American or British or any other coalition lives are worth it. They have sown the crop, allow them to reap it.
Let’s see how the scorecard looks after over 4 years..........
Bush’s address to the Iraqi people on the eve of the invasion in March 2003:
“The goals of our coalition are clear and limited. We will end a brutal regime, whose aggression and weapons of mass destruction make it a unique threat to the world. Coalition forces will help maintain law and order, so that Iraqis can live in security. We will respect your great religious traditions, whose principles of equality and compassion are essential to Iraq’s future. We will help you build a peaceful and representative government that protects the rights of all citizens. And then our military forces will leave.” (Bush, address to the Iraqi people, March 2003;
* End a brutal regime - done, replaced with brutal non-regime
* Whose aggression and WMD’s make it a unique threat to the world - never proven
* Will help maintain law and order - not done
* so Iraqis can live in security - not done
* will respect your great religious traditions - not done (bases set up on religious sites - see thread on ‘Iraq’s historic past in ruins’)
* help to building peaceful and representative government that protects the rights of all citizens - not done (see ‘will help maintain law and order’ above)
* then we’ll leave - not done, bases being consolidated to 6-12 ‘enduring’ ‘megabases’ (from over 100) Chalmers Johnson, author of the ‘Blowback’ trilogy on American Imperialism, points out that the vast amounts of money being spent on these megabases “are just simply unbelievable. These supplementary appropriations every year [are] in the $75-$100 billion range, at least half of it is going for base-building in Iraq, and is almost totally unsupervised by anybody.”
Well, it’s not quite how we acted when the French came to help us with the British. :P
I am also going from the viewpoint that Iraq was hardly “perfect” before we came there.
Is that a good fall-back position though? Regardless of what happens - ah well, it was shit anyway, doesn’t matter if it gets more shit.
Or does it just make it slightly less worse?
I am wondering if doing nothing at all and still taking their oil was the best option. I really don’t know.
Has any country treated Iraq properly?
......
EDIT: Who has ‘sown the crop’? The civilians of Iraq?
Who are the looters again?
Who are the people fighting sect wars now that the dictator is gone, instead of working together to rebuild their country?
Are they all from other countries?
I am not saying anybody “deserves” anything, but an old rule is you don’t sh*t where you eat.
All the people that I mentioned above are doing just that.
It may not the entire population, but if it is the minority, they are sure ruining it for a lot of people.
Well, it’s not quite how we acted when the French came to help us with the British. :P
I am also going from the viewpoint that Iraq was hardly “perfect” before we came there.
Is that a good fall-back position though? Regardless of what happens - ah well, it was shit anyway, doesn’t matter if it gets more shit.
Or does it just make it slightly less worse?
I am wondering if doing nothing at all and still taking their oil was the best option. I really don’t know.
Has any country treated Iraq properly?
I guess it depends on what your ultimate goal is, and how far back you want to go to undo what has been done to Iraq.
“Doing nothing at all” in terms of what? Nobody can say that nothing was being done to find out if there were WMDs.
Perhaps we can say that nothing was being done to topple Saddam from within though.
Saddam ran an oppressive regime, but that didn’t stop countries from dealing in their oil, and seeling them arms (yes, I know, us too)
I think the right thing to do would have also killed many Iraqi’s.
There was no simple solution to that countries problems (like most in the ME).
When you consider those harboring, aiding or funding or not in any way helping end the chaos then how many do you figure are “civilians?” Not being snarky here, but really how many? I don’t know but I doubt it would be as high as you would expect.
Yeah, I’ll admit that I was naive to believe that something civil and westernized could be established in Iraq. I completely overestimated the Iraq and regional capability to tolerate or sustain it. I have been proven very wrong there, very, very wrong. At least the Kurds are free and starting to build so it isn’t a total loss but even that looks like it might issue forth terrible problems with Turkey. Of course oil is a factor, nothing in that region means anything except because of oil and Israel. I always knew WMD wasn’t the pressing concern and have many times scolded the government for making that the public selling point and underestimating public intellect. The real hope for me was always the possibility of removing a vicious tyranny and allowing a better way of government and life to flourish. The chance of that is now slim and none and slim is in line for a bus ticket out of town.
Fisk has not been spot on. He has fumbled and flounced his way here and even that last piece is severely flawed. He is so well known for being wrong and roundly debunked and disproved that his name is now a verb for that very action.
Even so, in the short term the loss of American and allied lives is damn tragic. And though the moral victory is no doubt small consolation to those dead or maimed or their families at least some day when truly terrible acts must be considered at least we can say we gave the whole region a chance and they vomited on it. It is a bitter taste of ash, no doubt, but there it is.
I’m not sure honoring the religious etc. is a fail on architectural grounds when there are no pagans to speak of in Iraq. Allowing mosques to be staging points, arms caches and sniper posts for attacks seems pretty respectful and stupid as well.
A brutal tyrant and his family of sociopaths was removed and the Iraqi people were given the chance to metamorphisize into something far better for everyone. A historic chance that I can’t see any precedent for in that area. That can’t be denied. The fact that they did not is vastly more their failure than the allied coalitions.
......
EDIT: Who has ‘sown the crop’? The civilians of Iraq?
Who are the looters again?
Who are the people fighting sect wars now that the dictator is gone, instead of working together to rebuild their country?
Are they all from other countries?
I am not saying anybody “deserves” anything, but an old rule is you don’t sh*t where you eat.
All the people that I mentioned above are doing just that.
It may not the entire population, but if it is the minority, they are sure ruining it for a lot of people.
But it was so predictable. The result is just that, an end product So who did the ‘sowing’?
Saddam ran an oppressive regime, but that didn’t stop countries from dealing in their oil, and seeling them arms (yes, I know, us too)
I think the right thing to do would have also killed many Iraqi’s.
There was no simple solution to that countries problems (like most in the ME).
Killing many Iraqi’s is only one small piece of this fiasco.
I agree that there were indeed no simple solutions to their problems. It’s disappointing that so many people still support the current supposed ‘solution’.
I’m disappointed but hardly surprised that Iraqi self-determination manifests itself in setting each other’s children on fire, rather than authoring childrens’ books. Kinda like the noble people of New Orleans, when left to their own devices, looted their own neighborhood businesses.
When you consider those harboring, aiding or funding or not in any way helping end the chaos then how many do you figure are “civilians?” Not being snarky here, but really how many? I don’t know but I doubt it would be as high as you would expect.
I would assume it’s hard to take part in ‘ending the chaos’ when not only are you trying to stay alive, but you’ve had to leave your home, or you’re surrounded by constant gunfire, patrols, explosions. It’s probably as easy as it was to ‘end the chaos’ when Saddam was in power.
“I haven’t left my home in two months,” says Kulsoom, a medical student who lives in east Baghdad with her family.
Only a few family members ever go out, for daily essentials. Otherwise they stay at home, day after day.
What exactly are they meant to do?
Also, there is a world of difference between answering a survey ‘i support measures to get rid of the Americans’ and actively participating in violent actions.
Yeah, I’ll admit that I was naive to believe that something civil and westernized could be established in Iraq. I completely overestimated the Iraq and regional capability to tolerate or sustain it. I have been proven very wrong there, very, very wrong.
This completely ignores the way it was carried out. Do you believe the same chaos would have resulted if an internal revolution happened from within? Do you believe the West would have ever wanted that to happen?
Of course oil is a factor, nothing in that region means anything except because of oil and Israel.
I’m sure it probably means a great deal to the people who live there. This appears to be one of the major problems - everything is measured in terms of value to the West.
I always knew WMD wasn’t the pressing concern and have many times scolded the government for making that the public selling point and underestimating public intellect.
They were trying to make a hald-assed attempt at legitimacy under international law. That was the problem there.
The real hope for me was always the possibility of removing a vicious tyranny and allowing a better way of government and life to flourish.
Well that would be my goal too, but I never really thought it would happen by smashing the shit out of everything, and fucking everything up at every turn.
Fisk has not been spot on. He has fumbled and flounced his way here and even that last piece is severely flawed. He is so well known for being wrong and roundly debunked and disproved that his name is now a verb for that very action.
I haven’t seen analysis which suggests that. Being ‘well known for being wrong’ sounds like a general complaint in place of anything specific. From the start he said that this is going to be very bad, and it has been.
The term Fisking, or to Fisk, is blogosphere slang describing detailed point-by-point criticism that highlights errors, disputes the analysis of presented facts, or highlights other problems in a statement, article, or essay
The term is generic and doesn’t relate solely to Fisk himself; it describes a method of criticism. Many people prefer to do that than engage in rational debate or building a coherent argument.
Even so, in the short term the loss of American and allied lives is damn tragic. And though the moral victory is no doubt small consolation to those dead or maimed or their families at least some day when truly terrible acts must be considered at least we can say we gave the whole region a chance and they vomited on it. It is a bitter taste of ash, no doubt, but there it is.
I wish Saddam were still alive and in power so the Iraqis wouldn’t have to suffer quite as much, and could still spend the odd weekends visiting ancient sites and writing unifying poetry.
I’m not sure honoring the religious etc. is a fail on architectural grounds when there are no pagans to speak of in Iraq. Allowing mosques to be staging points, arms caches and sniper posts for attacks seems pretty respectful and stupid as well.
A brutal tyrant and his family of sociopaths was removed and the Iraqi people were given the chance to metamorphisize into something far better for everyone. A historic chance that I can’t see any precedent for in that area. That can’t be denied. The fact that they did not is vastly more their failure than the allied coalitions.
This whole ‘they’ concept is interesting. Who are ‘they’ exactly? The majority of people are just struggling to stay alive.
Cm, fine. Even after 30 years, we should have expected that at some point in the next 1000 years the Hussein tyranny ends. Apparently the 30 years just wasn’t enough time for them to get rid of him. All the US did is fuck everything up from its brilliant pedestal of Baathist order. Now don’t say a fucking peep about Darfur and be consistent. Or anywhere else.
Doubtful they could have gotten rid of him by themselves. What were any nations doing to try and effect change from within?
It was never going to work through American exceptionalism and blind militarist fundamentalism.
I like this piece about ‘victory culture’ ("in which triumph on some distant frontier against evil enemies was considered an American birthright").
Hey, it’s not my fault you piss off for a year and miss my comments about Darfur.
Hey, it’s not my fault you piss off for a year and miss my comments about Darfur.
Just like I missed anyone ever admonishing the Russkis 14-year attempt to bring peaceful Afghanis around to noble communism. 17 years after Gorbachev gifted them with self-determination the noble UN still hasn’t quite restored the peace and love that once flourished there. Certainly it can’t be these peoples and their ancient cultures to blame, no way.
This completely ignores the way it was carried out. Do you believe the same chaos would have resulted if an internal revolution happened from within? Do you believe the West would have ever wanted that to happen?
If it would have removed Saddam? Maybe.
I also believe a large amount of Iraqis would have died and been displaced during that, and there was still a good chance it would descend into the “chaos” that is happening now.
fact is that the terrorism and chaos which exists now in iraq was created by the
invasion of the USA and their allies.
And the real terrorists get stronger and stronger in afghanistan.
Iran and Northkorea are not to much afraid, cause US forces are stuck in iraq.
Saddam hussein wasnt strong enough after the 1st invasion of iraq, the kurds
nearly had something like autonomy, maybe after some time Saddam would have been replaced
by another Sunni general.
a lot of european politicians told the US not to invade iraq, well the critics have been called
chicken, cowards...., but they were right.
Now the whole world has to pay the price, and bin laden is still alive (or maybe not)
fact is that the terrorism and chaos which exists now in iraq was created by the
invasion of the USA and their allies.
And the real terrorists get stronger and stronger in afghanistan.
Iran and Northkorea are not to much afraid, cause US forces are stuck in iraq.
Saddam hussein wasnt strong enough after the 1st invasion of iraq, the kurds
nearly had something like autonomy, maybe after some time Saddam would have been replaced
by another Sunni general.
a lot of european politicians told the US not to invade iraq, well the critics have been called
chicken, cowards...., but they were right.
Now the whole world has to pay the price, and bin laden is still alive (or maybe not)
Hey chucklehead, you wanna back ANY of this up with facts, or is it more daily Kos, moveon.org, demo underground drivel?
Didn’t North Korea recently come back to the table and agree to disarm?
Kurds had autonomy under Saddam? What about the gasing?
SOME eurotrash politikkks didn’t support the ENFORCEMENT OF THE UN MANDATE!
maybe after some time Saddam would have been replaced by another Sunni general
After “some time”, how many more rapes, murders, and genocide would continue to occur? Do you know how many people were killed during Saddam’s rule? How about we have your sister raped and tortured? Would you say that the perps should be left in a position of power after that?
