PDA

View Full Version : Now thatīs a great mess in Iraq



WingChun Lawyer
8th April 04, 09:07 AM
Check this out:

http://www.cnn.com/2004/WORLD/meast/04/08/iraq.main/index.html

US firepower nothwithstanding, and in spite of the fact that those cities will probably be retaken in a couple of days at most, I believe that in the end the USA is going to leave Iraq on the shiitesī terms, not Mr. Bushīs.

CaptShady
8th April 04, 09:15 AM
Originally posted by WingChun Lawyer
Check this out:

http://www.cnn.com/2004/WORLD/meast/04/08/iraq.main/index.html

US firepower nothwithstanding, and in spite of the fact that those cities will probably be retaken in a couple of days at most, I believe that in the end the USA is going to leave Iraq on the shiitesī terms, not Mr. Bushīs.

Agreed, and the saddest thing of all. What mostly muslim state in the middle east has accepted Democracy? I know of none, so of course that means there are none :D

It's just too sad that we went over there, many died, so that when we pull out there'll be civil war, and inevitably a tyrant running the place in a dictatorial system.

Beatdown Richie
8th April 04, 09:27 AM
> It's just too sad that we went over there, many died, so
> that when we pull out there'll be civil war, and inevitably
> a tyrant running the place in a dictatorial system.
Right. And no one ever could possibly foresee that course of events.

CaptShady
8th April 04, 09:32 AM
Originally posted by Beatdown Richie

Right. And no one ever could possibly foresee that course of events.

Yeah, cause THAT'S never happened before!

WingChun Lawyer
8th April 04, 09:32 AM
Originally posted by CaptShady

It's just too sad that we went over there, many died, so that when we pull out there'll be civil war, and inevitably a tyrant running the place in a dictatorial system.

True words. No sane person could have love for Saddam, but the scenario you just described is even worse - and, as Richie said, you didnīt need 20/20 foresight to have seen this coming.

An american democracy in Iraq. Yeah, sure. Mr. Bush should have first tried this experiment with Saudi Arabia, the mess would probably be lesser (although the results would probably not be better).

Raven
8th April 04, 09:35 AM
I just can't believe it's take journalists this long to start publishing this. Like others have said, it was a foregone conclusion.

Shuma-Gorath
8th April 04, 09:48 AM
For the Coalition's sake, I hope they kill Muqtada al-Sadr in the next few weeks.

WingChun Lawyer
8th April 04, 09:50 AM
Originally posted by Shumagorath
For the Coalition's sake, I hope they kill Muqtada al-Sadr in the next few weeks.

Oh, sure. All the coalition needs right now is a shiite martyr, and a cleric to boot.

Raven
8th April 04, 09:52 AM
WCL is correct.

Shuma-Gorath
8th April 04, 09:53 AM
Originally posted by WingChun Lawyer
Oh, sure. All the coalition needs right now is a shiite martyr, and a cleric to boot.

A martyr is still dead. People have been holding up the man's picture infront of burning humvees; if he is directing this uprising he must be stopped.

WingChun Lawyer
8th April 04, 09:54 AM
Originally posted by Shumagorath
A martyr is still dead. People have been holding up the man's picture infront of burning humvees; if he is directing this uprising he must be stopped.

You do realize that tactic didnīt work against the palestinians...

Shuma-Gorath
8th April 04, 10:00 AM
Originally posted by WingChun Lawyer
You do realize that tactic didnīt work against the palestinians...

Shiek Ahmed Yassin could have been killed at a better time, and for some reason Arafat is still alive. Israel/Palestine is an infinitely larger quagmire than Iraq.

WingChun Lawyer
8th April 04, 10:03 AM
Originally posted by Shumagorath
Israel/Palestine is an infinitely larger quagmire than Iraq.

You did check the link, didnīt you...? And in Mr. Bushīs opinion, Iraq is an infinetely larger quagmire than Israel/Palestine - simply because there are no american soldiers dying there, and the bill is somewhat lower.

Also, there is the fact that Iraq is a quagmire which the USA could have avoided entirely.

Shuma-Gorath
8th April 04, 10:12 AM
Originally posted by WingChun Lawyer
Also, there is the fact that Iraq is a quagmire which the USA could have avoided entirely.

No argument here. I've taken a bit of an "ends justify the means" stance on Iraq thanks to the capture of Saddam and the death of his sons, but now it looks like we'll just end up with another moron in his place.

What I have to wonder is how anyone expected any leader to wage a war without experiencing any casualties.

WingChun Lawyer
8th April 04, 10:16 AM
Originally posted by Shumagorath
No argument here. I've taken a bit of an "ends justify the means" stance on Iraq thanks to the capture of Saddam and the death of his sons, but now it looks like we'll just end up with another moron in his place.


I would agree with the "ends justify the means" mentality, if it was actually possible to do some good on Iraq. Frankly, I doubt it, and I havenīt access to the most sophisticated intelligence apparatus on earth - itīs not like Mr. Bush actually paid attention to his intel reports, it seems.

garbanzo
8th April 04, 10:32 AM
A year ago, when I was active in the effort to keep the U.S. from going to war, my fellow activists and I were lampooned in corporate media and discounted as ignorant, unpatriotic peacenicks who didn't understand the situation.

When the U.S. invaded and pulled down Hussein's statue with a tank, my fellow activists and I were told by the corporate media that we should be hanging our heads in shame.

A year later: the country is degenerating into anarchy and house-to-house warfare; the so-called coalition is falling apart,; the U.S. is preparing to hand over authority to a virtually non-existant civil government with no credibility among the populace; muslims are streaming across the border from Jordan to fight the "infadels" (that's us, folks); Iraq has no beome a center of terrorist activity in a way that is was not before the U.S. invaded; there has been no evidence of the WMD that were touted as the primary reason for invasion; American service personnel are dying on a daily basis; Iraqi civlians are dying on a daily basis; the U.S has two choices, staying in or pulling out, neither of which seem to lead to the fullfillment of the neo-conservative dream that democracy will spread throughout the Middle East.

We (those who opposed the war) were right.

They (those who supported the war) were wrong.

Shuma-Gorath
8th April 04, 10:37 AM
Half the Iraq protestors I met would have protested World War 2 if given the chance. Please try to go beyond a black and white view.

garbanzo
8th April 04, 10:42 AM
I admit, the last two lines of my post were hyperbole.

The paragraph before those lines, contains many reasons that the situation is a disaster.

I'm open to any reasons why it should be considered a success.

CaptShady
8th April 04, 10:47 AM
Originally posted by garbanzo
We (those who opposed the war) were right.

They (those who supported the war) were wrong.

I will definitely concede that. I was in the 2nd group. HOWEVER .. most opposing the war were beating up people in the streets going "violence isn't the way"!

When militant protestors come out, they get lumped into the tree hugging militant assholes who flat out don't have a clue about the REAL facts going on! It makes people quick to assume you're full of shit too.

Shuma-Gorath
8th April 04, 10:53 AM
Remember that people like BalloonKnot were probably protesting alongside you. You activists need better quality control.

garbanzo
8th April 04, 10:56 AM
In one of the marches I went to in Mahattan, at which there were hundreds of thousands of people, a few hundred people decided to pick a fight with the cops. Someone even pepper sprayed an officer. The person who did so got his head cracked open and was arrested, which is just fine by me.

There's an asshole in every crowd. In a crowd of that size, there's gonna be a lot of assholes.

That's not really the issue. The issue is that the war was a mistake.

Part of the reason for my stridency is that I think the press sold out and became a mouthpiece for the administration's party line. The result was that the citizenry did not have access to the information necessary to make an informed decision.

garbanzo
8th April 04, 10:57 AM
I like Balloonknot.

nasty_totoro
8th April 04, 11:59 AM
the war itself was not the real problem ... the problem is the screwed up and by the pants manner that bush managed the war and the occupation in its aftermath ...

there was a very real opportunity right after the was to get the UN directly involved with the governing of iraq ... of course the bush administration being the unilateralist that they are ... decided that they would rather manage the entire show themselves ...

now you see the results ...

even street thugs know that its always better to have a lot of people with you when you fight ... some how bush forgot about that ...

WingChun Lawyer
8th April 04, 12:14 PM
Originally posted by nasty_totoro
the war itself was not the real problem ... the problem is the screwed up and by the pants manner that bush managed the war and the occupation in its aftermath ...

Quite frankly, I donīt think he had much in the way of a plan for the day after the war was over. Probably something along the lines of "letīs leave some poor bastard in charge whoīll keep the oil flowing and our military bases in place".

And that may be just me, but I donīt think the UN could have helped significantly. I mean, the UN headquarters itself was bombed, itīs not like the iraqis trust the UN a lot.

Balloonknot
8th April 04, 01:43 PM
Thanks Garbanzo! You're cool with me too. Shum give it a rest huh? Let's just leave it alone now. Thank you and have a nice day.

The Wastrel
8th April 04, 01:53 PM
There was a plan, and it was tanked.

http://www.bullshido.net/forums/showthread.php?s=&threadid=6560&highlight=Rieff

Nihilanthic
8th April 04, 01:53 PM
Jesus people...

Been there a year and now that something really does happen you all act like its the end of the world. While one death is bad 670 casualities (or so) after a year of action is... pretty damn good by any standards. Be realistic.

And besides all the lovely chances to bash the USA and bitch about blood for oil and other shit... anyone ever thought about the Iraqi people? Yeah, its "illegal" as if international politics has such things as laws and fairness and you need permission to go to war... but if we kept Saddam in power we all know what would still be going on. No, I don't like bush or how he went about doing it, because he left himself wide open for partisanship and the left of Europe to scapegoat america and bitchbitchbitch at us all, but I'm glad at least as a side effect a dictator is gone and there is at least a CHANCE for those people, although those militants, terrorist groups and those few hate spewing religious leaders are trying to ruin it.

One thing I hate is how people whine about they want peace and want everyone to not invade, seek diplomatic means, whine and shit... its your own peace. You're not giving the people suffering in that hellhole peace at all. NOBODY really gives a fuck about Iraq, its all about what money can be made there. Europe was happily blaming the deaths on sanctions and having business deals with Saddams regime and not giving a flying fuck about Iraq, and they still don't. If we left they'd point and say "look what you did" and not help. Why bother when you can throw more sins at their favorite scapegoat?

The Wastrel
8th April 04, 01:55 PM
NOBODY really gives a fuck about Iraq, its all about what money can be made there.

Bull.

Nihilanthic
8th April 04, 01:57 PM
Well, who DOES care? I'd like to see some evidence of that.

All I've seen is the world acting like vultures opportunisticly trying to take what they can from that dying nation.

Te No Kage!
8th April 04, 02:12 PM
Why do the Iraqi militants think that these constant skirmishes will get the US to leave? Wouldn't it be smarter to act all cool so that the Americans pull out earlier and then launch the civil war to take control of Iraq? I'm sorry but that's why Iraq will never amount to much, they don't have any leaders with the brains or ability to make rational decisions.

KageReaper
8th April 04, 02:23 PM
You talk like it's easy to piece together an unstable country

Nihilanthic
8th April 04, 02:27 PM
Its fractionalized and IMO Islam (like most other religions) is really fucking up what could be a a good thing.

Iraq does have agrilcuture. Fertile Crescent. TONS OF OIL. But, alas, these militant muslims and factionalized groups fight eachother way too much for that country to build up like a modern nation.

Te No Kage!
8th April 04, 02:33 PM
Originally posted by KageReaper
You talk like it's easy to piece together an unstable country

I was speaking as if I was a faction leader. The faction leaders don't give a fuck about the other people. They just want the power for themselves and their group. If I was a faction leader (shiites, sunis, whatever), I'd wait until America pulled out and then attempt the coup d'etat (ala taliban). It just seems that they are all just a bunch of hotheads without the patience to coldly calculate their evil schemes. If any of the groups had the patience of Al Qaeda, they'd be in there in no time, but hey, you never know, maybe that's what they're planning. Maybe we haven't seen the big player in the civil war yet.

garbanzo
8th April 04, 02:41 PM
Originally posted by Nihilanthic
Its fractionalized and IMO Islam (like most other religions) is really fucking up what could be a a good thing.

Iraq does have agrilcuture. Fertile Crescent. TONS OF OIL. But, alas, these militant muslims and factionalized groups fight eachother way too much for that country to build up like a modern nation.


It take it that "a good thing" means becoming a good little democratic country that sides with the US and helps export deomocracy to its neighbors.

You may not mean that, but Donald Rumsfeld & co. seem to have that vision.

The problem is that there is no historical precedent for it. What we refer to as democracy is an political system that arose in Western Europe with the rise of the middle class.

It is unreasonable to expect that a country like Iraq, a war-torn nation that had been under a one form of authritarian reqime or another since its inception, is suddenly going to be "converted" to democracy by U.S. government officials who do not speak Arabic.

WingChun Lawyer
8th April 04, 02:43 PM
Originally posted by The Wastrel
There was a plan, and it was tanked.

http://www.bullshido.net/forums/showthread.php?s=&threadid=6560&highlight=Rieff

Thanks Wastrel, that actually supports my earlier post, stating that the lovely neocons purposefully ignored what their intel told them. That, in my opinion, is worse than not having a plan.

"There was also a broader disagreement about whether and how quickly Iraq could become a full-fledged democracy. The State Department itself was of two minds on this question. One prewar State Department report, echoing the conventional wisdom among Arabists, asserted that ''liberal democracy would be difficult to achieve'' in Iraq and that ''electoral democracy, were it to emerge, could well be subject to exploitation by anti-American elements.'' The C.I.A. agreed with this assessment; in March 2003, the agency issued a report that was widely reported to conclude that prospects for democracy in a post-Hussein Iraq were bleak. In contrast, the neoconservatives within the Bush administration, above all within the Department of Defense, consistently asserted that the C.I.A. and the State Department were wrong and that there was no reason to suppose that Iraq could not become a full-fledged democracy, and relatively quickly and smoothly."

garbanzo
8th April 04, 02:46 PM
That raises a very interesting scenario.

Let's say that Iraq does become democratic.

Let's say a hard-line, Islamic fundimentalist party comes to power.

Let's say they give safe have to Al Queda.

Let's say they start to develop WMD.

What reason is there to suppose that a democratic Iraq will remain pro-American past the first election?

WingChun Lawyer
8th April 04, 02:47 PM
Originally posted by Nihilanthic
No, I don't like bush or how he went about doing it, because he left himself wide open for partisanship and the left of Europe to scapegoat america and bitchbitchbitch at us all, but I'm glad at least as a side effect a dictator is gone and there is at least a CHANCE for those people, although those militants, terrorist groups and those few hate spewing religious leaders are trying to ruin it.


I agree with that, but I refer to my previous post. I donīt think there ever was a chance for those people, at least if your idea of a chance necessarily includes a US - friendly democratic government.

I canīt see what could be done to actually bring some stability there, but, as the CIA concluded a long time ago, a democracy is not an option. It seems, again in my opinion, that the US put itself in a lose-lose situation.

garbanzo
8th April 04, 03:00 PM
The left of Europe to bitch at us?

It wasn't the left, it was most of the population and their governments.

They opposed the war from the beginning. They had little or no reason to support it.

The French were business partners with Hussein, so they had an economic stake in his remaining in power.