Freedom On The March.

[Fenian_Bastard]

http://today.reuters.co.uk/news/newsArticle.aspx?type=reutersEdge&storyID=2006-07-21T131602Z_01_NOA147743_RTRUKOC_0_FEATURE-IRAQ.xml

They didn't care if this happened. They never did.

 

[The Big Ragu]

FB, As big an indictment as this is of America--which is what you meant by posting it--what does it say about the Iraqi people? They are suddenly thrust into a situation--whether they asked for it or not--in which they are not living under the thumb of Saddaam Hussein and they have the opportunity to remake their country in any way they want. And rather than finding a way to peacefully coexist, the sunni and shiite factions would rather tear apart the country further, divide Bagdahd and allow a civil war to brew.

I agree that we went in there without understanding the dynamics and we have had no plan and done a shitty job. No arguments about that. But let's say they do end up fighting each other? Is it any worse than when they had Saddam in place, and he just persecuted the Shiites and Kurds, who never even had the chance to fight back, even though they represented a majority of the population?

 

[alleyallen]

FB, As big an indictment as this is of America--which is what you meant by posting it--what does it say about the Iraqi people? They are suddenly thrust into a situation--whether they asked for it or not--in which they are not living under the thumb of Saddaam Hussein and they have the opportunity to remake their country in any way they want. And rather than finding a way to peacefully coexist, the sunni and shiite factions would rather tear apart the country further, divide Bagdahd and allow a civil war to brew.

I agree that we went in there without understanding the dynamics and we have had no plan and done a shitty job. No arguments about that. But let's say they do end up fighting each other? Is it any worse than when they had Saddam in place, and he just persecuted the Shiites and Kurds, who never even had the chance to fight back, even though they represented a majority of the population?

At this point, I couldn't give a flip about who's to blame. It's like a train wreck ... you know it's going to happen and you're powerless to stop it. Let's just hope we can minimize the U.S. deaths first, then try to find a way to keep the entire country from turning into a bloodbath ... if that's even possible.

 

[HejiraHenry]

Just imagine this thread during WWII.

"FDR lied and people died!"

 

[alleyallen]

Just imagine this thread during WWII.

"FDR lied and people died!"

I was wondering who was going to be the first of your ilk to respond with that.

The focus of the article, in case you didn't open the link, was that it appears despite our military's best efforts -- and man were they good efforts, before anyone smarts off -- the country is such a hole it's going to hell on a daily basis.

Was F_B's intention to indict Bush and the administration? Perhaps, but why don't we all FOCUS on the story instead of stupid-ashed politics for once?

 

[Fenian_Bastard]

FB, As big an indictment as this is of America--which is what you meant by posting it--what does it say about the Iraqi people? They are suddenly thrust into a situation--whether they asked for it or not--in which they are not living under the thumb of Saddaam Hussein and they have the opportunity to remake their country in any way they want. And rather than finding a way to peacefully coexist, the sunni and shiite factions would rather tear apart the country further, divide Bagdahd and allow a civil war to brew.

I agree that we went in there without understanding the dynamics and we have had no plan and done a shitty job. No arguments about that. But let's say they do end up fighting each other? Is it any worse than when they had Saddam in place, and he just persecuted the Shiites and Kurds, who never even had the chance to fight back, even though they represented a majority of the population?

Rags --
As you know, we twice encouraged the Kurds to fight back, and then they did, and we bailed. By the time we launched Operation Surpash Daddy in 2003, Hussein wasn't capable of mounting an offensive on his kitchen staff.
We went in there without a plan, as you said, and without caring about anything except parcelling out the profits, and based on geopolitical fantasies by people who didn't know deck. We demolished the country and now we walk away?
Even in pure realpolitik, that's a bad idea.


UPDATE -- This isn't good news, either.
http://www.guardian.co.uk/afghanistan/story/0,,1826303,00.html

 

[The Big Ragu]

I'm not arguing with most of what you're saying. But if a civil war breaks out and it is essentially people fighting against each other because their ideas about Islam are slightly different, and they further destroy their country, I won't accept the "We destroyed the place and walked out on them" argument. Yes, we have royally forked this up. But what's done is done. Let's look toward the future right now. The Iraqi people have two choices--build a stable country, in which people live side by side peacefully, or start an irrational civil war. Saddaam Hussein is gone. Ostensibly, that is what most people wanted, right? If they choose the dumb-as-ship civil war (which the radical elements of Islam are encouraging), in which they further destroy their country it's about the one thing you can't blame on America.

 

[Fenian_Bastard]

Sure, you can.
If the United States went in there and demolished the civilian government -- as abhorrent as it may have been -- blew up virtually all the civilian infrastructure, and then declined to repair either one, while refusing to commit the time, troops, or money to maintain order, you can blame the US. There's an obligation to being an occupying power. You're the only cop on the block. Which is why I never forgave Sharon for Sabra and Shatila. We jailed an awful lot of Nazis for their part in unleashing the local militias and anti-Semites in places like Hungary and Romania.

 

[alleyallen]

F_B, this is where I veer off from you. I don't feel the U.S. should be held to blame for Iraqis destroying each other over a religious faction. I just don't.

This country is like a child. We did everything except wipe their butts and flush the toilet for them and now they're crapping all over the floor before we could put a freaking diaper on them. If we give them the tools to move forward, man, it's up to them to do it in the long run. Otherwise, let's just make Iraq the 51st freaking state and indiscriminently take all the oil we need and lower the gas prices a bit.

 

[Fenian_Bastard]

F_B, this is where I veer off from you. I don't feel the U.S. should be held to blame for Iraqis destroying each other over a religious faction. I just don't.

This country is like a child. We did everything except wipe their butts and flush the toilet for them and now they're crapping all over the floor before we could put a freaking diaper on them. If we give them the tools to move forward, man, it's up to them to do it in the long run. Otherwise, let's just make Iraq the 51st freaking state and indiscriminently take all the oil we need and lower the gas prices a bit.

alley --
We gave them nothing like the tools. We gave them an on-the-cheap invasion and occupation. We lied to ourselves -- "This war will pay for itself!" -- and we carried our illusions with us. We can't even get them electrical power they had under Saddam because we decided we didn't have to secure anything but the oil ministry. As to the end of your post, we're pretty much going to grab the oil anyway.

 

[alleyallen]

F_B, this is where I veer off from you. I don't feel the U.S. should be held to blame for Iraqis destroying each other over a religious faction. I just don't.

This country is like a child. We did everything except wipe their butts and flush the toilet for them and now they're crapping all over the floor before we could put a freaking diaper on them. If we give them the tools to move forward, man, it's up to them to do it in the long run. Otherwise, let's just make Iraq the 51st freaking state and indiscriminently take all the oil we need and lower the gas prices a bit.

alley --
We gave them nothing like the tools. We gave them an on-the-cheap invasion and occupation. We lied to ourselves  -- "This war will pay for itself!" -- and we carried our illusions with us. We can't even get them electrical power they had under Saddam because we decided we didn't have to secure anything but the oil ministry. As to the end of your post, we're pretty much going to grab the oil anyway.

As for the oil ... if we're going to grab it anyway, then let's get to it. I, for one, would vote for any Bush or Cheney plan to send in a convoy of Exxon tankers and start filling up ... as long as it means relief from gas prices.

 

[alleyallen]

And Fenian, I'm not going to keep rehashing the same "It's all Bush's fault" argument because, even for me, it gets a little old after a while. The situation is crap now. The question is how can Iraq fix it, and can we help without risking even more lives than is absolutely necessary.

Let's hope for a solution instead of beating the problem ... or the problem-makers.