So much for liberating Iraqis...killing Americans seems to liberate Iraqis. If these same Iraqis wanted freedom from Saddam, couldn't they have done what they are doing to our troops now to Saddam and his government? Yet another reason why I was/am totally opposed to occupation of Iraq. It's like the guy who tries to save the girl from her physically abusive boyfriend only to get beat up by the girl.
1. it is under martial law 2. The situations are not analogous at all. We aren't Lee Kuan Yew trying to keep his people from chewing gum, the occupying power/jihad/terrorism/arab world component precludes such treatement as a viable option --- that's what Saddam did after all.
Cohen; You must've missed the massive protest by Shiites against the US led occupation going on this week.
Lil; I find this surprising coming from you considering your positions on the Taiwan forum. You have to consider that many of the Iraqis feel like the native Taiwanese do in regards to mainlanders imposing martial law on them. Probably they hate them even more because the KMT didn't militarily overthrow the previous Taiwanese government. FYI under Islamic Sharia law all of those crimes are punishable by death.
Atrocities are committed to draw a responce of horror. I learned that from Apocolypse Now. Once a body is dead subsequent acts only effect the living. I'm cetainly not implying that these people's death is no less a tradgedy. The deaths of any good people trying to make the world a better place is a tragedy. But if we let the atrocities lessen our commitmant we defame the lives of the fallen and allow evil to win. In the course of human history warfare has been a horrific exercise of political will. Morally repugnant regimes have an advantage over morlistic ones in that they are not limited in their capacity for violence. If we were to withdraw from Iraq, yes less Americans would die but would the total body count be less? Civil war between Shiite, Sunni and Kurds would probably claim hundreds of thousands of lives. Not to mention the potential for the unintended consequences as outside countries align themselves with the warring factions. No mattter if the justification, freeing Iraq from Saddam is of itself a noble cause. Trying to setablish a secular democracy in the middle East is a noble cause. We need to see these atrocities as a reason to stiffen our resolve. Besides if we let the murderers win in Iraq do you really think there will be no future American lives lost to their regime?
Sorry for the rapid fire posts. Unfortunately at this point we are stuck with Iraq. For us to pull out now before Iraq is stable will only lead to more chaos and bloodshed that will come back to haunt us. Unfortunately though we are also part of the problem. I have to admit I don't see a good solution for this. Internationalizing the effort more might help but I doubt many countries are eager to sacrifice their own troops to bail us out of this mess. Finally this was a problem that many could see coming and again emphasizes the failure of this Admin. to consider long term consequences. Many critics like Army Chief of Staff Gen. Shinseki told the Admin. before hand that it would be easy to defeat Saddam but the problem would be in what happens after Iraq falls. This Admin chose to ignore that advice and instead by into rosy predictions that the Iraqis would welcome the US with flowers and go about their business building a secular, stable, prosperous and democratic country. Even if you supported the invasion of Iraq and the removal of Saddam from power you should hold the Admin. responsible for the lack of planning on how to handle Iraq after Saddam fell and for ignoring advice that things would be very difficult.
Continuing the effort, rebuidling a country the size of California will take years. Stoic acceptance that casualties and atrocities are part of the effort. Winning hearts and minds through actions and propaganda. I don't know why the US seems so bad at this. But I do believe we will have to embrace an Islamic democracy that may not be 'little America'. Islamic clerics have a thousand years of effort in trying to control the behavior of these societies. We probably cannot over come that even if we provide every Iraqi a free TV. Develop an ethical system of laws and enforcement within Iraq. These people have never known anything but autocracy enforced by violence. Many see their 'way of life' threatened and are reacting accordingly but could be brought around to acceptance if the alternative is moral high ground. It will be very very hard on this country. But at stake is the chance to change the world. The Israeli/Arab conflict has created a rift between the Middle East and the West . The evolution of democracy from autocracy requires power be taken from those in power. If we can pacify and democratize Iraq we will have taken a huge step toward world peace. If we fail and leave a broken, demoralized and desparate people in Iraq how can we ever expect to see an end to their retribution?
The latest and perhaps the final reason as to why we went to war per Cohen, and others. We did it because we love the Iraqis, care about their civil rights and in twenty or thirty years from now we will know if all has been worthwhile. Maybe Bush should go on TV and try the latest reason for this mess.
Stoically acccepting casualties and huge costs is a workable strategy for us at home, not so workable for people in Iraq tasked with carrying it out. Eventually, the people on the ground will say "F-ck this, we're not doing this anymore." LIkewise, taking a vein from that other thread, instead of investing all of that human & econmic capital in the Mid East to try to chase the iffy proposition of 'changing the world", why don't we just develop alternative energy sources and abandon the mideast like we abandon Africa? We are content to let their murderous regiimes practice genocide on a far greater scale there without interference. Mind you, I'm not suggesting that we should leave tomorrow or that genocide is good or tolerable, but I think its an interesting point to follow.
That much?? I find that hard to believe. What a mess! Deck, Do you think the Liberation of Iraqi people was a misadventure? Or Bush's likely motivations a misadventure? Or Bush's atrocious foreign diplomacy...er...lack of foreign diplomacy? -Cohen Cohen, misadventure sounded rather childish to me when I typed it, and I think Bush's amazing incompetence, diplomatically and otherwise, with regard to this invasion of Iraq, has an almost childlike, bumbling quality to it... which is especially tragic considering all the lives lost on both sides and the lives being lost during the occupation. His motivations are obscure. Clearly, it wasn't about "weapons of mass destruction". Sometimes I wonder if Bush is aware that he's being led by the nose by advisors with their own agenda or if he is just this stupid. It could both. As for "Bush's atrocious foreign diplomacy...er...lack of foreign diplomacy?" You just summed it up. What little coherent policy he has is atrocious. Maybe misadventure is the wrong word after all. edit: you used "diplomacy", so if my using policy instead is a bad choice, just consider both of them rolled together.
Because rather than a defensive or humanitarian enterprise, the US invasion of Iraq is a blatant land-grab for strategic purposes both military and economic. And 95% of the rest of the world sees this very clearly. It is absolutely amazing to me that there remain thoughtful people in the US that continue to believe that the primary reason for the invasion was WMD. Because there is FAR too much money to be made through the petroleum and military industries. Plus, if an alternative viable enough to replace completely fossil fuels appeared tomorrow, trillions of dollars would come flooding back into the US, and we'd become the new Argentina.
GWB supposedly did have a little revenge in mind since Saddam allegedly put a hit on Bush the Senior during a visit to Kuwait a few years back. Hmmmm, wonder what he was doing in Kuwait anyway?
I did not. What did I say that indicated that? I.e., does a more careful re-read of my posts indicate that I may be aware of Shiite issues w/ the US? Or is it that you're saying that ALL Shiites have a problem w/ the US?
Not quite as grisly as the 4 contract employees, but we shouldn't forget the five US soldiers who were also killed today. Oh well in 20 or 30 years we will know if this has all been worthwhile. I wonder if that is enough for the families of these 9 Americans. ************* . Five U.S. soldiers of the 1st Infantry Division also were killed in the same area when a bomb exploded under their M-113 armored personnel carrier, making it the bloodiest day for Americans in Iraq since Jan. 8 link
