The attacks on U.S. troops grow in complexity while Iraqis thirst for a final crushing victory, not over us, but over each other. Reading the latest out of Iraq is an exercise in self-flagellation. Deep down, even though I hold no responsibility for this debacle, I really want Iraq to avoid years of civil and sectarian bloodshed. When wingnuts make arguments about how we have a responsibility to prevent the worst, I do feel a twinge on my heartstrings. I don’t want to be a heartless bastard.
But it’s just not something we can solve. I’ve looked at this conflict eighteen hundred different ways and I’ve tried to think of things we can do to keep Iraq from descending into a pit of hell. I’ve never been able to come up with an answer.
Iraq is different from Kosovo or Somalia or Rwanda or Darfur. We didn’t create those messes. We have no credibility to tackle the problem of Iraq.
And I really believe Iraq is a problem like Palestine or Cyprus or Kashmir or Northern Ireland. It’s intractable. There aren’t easy answers. The factions probably have to exhaust each other…and the US isn’t going to help that process by sticking around and trying to pump their oil.
Sitting in the cool recesses of his home, the white-robed sheik said he was a moderate, a supporter of democracy. It is for people like him that the Americans have fought this war. But the solution he proposes is not one the Americans would easily embrace.
“In the history of Iraq, more than 7,000 years, there have always been strong leaders,” he said. “We need strong rulers or dictators like Franco, Hitler, even Mubarak. We need a strong dictator, and a fair one at the same time, to kill all extremists, Sunni and Shiite.”
I was surprised to hear those words. But perhaps I was being naïve. Looking back on all I have seen of this war, it now seems that the Iraqis have been driving all along for the decisive victory, the act of sahel, the day the bodies will be dragged through the streets.
It gives me no pleasure to agree with this sheik. I wish it were not so that Iraq needs a ruthless leader, a Hitler or Franco or Muhbarak, to restore order. But, it is either that, or it is this. And this isn’t working.
Bush wants to stay in Iraq and he wants us to accept the bodycount as the cost of doing business. It doesn’t really matter what I say about that because I am not the deciding voice. It’s already crystal clear that the American public is not willing to pay this price as the cost of doing business. We’ll keep defeating politicians that support this war until there are no politicians that support this war left in office.
They want this:
Administration officials and top military leaders declined to talk on the record about their long-term plans in Iraq. But when speaking on a not-for-attribution basis, they describe a fairly detailed concept. It calls for maintaining three or four major bases in the country, all well outside of the crowded urban areas where casualties have soared. They would include the base at Al Asad in Anbar Province, Balad Air Base about 50 miles north of Baghdad, and Tallil Air Base in the south.
That’s simply not going to happen.
It’s amazing to me that the first MSM to declare the surge a failure was the Wall Street Journal. Where is the honesty of sources like the New York Times? Perhaps, to their staffs, it isn’t news.
But BushCo. is in the business of what they do best, stealing the thunder of the Democrats and doing it first. They know they must announce a withdrawal plan, and I guarantee you that it will come in the fall. That has to be the agreement they’ve reached with Republicans.
With due respect to Ron Paul (who, unusual for a Republican, has that disturbing habit of trying to think)the real reason we were attacked on 9/11 and had engendered decades of hatred in the Middle East was our “permanent” base in Saudi Arabia. Odd as it may seem, Bin Laden was far more angry at the Saudi royal family than us at the start. We just butted into a family feud. Sound familiar?
This is a recipe for disaster.
I will never be convinced that there was ever any authenticity to ANY of the stated reasons given for this preemptive invasion and occupation of Iraq. It’s just beyond belief that any sentient human could have expected anything other than exactly what has transpired when you blow up a country with that kind of deeply fractured, WELL KNOWN history.
I think they invaded Iraq knowing full well, and planning well in advance FOR, this exact outcome, as justification for the establishment of permanent US bases in the oil rich Middle East. There was cold blooded awareness going in of what it really would cost in terms of American lives and treasure, and in terms of massive cost in lives to Iraqi citizens who only want what we want: the right to live in peace and safety. I firmly believe the architects of this war knew all of this going in and simply did it anyway, without a single qualm. They know they have already won.
But it still won’t be enough; there IS no “enough” in exisitance for such a twisted, deadly “leadership” as the one we’ve elected to office. And it’s looking to me like they have pretty well “bought and paid off” anything and anyone who could possibly stop them.
United (the people) stand, awake and alert and involved,) or, divided we fall (into a corporate induced coma of consumerism), while the big bad bully boys simply take over.
Anyway, that’s my humble view of it all.
And them fighting each other shows how Divide and Conquer works. What’s up with Booman? He is basically with the Bush agenda and simply blames the victims for the chaos they are forced to live in? Is he blaming the Palestinians also for not accepting peace?
Dishea-r-tening
Booman, I’m not sure how you could think that a brutal dictator could be in any way good for the Iraqi people. Look at the dictatorships in the rest of the Arab world – they have consistently acted against the interests of their own people, their actions and policies instead geared towards maintaining their (increasingly fragile) grip on power (that’s what dictators tend to do).
Iraq needs a democracy. Getting there will not be easy, although there are Iraqi groups dedicated to seeing it become a reality. Certainly, the first step is for the occupation, the cause of so much violence, to end, in accordance with Iraqi public opinion.
Beyond that, our obligations are completely withdraw from Iraq, pay reparations for the enormous damage we’ve caused, hold those responsible accountable and then help the Iraqi people in any way they want us to.
The rest is up to them.
Remember this BBC article from earlier this year about what the Iraqi people think?
Some of them feel that at least they had lights and running water back then, something that democracy hasn’t been able to give them. Sad.
Just sayin’.
They were undoubtedly far better off under Saddam. But I don’t think they face a dichotomy between the current state of permanent terror and living under a brutal tyrant.
There’s a third way – democracy – but it cannot be imposed from the outside, particularly not when the country allegedly doing the “imposing” is not actually interested in democracy at all.
Anyone up for a impeach Cheney blogswarm on Tuesday when Libby is sentenced?