Don’t think about the Iraq war much.
About The Author
BooMan
Martin Longman a contributing editor at the Washington Monthly. He is also the founder of Booman Tribune and Progress Pond. He has a degree in philosophy from Western Michigan University.
37 Comments
Recent Posts
- Day 14: Louisiana Senator Approvingly Compares Trump to Stalin
- Day 13: Elon Musk Flexes His Muscles
- Day 12: While Elon Musk Takes Over, We Podcast With Driftglass and Blue Gal
- Day 11: Harm of Fascist Regime’s Foreign Aid Freeze Comes Into View
- Day 10: The Fascist Regime Blames a Plane Crash on Nonwhite People
I just looked up the population of Alaska.
It’s roughly 670,000.
Do people realize how small that is?
Los Angeles’ population alone is nearly 10,000,000.
Illinois’ population, which Obama represents is about 13,000,000.
How in hell did McCain think this was a good decision, especially given his age and his promise to serve only one term?
Palin pulls into play a whole lot more people than the population of Alaska – please read scribe’s diary.
take comfort over at Huffpost: –the two Top Alaska Bewspapers Question Palin’s Fitness
So many Americans can’t even find there own state on a blank map, much less Alaska. It doesn’t matter if she’s from Alaska with less than a million, or from California with 33 million.
Many Americans don’t know better, nor do they care. She’s got makeup and big hair, and big xxeasxx, and a small waist. THOSE things matter in Tee Vee Land.
I think we should be calling it an occupation. Thats probably why you don’t think about it. Its been an occupation for a long time. Wars have armies and they end. Occupations go on and on.
The war was over on May Day 2003. My President told me so. He was wearing a flight suit.
It was never a war. First it was an unprovoked invasion – an act of pure, naked aggression. After that it was an occupation.
Like that, kinda?
well, things are going swimmingly, sunni and shi’a are BFF’s…or maybe not. and malarki is on his way to an appointment with destiny…unfortunatley for him, it’s likely to be the “Iraqi curse”.
none of that stuff matters when the new RATpub american idol [palin] is on the stage.
Sunni and Shi`a living in Iraq went for over a thousand years without any major conflict, living side by side, playing together, studying together, working together, marrying their kids to each other (the intermarriage rate was about 30%). Iraqis never cared if someone was Sunni or Shi`a or anything else. No one asked “are you Sunni or Shi`a” – it was just a weird question. It was not until 2003 when the United States brought in and empowered extremists and separatists that the problems began.
and thats what they are arguing in the article. Why do you move against extremists in Sunni towns but not Shiite extremists in their towns. It is all stemming from the invasion. Al Qaeda was not in Iraq before the invasion. There would be no moving against anyone if we had not invaded.
Could you please provide some sources for the Sunni/Shi’a thousand year peace? I find the Iraq War to be a disgusting invasion, but it sounds to me like you’re exaggerating to make your point.
Eeblet, the Shi`a split-off occurred in the late 7th century several decades after Prophet Mohammad’s death. The issue was a dispute over the leadership succession – in other words, it was a political, not a religious dispute. There were a number of politically-based conflicts and battles in the decades after Mohammad’s death, some of which involved the dispute that lead to the Shi`a split-off, others of which did not. Those conflicts and battles were among and between the leaders, and not the population.
Iraq’s has always been a very diverse society both religiously and ethno-linguistically. The various peoples have lived together there literally for millennia in just the same way peoples live together in other diverse societies such as, for example, the United States. Relations within, between, and among the various groups are completely normal and follow pretty much the same patterns you see everywhere else that people from different nationalities, ethnicities, and religions live together. In other words, there is nothing special or remarkable about it. It is very difficult to impossible to find sources for people living unremarkably normally together. The unremarkable is rarely, if ever, remarked upon. So, the burden is on those who claim that Iraqis have a history of violent hatred and conflict to demonstrate that.
There is no history prior to 2003that period of serious, widespread, or protracted ethnic or religious conflict. It’s awfully difficult to provide sources for something that is not happening. Interestingly, I have never seen anyone provide even remotely convincing sources for their claims that “Sunnis and Shiites have hated each other and been slaughtering each other for centuries”, or more interestingly “for thousands of years”, or, even more fascinatingly “since Biblical times”. (Note: Islam came to being in the 7th century, has not existed for thousands of years, and did not exist in Biblical times.) Can YOU find sources for centuries, or decades, or even years of specific instances or widespread or protracted conflict between Sunnis and Shi’as in Iraq?
There are numerous articles by scholars and others containing references to Iraq’s high intermarriage rate. Many are available on the web, and you can do a Google search if you like. You might find a reference there to the studies that show the rate of intermarriage – I don’t know whether that information is available on the web in English.
Also, as most Iraqis know, Iraq’s large Arab tribes, and many of its smaller ones, are mixed Sunni and Shi`a. There are references to that reality easily available on the web, too.
As for the myth that “Iraq is an inherently non-viable entity cobbled together by the western powers out of three distinct geographic regions with distinct populations that detested each other and did not want to be part of the same nation”, that is demonstrable nonsense. Yes, the modern-day nation state of Iraq was created by the western powers out of three wilayat, or governates. That much is true, but the rest is sheer rubbish. Unfortunately, I do not have time right now to go into that, but if you like I can do so later.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sunni-Shia_relations#Post-1970
I certainly see your point and appreciate your perspective; we may even be in agreement: my impression was not that there’s always been bloody conflict, but rather that there’s been occasional tension in the latter part of last century. I certainly am open to being wrong, but I see no reason my intellectually rigorous teacher (who was a PhD in Islamic Studies) would have taught us about recent Shi’a/Sunni conflicts if they didn’t exist (the year was 1996 or 97, I believe).
You say “The various peoples have lived together there literally for millennia in just the same way peoples live together in other diverse societies such as, for example, the United States” – sure, but it’s not like we’re conflict-free here! Perhaps a better question to you is: why would anyone 10 yrs ago have been promoting the notion that there was some Sunni/Shi’a conflict?
I have not said Iraq was conflict free, have I?
Eeblet, the Wikipedia article you linked to is, of course, WAY oversimplified, and in some respects enough so to be not entirely accurate. The article implies, for example, that the persecution of Shi`as by Saddam Hussein had a sectarian basis, which is not correct. Saddam was not a sectarian, and had many Shi`as in very high places in his regime – so much so that an estimated 50% or so of the members on that ridiculous deck of playing cards are Shi`as or at least from Shi`a background (one is a Kurd and Shi`a). The reason Saddam persecuted anyone is that they were considered a threat to him and his regime, and Sunnis were anything but immune to his wrath. And there were Shi`a groups, such as that of Al Hakim, that not only opposed Saddam’s regime, but also had as their goal turning Iraq from a secular state, which it had always been from the beginning, to a religious Shi`a state. Some of those groups now comprise the American-sponsored Iraqi make-believe government.
Of course, Wikipedia, by its very nature, cannot be treated as a definitive source, although it is useful.
It is important to go beyond “there were Shi`a/Sunni conflicts” and look in more detail at the conflicts themselves – what was the source/cause of the conflict, between whom, exactly, did the conflict occur, and what form did it take. I would be interested to know what you recall your teacher telling you about that.
I would agree that there was Shi`a/Sunni tension after the 1991 insurgency that was encouraged and betrayed by George H.W. Bush. However, the extent to which that tension affected Iraqi society should not be exaggerated. For the most part, relations at the level of society continued generally good, including intermarriage. The thing is, when people know each other and have personal and familial relationships with one another that sometimes go back generations, it is not so easy to destroy those relationships.
And by the way, Eeblet, would you mind telling me where you studied with this teacher? I wonder if it is someone I know.
OSCE observers fault Georgians in conflict: Magazine
Another Bush-success…
Good to see that the OSCE observers are not swayed by any US pressure to cover this up (USA is a member in OSCE).
Here is a much better article on the current situation in that area:
Medvedev Says Russia Seeks Dialogue With EU
Peeder Finally Flushed Today. He just pulled the plug on Political Flesh Feast about half an hour ago.
There are a couple of alternatives offered in diaries at MaryScott’s place.
Boran2 didn’t post his Palooza today for the first time in what, a millenium? Hope all’s well.
I believe he is traveling; he posted a beauty in theFriday Foto Flogging.
Thanks :o)
‘
McCain tells Politico
The Republican National Convention may be postponed— as Gustav intrudes
yeah…senator sensitive:
katrina: day 1
I doubt that would happen, but if it does, it has the nifty little benefit of delaying when he gets public funds.
I’m still blown away that McKept can meet someone twice, not even properly vet her, and call that a well-reasoned move. You have GOT to be kidding me! He had to keep referring to his flippin’ cue cards to pronounce her name! I am truly in bizarro world, because if most of us had any sense in this country, he’d be laughed off the ballot. He is an idiot and his ass is wholly owned by extreme wingnut faction.
But I’ll warn everyone: don’t lower expectations; keep them sky high! Don’t think we got this in the bag, because we don’t.
Exhibit A: george w. bush
It just enrages me that McCain can say this (on FoxNews Sunday):
…after his festive birthday cake love fest with Bush during Katrina. Has anyone in the media made this point – and displayed the picture above? Anyone? I can hardly stand to watch the news anymore, so I might have missed (I know, I know…I’m giving them too much credit).
I spent some time on another board last night refuting one of those stupid Obama smear emails. After I was done, I posted Steve Benen’s McCain flip-flop list.
And I do have to admit that the selection of Sarah Palin has me enraged for a really stupid reason. I wanted us to win in the fall based on the issues. Based on fighting hard and fighting (mostly) fair. This Palin pick gives a lot of people an out if we win.
On a shallow note, Sarah is growing on me from a visual standpoint. 😀
I just want to win. I don’t care why people vote for Obama as long as they do vote for him.
And I think she looks like a sadistic school teacher. With a whiny voice. Wouldn’t touch her with a foot thick condom.
More like a Drag Queen dressed as an administrative assistant in the Gay Players production of “9 to 5”. (Credit to commenter Phidipides on The Left Coaster)
You’re kidding, right? You are turned on by aging beauty queens who can’t let go of their pageanter look?
And that VOICE! And worse yet, that voice talking about Eye Rack and Eye Ran and nucular weapons. GAWD!
I can’t explain it. The visuals do something for me. In this respect, she’s the same as MoDo,
Of course, her politics (and MoDo’s columns, for that matter) are abysmal.
http://politicalwire.com/archives/2008/08/30/worst_pick_ever.html
In fact, as Palin’s cultural views become better known — she oppose abortion in all cases and opposes the use of birth control pills and condoms even among married couples —
Yeah. That works. :rolls eyes:
Regarding Iraq (is it said eh-rock, because that’s how I’ve said it), I’ve picked up many, many books on the war and am reading as much as I can.
I read somewhere that because of this war, American troops have something going for them that their Russian and Chinese counterparts don’t: they’ve been though the fire of combat and are battle-tested. I was incredibly sad when I read that, even as it’s true.
eh-rock works for me, and is probably as close as a non-Arabic-speaker can get to the correct Arabic pronunciation. It is impossible for most westerners to produce the true pronunciation because the word, عراق contains two consonant sounds that do not exist in any western language that I know of and are very hard for non-Arabic-speakers to pronounce, so some adaptation is reasonable, but Eye Rack is just beyond unacceptable.
I usually write the pronunciation of the first syllable as ear. Eye Rack is horribly, horribly wrong and gratingly ignorant, uncaring ugly-American-sounding. Earack is less awful, but still badly off. Eerock is just wrong (Eeron for ايران is correct however – can you see that the names of the two countries are spelled very differently in Arabic script?)
Yes, I suppose they are battle-tested. They are also very battle-weary, I imagine, although probably some of them love killing and torturing people and destroying things and so much now that they would be happy to be given more opportunities to do so. That kind of power over other people can really go to some people’s heads.
Thanks for the Arabic lesson. Like most Anglophone Americans, I had assumed that the “I” was pronounced the same in both cases.
What do the names mean? Is Iraq really the same as Mesopotamia, i.e. “Between the rivers”?
People tend to assume that because Iran and Iraq have only one letter difference when written in English script, then it must be the same in Arabic and Farsi (which is written in a variant of Arabic script). It clearly isn’t.
Iraq (one translitaration is 3raq) is one of the names that has been used for centuries for the region roughly comprising the modern-day nation state. I don’t know the etymology of the word. Maybe it has been studied, maybe not.
Iran is the name given to the modern-day nation state that was Persia. Many Iranians living in the west prefer to refer to their country as Persia, and themselves and their language as Persian. I believe based on my observations that began in the ’70’s after the revolution when Iran developed a negative image in the mind of western people, but I don’t know that for certain.
Is anyone else going to the rally on Labor Day at Hart Plaza? I plan on being there and I thought it might be cool to meet some fellow Boo Tribbers!