Alpha, today's column by Friedman shows just how out of touch he is to implement anything. The man only talks. His early talk was sounding a bit like me in my discussions with you. We are in Iraq to draw out the infection and to reorient the Middle East along responsbility and accountability. Yet Friedman feels this means democracy.... only...
That's utter nonsense. History is against him. Specifically, he decrees:
>>>Because if it is impossible for the peoples of even one Arab state to voluntarily organize themselves around a social contract for democratic life, then we are looking at dictators and kings ruling this region as far as the eye can see. And that will guarantee that this region will be a cauldron of oil-financed pathologies and terrorism for the rest of our lives.<<<
They once said this about Libya, until Reagan dropped a couple of bombs. They once said this about Tripoli, until the Marines established themselves as a force to be reckoned with. Democracy 'only' doesn't ordain peace and stability. The willingness for America to protect our 'democracy' does. And we're doing it. ...btw, Arabs are now fighting Arabs, and maybe there is a civil war on the horizon. But that civil war had its seeds from the British cartographer who drew up 'national' borders with his pencil. Jordan is the key. Will they have ambitious plans to gain back what was once TransJordan? Will some Saudis help them?
QWAK,canucanoe, When analchord DOES shower,----they have to come in waring "HAS MAT suits" and put the towels and what is left of the bar of SOAP in a special barrel and bury it at Yucka mountain! With a lable reading "BIO HASARD do not open for 50,000 years!" :)
Iraq is our sorely needed military base in the war on terror.(if they're not there, then where are they?)
Can we advance the discussion yet?
The think tanks conceded the civil war two years ago. They've moved on, why cant you?
Your posts might have been germane two years ago.
Historically, the Shia and Sunni only agree on one thing: They hate the Kurds.
Thus, we will see Kurdish independence.
The newly elected government will meet only to draw a new map.
But they will hate each other, and bury each other for generations.
We may provide some order to the killing, and limit it, but only if we draft 500k troops and keep them there for a zillion years.
You know, canu, it's true that geodesic symmetry allows for a freer flow of air around your shaved sacs, but it doesn't make you some sort of savant salver.
Stay with liberal applications, and you wont sound so yeastly.
You traded the swelling in your groin for the swelling in your head.
(and that's something that a more conservative therapy wont cure)
>>>You need to accept it if Webster's def is correct. It is, in part..."a rebel against a lawful government or civil authority". That makes all of those that oppose the Allawi interim government insurgents in the classic sense, no matter where they're from. Fact is vast majority are Sunni rebels, a fact the administration acknowledges.<<<
That makes us the insurgents. Makes sense, the Baathists were the established 'government'.
As for everything going badly, I disagree. Major changes have been occuring in the Middle East. Just what do you think are the real goals of the Iraqi 'war'? Is Iraq a tactical thrust or a Middle East strategy? You won't get your answer from the Administration's politicalese.
RE:"I just don't think you know what the word 'insurgent' means. I cannot accept your label that Sunnis and Baathists, who are citizens Iraq, are 'insurgents'."
You need to accept it if Webster's def is correct. It is, in part..."a rebel against a lawful government or civil authority". That makes all of those that oppose the Allawi interim government insurgents in the classic sense, no matter where they're from. Fact is vast majority are Sunni rebels, a fact the administration acknowledges.
We are indeed fighting for ourselves. The problem is that the poor planning and execution of the post-war action has led the US to define and re-define the mission along with acceptable outcomes. That does not bode well for US credibility especially in the face of the absense of WMD.
The war is going badly. That is indisputable. What is also indisputable, is that George W. Bush is 100% responsible for doing a piss poor job prosecuting a very important military action, one that was supported overwhelmingly by Congress and the American people.
One doesn't 'win' by having the biggest 'guns'. 1500s Spain learnt that. 1700s Britain learned that. The Afghanis just drove out the Soviets with pea shooters! We'll be celebrating MLK Day shortly, he didn't even have a gun. I don't think you have a good grasp of history.
Alpha, know the history well. I just don't think you know what the word 'insurgent' means. I cannot accept your label that Sunnis and Baathists, who are citizens Iraq, are 'insurgents'. They have every right to being there and fighting, unless their ilk decides otherwise. How do they decide otherwise? ...with their fists, the same way just about every country ever built was defined. That British cartographer's pencil illustration of the country of 'Iraq' has lasted quite a long time due to Sunni fists. Maybe it is now the Kurd and Shia time to define their borders. We fight for ourselves, as will all these other parties. Anyone who thinks one goes to war to fight for others is a fool. Your earlier statement defines you as a fool.
Guess you missed the history lesson regarding Iraq's baathist party and the fact that it was overwhelimingly comprised of Sunniis. Hard to beleive with all you have been spewing you were not aware this where Saddam emerged from and was the base of his power.