Withdrawing from Iraq: A Disaster Waiting to Happen?

If I might re-phrase the title of this article, ``(U.S.)-Withdrawing from Iraq: PEACE waiting to happen``-

#53, ``...long string of US efforts to make common cause with the Islamic right..`` Point well taken, the ``Islamic Right`` is a creation of the colonial west- a caricature forced upon Islam from the beginning, in justification of the crusades and as Christian propaganda and of course there are idiots like UBL who do their utmost to mold themselves into this caricature, in the name of Islam.

The article I did on Islam: Image & Reality Post 9/11 can be read at http://blog.asadi.org
Here is an excerpt that is relevant to the quote above:

Contrary to what these agenda driven writings present, Islam has the strongest organized social justice component within its system, compared not only to most other religions, but to most secular systems as well. Not only does it suggest a community-style society of humankind by pointing to the natural world as guide (Quran 6:38), with humanity as trustee, not owner of resources (Quran 2:284, 57:7 etc.), it encourages the distribution of the surplus of every individual (Quran 2:219) in the form of a social fund (Quran 9:60) administered by those in charge of governance. It makes the fulfillment of basic necessities of the needy a ``religious`` duty, without which the ritual of prayer itself is mocked, yes mocked by the Quran itself (Quran 107:1-7). Such ``socialistic`` emphasis on social justice, organized within a religious system is unheard of in the world of religion, which according to Marx often served as the ``opium of the masses``. The Quran’s emphasis on the sanctity of human life, comparing a single one to all of humanity (Quran 5:32) is also unsurpassed in world literature, and the common bond, the ``human consciousness`` it intends to create based upon common origin (Quran 4:1) and one creator God, who created all equally according to his nature (Quran 30:30) is equally unsurpassed as humanitarian doctrine and is demonstrated as fact during the Hajj pilgrimage. All systems have been abused and misused for political/economic motives and Islam is no exception, but condemning it as an inherently anti-human ideology is dishonest and unjust. (Often the distorted, reactionary version of Islam has been implanted from ``outside`` as was the case of the proxy Cold-War that the U.S. was fighting against the Soviets in Afghanistan: here you had the CIA, most of whom were non-believers in Islam, promising the Afghans a sure ticket to heaven if they died fighting the Soviets,- (text books printed in the US meant for the Afghan youth from that era still float around in Pakistan) Stinger missiles were an added bonus; supporting Zia’s “Saudi Islamization” of Pakistan etc.)

Click on the URL below for yet another “take” on staying in Iraq or leaving. I’ve posted a short excerpt.

http://www.atimes.com/atimes/Middle_East/GL01Ak01.html

What `staying the course` really means
By Robert Dreyfuss

``Nearly three years into the war in Iraq, the Bush administration tells us that it wasn`t about weapons of mass destruction or Iraqi ties to al-Qaeda, but about America`s holy mission to spread democracy to the benighted regions of the Middle East. However, postwar Iraq is anything but a democracy. In fact, if Iraq manages to avoid all-out civil war, it is likely to end up with a government that is fiercely undemocratic - a Shi`ite theocratic dictatorship that rules by terror, torture, and armed might.

What President George W Bush has wrought in Iraq is just the latest in a long string of US efforts to make common cause with the Islamic right. But like the Sorcerer`s Apprentice, whose naive and inexperienced use of magic blows up in his face, American efforts to play with the forces of political Islam have proved to be dangerous, volatile and often uncontrollable.``

shiites itching for some payback...Let them tackle the insurgents like Saddam ``tackled`` them...

Shiite Urges U.S. to Give Iraqis Leeway In Rebel Fight
Americans Have Blocked Tougher Tactics, Cleric Says

By Ellen Knickmeyer
Washington Post Foreign Service
Sunday, November 27, 2005; A01

BAGHDAD -- The leader of Iraq`s most powerful political party has called on the United States to let Iraqi fighters take a more aggressive role against insurgents, saying his country will only be able to defeat the insurgency when the United States lets Iraqis get tough.

``The more freedom given to Iraqis, the more chance for further progress there would be, particularly in fighting terror,`` said Abdul Aziz Hakim, head of the Supreme Council for the Islamic Revolution in Iraq, the Shiite Muslim religious party that leads the transitional government and whose armed wing is the most feared of Iraq`s many factional forces.

``Moving a little further east is Afghanistan, a country deep-seated in radical, fundamental ideals and one that has proved to be an elusive target for powers new and old`` ?

And how exactly is afghanistan ``rooted`` in radical fundamental ideals?

#36 by kamasutra on November 24, 2005 6:49pm PT


Much like banker lady say - Early withdrawal mean stiff penalty.


Early withdrawal means no knocking up anyone...

Moving out of Iraq is most certainly going to throw the country into widespread civil unrest and civil war.


Arm the shias..arm the kurds...let them get some payback on the sunnis...and get the hell out..

The sunnis don`t have the oil..the shias and the kurds do...

I`m sure the Peshmerga won`t tolerate sunni nonsense...

Re: # 46

Romair...

Thanks for this post from the visionary Mark Twain. For anyone interested, there`s a little more of Mark Twain`s commentary on this URL:

http://www.counterpunch.com/twain03192003.html

Here (from an essay posted on today`s Counterpunch) is a little of what Alexander Cockburn has to say:

By ALEXANDER COCKBURN

http://www.counterpunch.org/

``Would there actually be a power vacuum if US withdrew, followed by civil war, as is widely argued in the U.S.? The Sunni can`t take Baghdad. They can`t penetrate the main Kurdish and Shia areas. How exactly is the US military preventing a civil war at the moment? The refusal of the Shia to retaliate is the most important factor here and this is primarily the result of Grand Ayatollah Ali al-Sistani standing firmly against it.

Now suppose Sistani calls for a withdrawal? Then the US and Britain will have little choice but to go, probably over an 18 month period. This very week, incidentally, a gathering in Cairo of Sunni, Shiite, and Kurdish leaders (under the auspices of the Arab League) called for a timetable for US withdrawal and also said that Iraq`s opposition had a ``legitimate right to resistance.`` The Sunni are not going to stop fighting while the occupation continues. The quid pro quo for the US leaving would presumably be a ceasefire by the Sunni and an end to suicide bombing attacks.

All those Democratic Party withdrawal dates are predicated on the idea that Iraqi army security forces will be built up and can take over. This scenario is as unrealistic as calls to ``internationalize`` the occupying force. All the evidence is that only an agreement on the departure of the US will lead to an end to the armed resistance, just as Murtha said. The idea that the Sunni taking part in the election somehow means a shift from military action is also baloney. It is clearly an `Armalite and ballot box` strategy.``

``There has never been a just one, never an honorable one--on the part of the instigator of the war.

I can see a million years ahead, and this rule will never change in so many as half a dozen instances. The loud little handful--as usual--will shout for the war. The pulpit will--warily and cautiously--object--at first; the great, big, dull bulk of the nation will rub its sleepy eyes and try to make out why there should be a war, and will say, earnestly and indignantly, `It is unjust and dishonorable, and there is no necessity for it.`

Then the handful will shout louder.

A few fair men on the other side will argue and reason against the war with speech and pen, and at first will have a hearing and be applauded; but it will not last long; those others will outshout them, and presently the anti-war audiences will thin out and lose popularity. Before long you will see this curious thing: the speakers stoned from the platform, and free speech strangled by hordes of furious men who in their secret hearts are still at one with those stoned speakers--as earlier-- but do not dare to say so. And now the whole nation--pulpit and all-- will take up the war-cry, and shout itself hoarse, and mob any honest man who ventures to open his mouth; and presently such mouths will cease to open. Next the statesmen will invent cheap lies, putting the blame upon the nation that is attacked, and every man will be glad of those conscience-soothing falsities, and will diligently study them, and refuse to examine any refutations of them; and thus he will by and by convince himself that the war is just, and will thank God for the better sleep he enjoys after this process of grotesque self-deception.``

-- The Incomparable Mark Twain (1910)

As true today as it was then................

hamidm #42: ``..........regardless of how iraq turns out in the next year or so``

Hmm.........funny how time changes things. There used to be a time, when you were convinced that the Iraq invasion was the biggest success Bush would ever have........We debated it for quite a while.........Are you now wondering that it may not turn out the way you had predicted?.........

How about a novel idea. Perhaps its time for you and your Evangelical friends to give it a rest.............So other sane people can start making decisions............

To paraphrase Clinton ``It`s the oil, stupid.`` Here`re a couple of paragraphs from an article by James Kunstler. You can read the entire essay at the URL below. mirmir

http://www.alternet.org/story/28630/

Can You Spell Withdrawal without O-I-L?
By James Howard Kunstler, kunstler.com
Posted on November 24, 2005, Printed on November 25, 2005

Neither Jack Murtha, the congressman who set the cable news networks afire this weekend, or Frank Rich, the lead dog on the New York Times Sunday op-ed page, mentioned the word ``oil`` once. I only mention it myself because it would be nice if we could have a coherent public discussion about staying or going in Iraq, and you can`t do that without talking about the oil of the Middle East.

But it does illustrate how deep the national denial runs and how foggy the debate gets. Even poor George W. Bush seems to think we`re in Iraq in order to turn the people into Jeffersonian democrats, so the only issue for his opponents is whether that is possible or not.

Maybe we ought to ask: what happens to the oil supply of the Crusader West when none of its representatives maintains a garrison in the Middle East? I use the term Crusader not to be cute, but to remind you how Europe and America are viewed by many people of the Middle East. They don`t like us. They have a longstanding beef with us. Some of them would like to punish us.

America is leading the current crusade because we are the society most desperately addicted to oil, and the Middle East is where two-thirds of the world`s remaining oil lies. The one thing that we apparently cannot bring ourselves to talk about is our addiction itself. The commuters whizzing around the (large) cities and metroplexes of this land probably got a big charge out of Congressman Murtha`s anti-war blast taking over drive-time radio last Friday. I wonder if they thought about how it might affect their commuting.

Re: # 39


>>>>We don`t want your brain hurting.<<<<

Rizvi Sahib.. Salutations, Y tu mama Tambien. And Thankyou for your concerns about the well being of my brain.

Next time wait for a few days after coming out of a taco before addressing me as you register only today and the first thing you do is to speak on some group’s behalf. Who are these “we” you are talking about? Until I know who these “we” are for sure, I ain’t going to do you, monkeybrains.

Salutations,

Kulharee

a long term project ...........

..........regardless of how iraq turns out in the next year or so, things have changed for the better and everyone will be better off in the long run ............. a tyrant is gone, people have cell phones, the political logjam has been broken and other rogues like the ayatollas in tehran and asad in damascus are beginning to take notice ..........

.............now america has to make sure it stays in the region for as long as it takes the bedouins to get their act together ..........let`s not forget that we were engaged in central america for the better part of a century before countries like panama, guatemala, honduras and salvadore were cleansed of the communist pestilence ...... islamic fundamentalism is a much bigger threat and it could take much longer to eradicate this disease........... this is a problem for the entire civilized world and, now that the soviet threat is not there, should be nato`s main focus ............ why should the american tax payer foot the entire bill for providing security for the french and the japanese ? ...........

Re: # 38

..... there is no hamidm but hamidm, and hamidm2 is his successor ..........

mujtaba is taking hamidm`s name in vain ...............

#32 Thank you, I recently posted a i-log entry, ``Declarations of Independence``- since the corporate media (as well as the CIA funded media in many parts of the world- their budget is tens of billions, more than the GDP of many poor countries combined) blocks all dissent, we need to network to get these messages to as many as we can.

Re: # 10

Hello Mr. Axe. You are funny. Ha ha funny. Notice small sentences? We don`t want your brain hurting. (Thinking out loud: But that would be self-defeating logic. After all, you can`t hurt something if doesn`t exist.) Well, never mind the brain reference then. Just keeping saying silly things. We find them amusing. And congratulations! for climbing up the evolutionary ladder. A few million years and you would be competing with amoeba. Luego!

Sin-celery,

Ray

Mujtaba Hamid = hamidm2 ?????

Re: # 35

Truly… does the killing (with an intention of extinction) of native Sudanese by the Ay-rab Sudanese also make you sad and humble? USA might leave the region soon, but how are you going to get rid of the Wahabis? Hain? Incidentally, Syrians are next; so keep your seat belts fastened, as there is no need to be humble and sad as yet. Later.

#36
Kamasutra… The other factors such as the size of the deposit also count.

Much like banker lady say - Early withdrawal mean stiff penalty.

Sometimes it makes me sad and humble. If we look at the history, the creation of United States of America is probably the only event in history when the Colonialism had had its absolute victory. The colonial invasion of Europeans brought the local population to near extinction and the occupation was so successful that it did not need any support from the mother country any more.

Ironically, as USA will depart Middle East, as it will, defeated and humiliated, it will be the final nail in the coffin of Colonialism. The world will be free of this scourge on humanity. Does it mean that strong will stop exploiting the weak? I do not think so. Man will invent other ways to subjugate and steal from other. But colonialism will be no more.

#31

Hamidm,

That’s a great idea for the sake of muslims and non-muslims’ future.

However, better alternative would have been for POM (Prisoners of Mullahs) states to cooperate with Bush by sending secular muslim troops to help Americans to set up a model democratic muslim state. All muslim states are virtually POM states.

Looks like USA is loosing its will power. Look for bigger Sunni-Shia rift in that area if we pull out. Now, I am not sure we should have gone in.

Mr. Hamid,
I would tend agree with perseverance mentality. As former girlfriend of mine saying, first don`t get in when not wanted, but if get in, then not withdraw premature, but stay in till job totally finished. Also, good idea to clean up after one own mess.

Re: # 28
masadi...
I have read all your posts with mounting interest. Your understanding of the history and current state of affairs regarding the U.S. invasion and occupation of Iraq rank right at the top of all analyses that I`ve come across.
None of us, certainly, can predict the future course of events there, but I am convinced that only Iraq, perhaps with the aid and support of other middle eastern nations, can solve its own internal problems. The Cairo conference recently concluded, and the one scheduled for February, are cause for at least a pinch of optimism. mirmir

Re: # 29

....... occupy saudi arabia, now !

......... the only way to reform a belligerent islam and bring muslims into the eighteenth century is to liberate mecca and medina from the wahabists and create something along the lines of the vatican so that there is some coherence to the nonsense emanating from the believers ......... today who interprets the mumbo-jumbo in the book and speaks for the muslims ?....... dr israr ahmed? osama bin laden ? maulana tahmed ? or is it the great warrior and philospopher, romair mian ? ........between these four characters, the ummah cannot even decide which day to celebrate eid or which toothpaste to use, let alone decide if suicide bombings and ritual beheadings are kosher ............ what we need is a grand sheikh of mecca and a college of fat maulanas to decide these matters .......... mecca and medina should be opened up to tourists of all faiths - the marine corps with help from disney can manage the place until the sheikh can get his act together ............

........ the more i think about it , the more i like the idea ...............

masadi #24

`` Apparently, many of the cheerleaders for the U.S. cause on here have no understanding of the history of Saddam Hussein, or the Iran Iraq conflict or the fact that the U.S. and Britain have been interfering in that region by supporting coups and installing their cronies whenever the rulers get too independent or try to do something for thier countries. Here is a short flash on Saddam, well documented http://www.bushflash.com/thanks.html ``

Explain to me how exactly US and Britain controlled Saddam.

`` Also the UBL reactionaries were trained and indoctrinated by the CIA, fighting Reagan`s cold war with the soviets. People who did not believe in Islam (most in the CIA) were telling these idiots that fighting the soviets was a sure ticket to heaven, and a million of them died fighting America`s war as disposable slaves of the master. Now all of a sudden the U.S. elite have developed amnesia and forgot how this monstrous distortion of Islam was created and forced upon the world by them. ``

Afghan rebels have nothing to do with Iraq.

`` Look at history as a guide, here is what the U.S. elite did in Vietnam, the end result in Iraq will not be much different, ``

In the end USA pulled out all troops leaving South Vietnamese to the mercy of North Vietnamese and Vietcong.

Interesting comments from well-known jouranlist Eric Margolis:

``Archives > November 14, 2005

AMERICANS ARE RUNNING OUT OF PATIENCE WITH THEIR `WAR PRESIDENT’

``.......While I was recently in London, leaked cabinet documents shockingly revealed that shortly before Bush invaded Iraq, he actually told PM Tony Blair he `wanted to go beyond Iraq’ by occupying Saudi Arabia and Pakistan. This is the first time we have concrete evidence that two key US allies were in the White House’s crosshairs........``

Ignoring the history of the situation and detaching facts from their roots and social structure, shows ignorance of history and the society in which this history is enacted - there is nothing ``holier than thou`` in pointing out what is ``apparent``. Ad Hominem arguments seem to be the hallmark of corporate cheerleaders. Cheerleaders of the U.S. through domination of the media reach tens of millions yet present themselves as victims even though those that oppose the inhumane policies of the U.S. elite have a much narrower audience because the media wont give their voice a chance to be heard. The media is dominated by a few large corporations that support these inhumane policies because they are good for profit maximization for a few, even as the vast majority of human beings suffer immensely.

Towards the end of the first Gulf war, the Administration of Bush senior encouraged the Shias to rebel and rise up against Saddam and then when they did, not only did they abandon them but gave Saddam permission to use his airspace to go after them (this they do not even deny, it is common knowledge)- thus the U.S definitely is responsible for creating those post Gulf war one mass graves. Pointing out the crimes of the US elite does not translate into hatred for America. The American people are victims of this same elite that is robbing them blind. The elite in America, the tiny group that weilds power and wealth does not describe America, neither do they describe the rest of the world but they rule over both.

Re: # 26

Asadi Sahib, when you say, and I quote

>>>>Apparently, many of the cheerleaders for the U.S. cause on here have no understanding of the history of Saddam Hussein, or the Iran Iraq conflict or the fact that the U.S. and Britain have been interfering in that region by supporting coups and installing their cronies whenever the rulers get too independent or try to do something for thier countries. Here is a short flash on Saddam, well documented http://www.bushflash.com/thanks.html<<<<<<

you are displaying your “holier and smarter than thou” attitude that might sell to a Maddrassha student of which you appear to be a product, it wont go well with “many of the cheerleaders”. The whole premise of your rhetoric “It’s US’s fault” is old Che Guevara garbage. Not everything is US’ fault as you appear to be implying. If Saddam butchers and gasses Kurds and Shias, it is not US fault.

First learn to present your arguments coherently, then worry about other peoples’ manners. My lack of manners is no excuse for your hatred of the United States. You should visit it sometimes, to get a better idea. We have a few vacancies in Gitmo Inn.

Apparently some people on here have no decency on how to communicate. The facts are clear for all to see. Also, in order to check statistics, you do not have to go far, go to google and check for yourself.

The 36 million hungry in America figure I quoted was from the book ``Growing Up Empty: The Hunger Epidemic in America by Loretta Schwartz-Nobel``, replicated and reported by many text books of sociology that deal with the issue. Further, reuters news agency, (which is not Opera by the way) reports a similar figure quoting the U.S. department of Agriculture

http://www.alertnet.org/thefacts/reliefresources/456106.htm

=== Interact Filtered ===
view this users filtered interacts

Apparently, many of the cheerleaders for the U.S. cause on here have no understanding of the history of Saddam Hussein, or the Iran Iraq conflict or the fact that the U.S. and Britain have been interfering in that region by supporting coups and installing their cronies whenever the rulers get too independent or try to do something for thier countries. Here is a short flash on Saddam, well documented http://www.bushflash.com/thanks.html

Also the UBL reactionaries were trained and indoctrinated by the CIA, fighting Reagan`s cold war with the soviets. People who did not believe in Islam (most in the CIA) were telling these idiots that fighting the soviets was a sure ticket to heaven, and a million of them died fighting America`s war as disposable slaves of the master. Now all of a sudden the U.S. elite have developed amnesia and forgot how this monstrous distortion of Islam was created and forced upon the world by them.

Look at history as a guide, here is what the U.S. elite did in Vietnam, the end result in Iraq will not be much different,

Quote ``During the Vietnam War, US forces massacred whole villages; murdered prisoners of war; set up ``free fire zones`` in which all living things were subjected to annihilation; systematically bombed all edifices, including hospitals, schools, churches and destroyed croplands and work animals``The CIA director of that day, Richard Helms, admitted that 20,500 persons were assassinated by the CIA sponsored Phoenix Program``In Vietnam, the US dropped 8 million tons of bombs (leaving 21 million bomb craters), and nearly 400,000 tons of Napalm``The 18 million gallons of Agent Orange and other such chemical defoliants dumped from US planes poisoned hundreds of thousands of acres and worked their way into Vietnam``s food-chain, dramatically increasing the number of miscarriages, still births and birth deformities. The chemical warfare gave Vietnam one of the world``s highest rates of liver cancer, a disease virtually unknown in the country in prewar days. The continuous bombing and use of napalm and defoliants rendered two-fifths of Vietnam``s land unsuitable for forestry or agriculture.`` (Parenti 1989: 44)

And, while I`m at it, you can click here for info on the recent Cairo conference and one man`s take:

http://www.prospect.org/web/page.ww?section=root&name=ViewWeb&articleId=10662

Some excerpts:

Peace Talk
Shiites, Kurds and Sunnis are trying to sort things out in Iraq. Too bad the Bush administration isn’t in on the plan.
By Robert Dreyfuss
Web Exclusive: 11.22.05

``The fact that the United States is not trumpeting the importance of the Cairo peace talks, and the fact that Secretary of State Condoleezza Rice and other top-level officials did not attend it, are failures of diplomacy. Not only did scores of Iraqi political leaders travel to Cairo to talk face to face in a manner that could not have happened in Baghdad, but the meeting was also attended by heads of state, including Egypt’s President Hosni Mubarak and Algeria’s President Abdelaziz Bouteflika and by the foreign ministers of Saudi Arabia, Syria, and Iran. After three days of talks, the attendees decided to convene a full-fledged peace conference in Cairo in late February or early March.``

``The significance of the meeting is that it brought together Shiite and Kurdish officials with leaders of various Sunni factions, including some of those with close ties to the Iraqi resistance. Waiting in the wings were people representing a spectrum of groups currently battling the U.S. occupation. According to Aiham al-Sammarae, who served in Iraq’s 2003-2004 interim government, several leaders of insurgent groups went to Cairo to participate on the fringes of the meeting. Opposition from Iraq’s main Shiite parties made it impossible for them to attend the conference itself, but that may be the next step. In a surprising statement after the conference, the attendees condemned terrorism but added that “resistance is a legitimate right of all peoples.” The conferees clearly intended to marginalize the forces associated with Abu Musab al-Zarqawi’s Al Qaeda in Iraq while encouraging opposition forces led by Iraqi nationalists, Baathists, and former military officers to join the talks.``

Here`s yet another interesting item from today`s ``Washington Monthly``:

``November 23, 2005
BOMBING AL-JAZEERA....This goes right to the top of the ``seriously weird`` pile:

President Bush planned to bomb Arab TV station al-Jazeera in friendly Qatar, a ``Top Secret`` No 10 memo reveals.

But he was talked out of it at a White House summit by Tony Blair, who said it would provoke a worldwide backlash.``

Read the full story here:

http://www.washingtonmonthly.com/

According to news reports, the U.S. has pressured Iraqi leaders to call for a timetable for withdrawal of U.S. troops. This is seen as a cover - Bush doesn`t want the ``draw-down`` (already under way) to look like his administration is caving in to the Democrats. Now Iran has added its voice to that of the U.S. in calling for a timetable. These snippets from today`s news:

``Iraqi leaders have put persistent differences to one side and agreed on their first joint statement, calling for a timetable for the withdrawal of foreign troops from the country.``

``Iran`s spiritual leader, Ayatollah Ali Khamenei, has called on Iraqis to demand a timetable for the withdrawal of US troops, stressing that the US is responsible for Iraq`s suffering.``

This article is just an example of the numbed, illogical and thoroughly illinformed view of the desi americans who are as ``dumbed`` up as the rest of the the US.

The Evils that are purported and the boogeyman aka US style listed out in this article are just on the verge of being benign albeit with a deadly rancour. So here is the ``EXPERT`` first world assessment as preached by Mr Hamid. We got in there, oops, but now we musnt get out as the boogeyman from the three sides will just make this area more susceptible to ``TERRORIZM`` the z would be the new US spelling of the word offcourse. This was a disaster long before the US got into the Iraq, this was a disaster when Saddam came into power backed by the CIA, this was a disaster when the US planted the Shah which eventually resulted in the frency full iranian revolution.

And now when the US is in there, it still remains to be a disaster, the most important thing to the US forces is there own security. Saddam was a monster many times over, but he was also a coward and divided and ruled iraq with full support of the western ``well meaning`` folk. So now it doesnt matter whether the US forces stay or leave, civil war is on the way, the ghost of islamic orthodoxy has been released because unfortunately we muslims tend to only find refuge in the most right of our islamic ``inspired`` idealogies. So I assure you Mr Hamid, your First worldly comfort levels with white men with guns ruling the unruly Arabs as being the only solution, was never a solution to begin with.

The only heroes in this case and the sole victims of this war by the west upon their former puppet dictators are the people of iraq. Who with all the onslaught still live on and manage to continue their existence in some shape and form. They did it before at the time of the Mad dictator, they will somehow manage to go through the rest of the their days.

And they most certainly not as worked up about the white men with guns staying in order to have ``DEMOKRAZY`` as Bush keeps invoking the now redundant word in Iraq. Democracy is not a invocation that you can wish for another people and another place, it is an organic growth of a society which emerges in some ways from perilous times. However the West specially ensures that the Peril continues. Irar today, Iran tommorow and maybe Syria the day after.

#15 by Kulharee

[This is one funny logic,,, we killed a million people because you supplied us weapons.]

Yes, this is the same logic that caused Musharraf to lament the reluctance of donors to be generous with earthquake relief and aid, as if it was the West`s responsibility to oblige Pakistan.

#17 by malik99

[You will notice that of those 25, muslims were perpetrators in only one : The Armenian killings.]

Yup, the killings of Bengalis in East Pakistan doesn`t count as a genocide because apparently, the Bengalis weren`t humans to begin with.

Before people get too carried away in jokes, please reflect on the top 25 worst human killings of the last 400 years. You will notice that of those 25, muslims were perpetrators in only one : The Armenian killings. The rest of them, from WWI, WWII, Nazi holocaust, Spanish Inquisition, Khmer Rouge, Vietnam war etc etc, were all perpetrated by our gentle and civilized christians brothers.

So if we look at micro-level, then every bomb blast makes you feel that you have been living under siege because of Muslims. But if you look at macro-level, you will realize that the fathers/grandfathers of most of the wise-ass interactors on this board, who are cheering the killings in this world, were 2-bit slaves and ``babus`` serving their colonial masters not too long ago.

masadi #14

`` The U.S. went to ``liberate`` the Iraqis they say, ``liberate`` them from the face of the earth, killing over 100,000 and destroying the infrastructure of the entire country- that used to be the most developed out of all Arab countries in the 1970s before Reagan lured his ``man in Baghdad`` to start a bloody war with Iran that killed over a million- Of course, and then the U.S. tried to ``liberate`` both those countries by supplying both with weapons once the dynamic of the war had taken hold. ``

How can Reagan lure Saddam to start the war with Iran ? Even if Reagan could lure Saddam where does Saddam`s brain goes ? He is not dumb. He survived for 25 years before being deposed by US invasion. Iraq was a Soviet client state with Soviet equipped military. How does US have influence in such a country ?

Since the fall of the Shah the only weapons US sold Iran was the $50-100 million in weapons for the Iran-Contra deal.

# 14

Ladies and gentlemen, that was OBL reporting live from Rwanda where he is helping the oppressed as he did in Bosnia and Kabool. Last week one of his compatriots blew up a wedding party and sent some 50-60 Jordanians to hell, but the lady bomber is still available for future liberations without lubrication.

This is one funny logic,,, we killed a million people because you supplied us weapons.

No one stopped anyone from going and helping the Tutsi. Did someone stop someone?

I think all the anti-Americans should go and help the Tutsi to make themselves useful.

The U.S. went to ``liberate`` the Iraqis they say, ``liberate`` them from the face of the earth, killing over 100,000 and destroying the infrastructure of the entire country- that used to be the most developed out of all Arab countries in the 1970s before Reagan lured his ``man in Baghdad`` to start a bloody war with Iran that killed over a million- Of course, and then the U.S. tried to ``liberate`` both those countries by supplying both with weapons once the dynamic of the war had taken hold.

How about the U.S try to liberate its own oppressed folk, over 36 million in the U.S. suffer from chronic hunger, over 46 million in the U.S. have no health insurance or protection from catastrophic illness- Life expectancy for oppressed minority groups in several localities in the U.S. are worse off than that in Bangladesh, according to the New England Journal of Medicine- How come the U.S. didnt go and ``liberate`` the Tutsi when the Hutu in Rwanda slaughtered over 800,000 of them, or try to liberate the Iraqis when Rumsfeld went to shake Saddam`s hand shortly after he had used chemical weapons? This ``liberation`` business is a big farce. The Iraq adventure has backfired for the Bush administration, they still want a foothold in an oil rich region, and protection of Israel is a major concern for them as well. They don`t even hid these facts, they stated them openly in their letter written to Clinton in 1998- http://newamericancentury.org/iraqclintonletter.htm

For details on the illegality of the U.S. invasion and occupation (not liberation) of Iraq see http://iraq.rationalreality.com

Re: # 12

Dear Muj23, You haven`t seen me get angry yet. This is just a little appetizer. I am only warming up. Give me a little time.

Dear Malik,

You will note that I refrained from any approval of moving into Iraq when the US did. That was, obviously, a mistake made because of being hateful, emotional and un-thorough. However, those are the same emotions that are leading us towards the mistake of moving out now. The biggest price being paid for the occupation is not by the American forces, rather the Iraqi people. A response driven by emotions will only cause further chaos.

Regarding your comment about Nejad stating ``its one thing to say and its another thing to do,`` what do you think his policy would be if he was the sole superpower... just say and not do? I doubt it.

Dear Kulharee,

The magnitude of anger in your postings are scary. Destroying and getting destroyed is a result that is not just a lose-lose for everyone, it also makes our lives while we`re alive that much more miserable and uncertain.

burpinder #7

`` Iranians aren`t Arab, stupid. ``

They do stupid things from time to time

Re: # 7


>>Iranians aren`t Arab, stupid.<<<


Burpinder, Same thing.. They are all the same. When George Bush gets into Ahmadinjad’s and Asad’s behinds, he is not going to separate Arabs from Iranians or vice-versa. As far as we Americans are concerned, all enemies of Israel and United States are bloody Arabs. They all have the same Allah and Hazballa. If you have an issue with that, that is your problem. Nothing can be done about that. Some while ago Texans whacked a Sikh mistaking him as an Arab. Good on them.


Re: # 9
........I think the Kurds maybe the only population in the Middle East, which are relatively pro-USA............

Romair Sahib… Israel is not in Europe contrary to popular beliefs. USA didn’t go there to get a foothold for the oil. They now get less than a ¼ of their oil from that region, and it is going to become even less within the next decade. USA went there to help liberate people of that region that have lived under oppression and misery for most of their lives (it also went there becuse some Wahabi mofos didnt know how to fly planes properly and stop on red light). I don’t know if anyone is counting or not, to date, over 200 mass graves have been discovered in Iraq. The Wahabi inspired Sunni mofos are now shytting in their pants but were dead silent when Shais and Kurds were being butchered by their daddy Saddam. The worst mistake that the US did was to go and liberate Kuwait. They should have let these Arbi Sunni Wahabi morons kill one another.

It`s a damned if you do, and damned if you don`t situation, for the USA, in Iraq. If they stay, things will remain bad. And if they leave, things could become even worse. Quite a bit like what happened in Afghanistan, when the Soviets invaded..........

From a realpolitik view, if the USA still wants to achieve its original objectives of controlling oil, and establishing a furthur foothold in the area, in my opinion, they only have one option. It will be disastrous for Iraq, but beneficial for the USA:

They need to let the country federate or divide into three parts. The Shia part in the South will be in control of Iran, through Islamic Iraqi party. Sistani, himself, being an Irani Ayatollah. The Sunni part in the middle will remain volatile and filled with violence. Americans will remain hated in both these parts........

However, the northern Kurdish part is where Americans have popularity. Iraqi Kurdistan is basically a semi-country of its own. And is quite peaceful. It has its own flag and its own Peshmarga army. The USA could set base here. Give the Kurds ownership of some of the oil fields on the Sunni border territory. And let the Kurds, unofficially, separate. The USA will, thus, get a foothold in the Middle East, and will get the oil it wanted.........

Turkey has threatened to invade any independent Iraqi Kurdistan. Since Turkey has an independent Kurdish movement in its area, which it has brutally suppressed. It does not want any independent Kurdish country, anywhere. However, the new Turkish govt. has approached its Kurds. And the USA could threaten Turkey with a boycot of its support in EU membership, if Turkey threatened Iraqi Kurdistan..........

My guess this is the strategy the USA will follow now in the area. I read that Israel already has its rep in Iraqi Kurdistan. The USA could eventually vacate Iraq and keep forces only in Kurdistan. And work out a deal for oil with a provincial Kurdish govt, through US and British oil companies, which are still waiting anxiously to sign lucrative oil deals in Iraq............The USA could also get the Kurds to recognize Israel........I think the Kurds maybe the only population in the Middle East, which are relatively pro-USA............

In the process, Iraq will be, for all practical purposes, three countries. With a civil war of sorts going on inside...............The biggest beneficiaries of this whole war will be Kurds and Iranis.............The USA has, basically, lost the Iraq War. Now it is trying to save the Iraqi peace.

My guess is Sunni Iraq will be the next long-term base and recruiting ground for Al-Qaeda, and will like much of Afghanistan remain unstable for the foreseeable future...............And Irani influence in the Middle East will grow significantly...............

I completely agree with you, America should not leave Iraq at this time.

Re: # 6

Iranians aren`t Arab, stupid.

I think it is time to withdraw from Iraq and go and teach Syrians a lesson now, then make our way to Iran and other morons in the region. Oh I would love to see these Arab scumbags kiss sand.

Re: # 3
masadi...
You`ve stated the plain truth. And truth is generally simple and easy to understand, just as you`ve presented it.
Yes, chaos almost certainly will follow a U.S. pullout, but what is going on now? There is no evidence that the U.S. presence has reduced the chaos - in fact terrorist activity (unknown before the illegal U.S. invasion) and the likehood of civil war appear to increase with each day that the U.S. remains. Isn`t it abundantly clear that only Iraqis can solve Iraq`s problems? It won`t be pretty, and the result won`t please the U.S., but the sooner the U.S. leaves the sooner the Iraqis can begin the difficult process of recovery.

Apparently my PREVIOUS attempt was not able to stir up much emotion in most chowkies.

Therefore.. here is the appeal again..

I know of this young man Hafeez. He is a bonafide victim whose family is out on the road. Please send him the little you can ...

I have already checked the following (Considering chowkie sensibilities):

1- He has NO political affiliation

2- He has NO Jehadi/Islamist affiliation

3- He is a hardworking law-abiding citizen of the AJK who is working in Lahore as a guard/chowkidar + office boy for lowly pay.

4- He lost some of his family and ALL of his worldly belonging.


PLEASE - please -please help.

You know where to contact me.

The U.S. invasion of Iraq was illegal according to the UN Charter and International law. It has killed over 100,000 civilians according to research published in the Lancet and conducted by Johns Hopkins University, Columbia University and the Al-Mustansiriya University in Baghdad (reported by CNN, 10/24/`04). Also the probability that an Iraqi is going to get killed by violence went up 5800% after the U.S. invasion compared to before under Saddam, according to the same research. Note that saving people from being ``mass graved`` is one of the reasons that is still repeated by the Bush Administration to justify the invasion of Iraq, even though the probability that a person will get killed violently in Iraq is actually higher today than it was under Saddam. The Iraq war had nothing to do with 9/11, the cronies that now form part of the Bush top ranks had decided upon invading Iraq in 1998 and were writing Clinton, using the same excuses see their letter on their own website at http://newamericancentury.org/iraqclintonletter.htm

Military conflict as conducted by the U.S. is closely linked to its political and economic institutions, it is justified by them for home consumption using moral slogans like freedom and democracy, see http://war.asadi.org

Mujtaba writes ``Ahmadi Nejad to the Presidency, a leader probably more radical than Khomenei himself. His recent statement calling for Israel to be ``wiped off the map,`` show that he meant what he said in his campaign talk``

Mujtaba, its one thing to say and its another thing to do. Nijad has only talked about wiping out Israel. If your write-up were to hold true, Iraq (as we knew it) is ACTUALLY in the process of being wiped out by the zionist-evangelist axis.

So perhaps instead of lecturing on how a country which destroyed Iraq should stay in Iraq to save it, you should be talking about how it should beat the retreat - for both Iraqi and the american`s mothers` good who are paying the ultimate price for each day of this adventure - rather than `intellectuals` like you!

How stupid can one be ?

Explain to me how Zarqawi and his Sunni allies can triumph over Shites and Kurds when USA and Iran decide to back those groups