Monday, January 10, 2005
A Year of Neocon Rule
Following my previous arguments, I can only characterize the period between April 2003 and April 2004 as “Neocon Rule”.
During that year, they had the field almost totally to themselves. It was when all those ’mistakes’ were made. They definitely also had ultimate control of the US army, which – wittingly or unwittingly - took part in those mistakes.
One of the many astonishing features characterizing that year was the appointment of young inexperienced people to run a country the size California. Examples:
Simone Ledeen, daughter of Michael Ledeen, the Iran-Contra luminary, AEI scholar, and neocon strategist. She was 29, a freshly-minted M.B.A., with little to no experience in war-torn countries. But as an advisor for northern Iraq at the Ministry of Finance in Baghdad, she was, in essence, helping shape one quarter of that nation's economy.
Jay Hallen, a twenty-four-year-old who had applied for a job at the White House, was put in charge of launching Baghdad’s new stock exchange.
Scott Erwin, a twenty-one-year-old former intern to Dick Cheney, reported in an email home that “I am assisting Iraqis in the management of finances and budgeting for the domestic security forces.” The college senior’s favorite job before this one? “My time as an ice-cream truck driver.”
These are just a few examples. If you look more closely, the picture is actually even more frightening. I can understand about political appointees and all that, but to me this looks ridiculous. They were either green fools or they didn’t want it to work. Whether these people who initiated those theories are evil or idiots can be debated indefinitely.
In either case, they bear much of the blame for what happened.
Anyway, neocon theory failed in practice. It failed miserably because it is based on some “naïve” (not to say evil) assumptions about human nature and how people behave under extreme stress. People simply did not behave as those neocons predicted [why Iraqis did not is a long story in a country that was continuously habituated for more than 6000 years, the last stretch of foreign occupation alone lasting more than three times the entire history of the United States.] One day, decent Americans and the people of the world will come to appreciate and admire these people’s handling of the difficult times that they have been through due to those criminal policies… like I do now.
By April 2004 (with the failure of most of Bremer’s measures, the fiasco of the Iraq Governing Council, the outbreak of Abu Ghraib prisoner abuse scandal, the Fallujah-I massacre, the first Moqtada episode and the evident surge in “insurgency”) it was clear that the plan has failed. This must have been quite obvious to President Bush in April 2004. Elections were dangerously close by then. Hence,
The hurried attempt to produce a new UN resolution where the administration made some painful compromises to other countries at the UN Security Council and tried to accommodate all members and even Sistani to produce resolution 1546 (which, by the way, I still think was a good resolution… later distorted in application).
The dumping of Mr. Chalabi who was undoubtedly strongly backed by the neocons in the administration and his replacement by Mr. Allawi the CIA / State Department man.
Replacing Paul Bremer by Negroponte
Abandonment of attempts to privatize Iraqi industries em masse.
Apparently the State Department and/or the CIA were given the green light to take charge. Alas, it was far too late.
What is happening now, after the election, is a new chapter in US politics. We will have to wait a while before making a judgment. But the signs (Rice replacing Powel, Rumsfeld and Wolfowitz staying on, Gonzales appointment, etc.) are not that good.
You know what? There is not much that you can do about that moving train fuelled by a “solid” public mandate for the next four years. May God help us all.
What is truly sad in all this is that there are many well-meaning Americans still talking about “Freedom and Democracy” for the Iraqi people.
During that year, they had the field almost totally to themselves. It was when all those ’mistakes’ were made. They definitely also had ultimate control of the US army, which – wittingly or unwittingly - took part in those mistakes.
One of the many astonishing features characterizing that year was the appointment of young inexperienced people to run a country the size California. Examples:
Simone Ledeen, daughter of Michael Ledeen, the Iran-Contra luminary, AEI scholar, and neocon strategist. She was 29, a freshly-minted M.B.A., with little to no experience in war-torn countries. But as an advisor for northern Iraq at the Ministry of Finance in Baghdad, she was, in essence, helping shape one quarter of that nation's economy.
Jay Hallen, a twenty-four-year-old who had applied for a job at the White House, was put in charge of launching Baghdad’s new stock exchange.
Scott Erwin, a twenty-one-year-old former intern to Dick Cheney, reported in an email home that “I am assisting Iraqis in the management of finances and budgeting for the domestic security forces.” The college senior’s favorite job before this one? “My time as an ice-cream truck driver.”
These are just a few examples. If you look more closely, the picture is actually even more frightening. I can understand about political appointees and all that, but to me this looks ridiculous. They were either green fools or they didn’t want it to work. Whether these people who initiated those theories are evil or idiots can be debated indefinitely.
In either case, they bear much of the blame for what happened.
Anyway, neocon theory failed in practice. It failed miserably because it is based on some “naïve” (not to say evil) assumptions about human nature and how people behave under extreme stress. People simply did not behave as those neocons predicted [why Iraqis did not is a long story in a country that was continuously habituated for more than 6000 years, the last stretch of foreign occupation alone lasting more than three times the entire history of the United States.] One day, decent Americans and the people of the world will come to appreciate and admire these people’s handling of the difficult times that they have been through due to those criminal policies… like I do now.
By April 2004 (with the failure of most of Bremer’s measures, the fiasco of the Iraq Governing Council, the outbreak of Abu Ghraib prisoner abuse scandal, the Fallujah-I massacre, the first Moqtada episode and the evident surge in “insurgency”) it was clear that the plan has failed. This must have been quite obvious to President Bush in April 2004. Elections were dangerously close by then. Hence,
The hurried attempt to produce a new UN resolution where the administration made some painful compromises to other countries at the UN Security Council and tried to accommodate all members and even Sistani to produce resolution 1546 (which, by the way, I still think was a good resolution… later distorted in application).
The dumping of Mr. Chalabi who was undoubtedly strongly backed by the neocons in the administration and his replacement by Mr. Allawi the CIA / State Department man.
Replacing Paul Bremer by Negroponte
Abandonment of attempts to privatize Iraqi industries em masse.
Apparently the State Department and/or the CIA were given the green light to take charge. Alas, it was far too late.
What is happening now, after the election, is a new chapter in US politics. We will have to wait a while before making a judgment. But the signs (Rice replacing Powel, Rumsfeld and Wolfowitz staying on, Gonzales appointment, etc.) are not that good.
You know what? There is not much that you can do about that moving train fuelled by a “solid” public mandate for the next four years. May God help us all.
What is truly sad in all this is that there are many well-meaning Americans still talking about “Freedom and Democracy” for the Iraqi people.
# posted by Abu Khaleel @ 8:32 PM 
Comments:
Today's pundits have defined Iraq as Lebanon circa '75-80 redux. I know I'm being willfully obtuse. While I see many of the same elements, a few are critically missing: a ragtag PLO army decamped from Jordan, the Israeli retaliatory campaign and Khomeini in his ascendancy. Could civil war in Lebanon have been avoided or was it a civil war that had been long deferred? It was interesting to read that Lebanon was at war with itself in 1958 - the same year as coup d'etat in a neighboring country.
You have sons, you must have grandsons (or some on the way.) Do you want us to stop talking about Freedom & Democracy in Iraq? Wouldn't that be sadder still.
The young twits assigned to the CPA were never going to part of the long term solution - they were just window dressing. The Baathists insurgency knows the real players - they're taking you down one by one.
They bound him hand and foot and they blindfolded him. They beat and they burned his flesh. Once they had finished torturing him, they strangled him with an electric cord. As a final touch, they riddled his body with bullets.
_____________________________________________________________________
"I know I'm being willfully obtuse."
Well certainly obscure, anyway. Try making your point in plain English, that us ordinary mortals can understand.
"You have sons, you must have grandsons (or some on the way.) Do you want us to stop talking about Freedom & Democracy in Iraq?"
I’m sure Abu would love you to keep talking about it. What he and the rest of Iraq want is for you to stop trying to implement it the neo-con way. It just hasn’t worked, it isn’t going to work. Try reading what Abu is actually saying, not what you assume he is saying.
One of Riverbend’s earliest posts was, quoting from memory, about an Iraqi engineering firm she knew who, after the invasion, put in a tender to repair a damaged bridge. They cut costs to the bone and quoted $300,000 dollars. The contract went to an American firm, for many millions of dollars.
That was the neo-con way. Just as ignoring the local leadership from the start, and using too few troops for an occupation, and mis-using the ones they did have, and always being behind the play, reacting belatedly to events rather being proactive were all the neo-con way. The arrogant, unrealistic neo-con way.
And I’ll bet that bridge is still damaged.
Circular
_____________________________________________________________________
Wake up. Iraq is your country. Don't blame a few hundred American CPA employees--they were assisting ministries with with tens of thousands of employees. For example, the senior advisor to Iraq's oil ministry was a former CEO of Shell Oil Cmopany. He had about 12 Americans on his staff alongside about 200,000 Iraqis. What got done or did not get done WAS THE RESPONSIBILITY OF IRAQIS -- not Americans.
You seem to be falling to that common pattern I've seen where you don't take responsibility for your own actions.
Pretty soon we will be gone and I predict you guys won't be able to manager your affairs worth a shit. That's because your culture is broken and until you and your friends figure it out, it will remain broken. Corruption, tribalism, extremism, inequality of gender and race and religion, meshing of state and religion. They doom you to a failed future.
George Bush thought he could fix Iraq. That was a mistake.
I am hoping you guys will elect a government on January 30 that will formally request the US forces to leave your soil. Then we can be gone and you will have pissed away the only chance you guys have had for a decent future.
_____________________________________________________________________
Hello Abu Khaleel,
It seems unlikely that 'interns' also known as 'errand-boys' were actually directing the occupation. Rather rightist US thinktanks like the American Enterprise Institute, Heritage Foundation, Hoover Institution, etc.(ivory tower academics) and various US public relations firms (Rendon) did the actual policy relaying their instructions by cell phone to their stooges. Part of the continuing problems is that this system is still running Iraq into the ground. These 'thinktanks' are not 'brain-trusts' but actually special cushy jobs for toadies like Ledeen and loyal Republican political operators. They have given the US occupation its highly distinctive 'odor'.
_____________________________________________________________________
Goodness Gracious -
America is inherently hostile to Iraq. Not just the Neocons. Not just George W. Bush. America is hostile to Iraq.
Madeleine Albright, secretary of state under Bill Clinton was told that 500,000 Iraqi's died because of the sanctions. She said - we think overall its worth it.
Imagine how undemocratic the Iraq would have to be to consistently produce leaders who side with the Israelis against the Palestinians. (By the way, that's what's coming)
Now understand that this is how undemocratic the US would have to be to tolerate a potentially hostile power that might emerge in the middle east and conceivably threaten Israel. It wouldn't matter if that nation was democratic or not.
The difference is that the US is not now occupied by a hostile foreign power and can actually elevate leaders who represent the views of its citizens. George W. Bush is one example. Bill Clinton, who was no friend of Iraq or of any Arabs was another.
I have to agree with the conservative guy that the you are putting too much emphasis on the Neo-Cons. No American who could be elected president will tolerate a stable, prosperous, independent Iraq.
_____________________________________________________________________
Dear Abu Khaleel:
About this quote:
They bound him hand and foot and they blindfolded him. They beat and they burned his flesh. Once they had finished torturing him, they strangled him with an electric cord. As a final touch, they riddled his body with bullets.
Read this, about Negropont tasks in Iraq:
From El Salvador To Iraq: Death Squads Come In Waves.
As I said, the only words Americans is capable to undertand is R.P.G, I.E.D, A.K.47, Grad, Ababil, K.I.A, W.I.A, and so on. No more, no less.
Sad, but true.
By the way, I think Iraquis are just taking their responsabilities when they send these words to the occupiers.
_____________________________________________________________________
"Willfully obtuse" anonymous above,
Your message has been received and fully understood (including the reference to the late Mr. Hadi Salih). Thank you for the warning.
_____________________________________________________________________
Circular,
If the above sounds too cryptic to you, remember Icarus. It is actually my fault. I have been a bit reckless and crossed a couple of red lines!
________________________________________________
Fathom,
I truly find it hard to respond to your many comments and insinuations. The simple reason is that all the answers to all your questions are all already there in these blogs. All you need is some intelligence, a pair of eyes and some time to read. But evidently you are more fond of writing than you are of reading. I can tell you what is going on hear, I can tell you what I feel, I can write things and anecdotes that only an Iraqi living here can write, I have even written a couple of blogs in Arabic to dispel some doubt... but I cannot work the miracle of making the blind see.
_____________________________________________________________________
Looks like you spoke too soon, Abu: the Saddamists haven’t gone, they’ve just metamorphosed into teenage Anonymouses making cryptic ambiguous offerings in fractured English.
Ho hum.
Fathom, my little nautical measurement, you also seem to be lapsing into ambiguity. Without going back over your previous posts, I am left again wondering where you stand. It’s quite simple: this war was a mistake, and has been lost. Or it wasn’t, and hasn’t. Care to enlighten me on your stance, instead of pointlessly speculating about my identity?
(And Bruno? He went on holiday weeks ago - I should have such holidays!)
If you read the entire Blog you would be left in no doubt that Abu is exactly who he says he is, a literate educated secular Iraqi citizen of moderate means and views, trying to communicate with the world objectively and rationally. And succeeding as far as I am concerned.
(Perhaps he is a bit obsessive about neo-cons at the moment, but he’s entitled to be - it’s his country that they are ruining. Have ruined. And in my view they are, in any case, the legitimate elected representatives of the USA, and therefore the voice and essence of it. God help us all.)
Like you, I would like to know what’s going on in his street. But it’s his Blog, he decides whether he’s a reporter or a commentator.
Circular
(Sent before Abu’s post above)
_____________________________________________________________________
Sorry Abu, you've lost me there.
George Bush as Icarus, flying too near to the sun? That seems a serious abuse of mythology.
Red lines I'm completely baffled about.
Circular
_____________________________________________________________________
Well, I’m back.
fathom –
Of course you are correct in stating that the ‘bridges’ story and many like it are more to do with endemic corruption than specifically neoconservatives. However, I also do note that many of the key neocon players have had strong links in the past with the companies now being paid to ‘reconstruct’ or ‘develop’ Iraq. This has to me has the flavour of the corruption that some criticize the Iraqi culture of inherently possessing. Merely another sick irony in this whole long saga …
Oh, and I read “To be honest Abu reads more like Circular or Bruno than any of the other Iraqi bloggers.” As a compliment. It’s always nice to be compared to sensible and informed people.
6:21 Anonymous –
Let me get this right.
You invade a country whose culture you don’t understand, whose structures you dismantle, whose economy has been gutted in good part by your country and whose language you cannot friggin’ speak. You are unable to even switch the lights back on. Your troops are stationed all over the country.
Yet you have the gall to say “What got done or did not get done WAS THE RESPONSIBILITY OF IRAQIS -- not Americans.”
Excuse me, but you sound seriously deluded. The responsibility of Iraqis for this mess ended when YOUR troops swarmed over the border.
The fact that their ancient culture is different from yours does not make it wrong – merely different. Economically speaking, I can point out to you that Saddam, whatever his moral outrages, actually managed, prior to the Iran – Iraq war, to set up quite an efficient and modern state that was prospering.
“I am hoping you guys will elect a government on January 30 that will formally request the US forces to leave your soil. Then we can be gone and you will have pissed away the only chance you guys have had for a decent future.”
Hum. I can smell an American chauvanist at the other end of this statement, somebody who automatically assumes non – American is non – functional. Man! One wonders how on earth the inhabitants of Mesapotamia managed to struggle through the last 6000 years without your divine guidance. I guess the talk of Iraq being the cradle of civilization is just an urban legend then.
I put it to you that the Iraqis will manage just fine on their own, the same as they always have … unless, of course, the US manages to inflict the civil war on Iraq which it is striving for.
TallDave –
If you are still about, I resumed our little discussion from the “The Other side of the Story” thread.
--Bruno --
(Um, technical difficulties ... )
_____________________________________________________________________
Fathom,
I stand by every word I wrote on this and other blogs – now and in ten years’ time. But I didn’t say I was addressing every last American. That would be absurd. Yes, there are millions upon millions of decent, compassionate Americans who may not be aware. I am addressing those people. But like any other country, there are also idiots, lunatics and fanatics. I cannot aspire to have any hope reaching out and convincing those people.
Saddamists: In your reading, didn’t you come across my definition for Saddamists? Here it is again:
Definition: A Saddamist is one who takes any blame towards, or criticism of, the Administration or Government as hatred of the country! In this doctrine, the "head of state" is considered to be an embodiment of the whole country!
When you call someone an American Saddamist, it does not mean that you are calling all Americans Saddamists. Is this so difficult to comprehend?
At the expense of wasting everybody’s time, it will try to make it simple: When you call someone an American politician, does it mean that all Americans are politicians? Similarly, when I call someone an American idiot, does it mean that all Americans are idiots?
In this blog I have done quite a bit of complaining. Yes. But people are dying every hour of every day, violently… needlessly. People are suffering. People are afraid and insecure. Right this minute, millions of people in Iraq are cold and have no electricity in a country that holds one of the largest oil reserves in the world. If you do not wish to hear what your administration has done to this country why read this blog?
You will find no rosy pictures here though. In this blog I am warning about dangers and making people aware of wrongdoings being committed in their name and in the name of Freedom and Democracy. There are many other sites, larger sites, that do just that. Go to read their material. There are also other sites that give honest accounts of what is going on down the street, if you want detailed reports, go to them. Here, I write about what I feel is important.
I also cannot give you any false hope - not with current policies running our lives. Go to your preacher for that! Instead, I attempted to give proposals for SOLUTIONS. I have done it several times in this blog and I have dedicated an entire blog for the boring details of such a scheme. Didn’t you come across them in your reading?
I have also written a lot about my country trying to give people a glimpse of the nature of the country and the people and their culture. If you are not interested, it is not my fault; others (Americans and from other countries) seem to be. I write to them.
And yet, I have lots of hope within me in the resilience and integrity of many of my own people and in the decency and integrity of many of yours. I wouldn’t have written those words if I didn’t. Go back and read those words of mine that you quoted above, then search the entire blog and tell me what I have written that is not true to those words. Will you do that please? I am an ordinary person not associated in any way with any propaganda machine, Iraqi, American or otherwise. After you’ve done that, go over your own comments and you try and figure out what you are trying to say because I have been having difficulty “fathoming” you!
Here, and to give you equal space and save you the effort of searching, I have posted a few excerpts from your own comments:
__________________
Several thousand men who would rather be at home volunteered to go into that city [Fallujah!!!] and clean it up. Disassemble the bombs, detain or kill those with dreams of winning glory by slicing throats on arab television. WThese volunteers hunt down the monsters wipe up the blood, bury their own dead, rebuild the houses and lay down a peaceful calm so family's can return.
Why was Japan so much easier to rebuild then Iraq, because more than half of their population was destroyed. They didn't have much of a stomach to fight after that. And now Japan is a shining start among nations in the globalized economy.
We didn't half the population of Iraq, we went in like surgeons trying to cut out a cancer. It's a noble pursuit although impossible to execute by perfection. Fighting this war has cost us more lives, more money and more time.
…And it's worth a deeper look: Close down the borders between secure and insecure nations. And let those insecure nations fold in on themselves. Many of those folks want to return to the middle ages. Let's let them do it and perhaps they will evolve on their own to a more peaceful place. I would feel sad for the progressive thinkers trapped in a cut off backsliding civilization.
Of course this only works if we can totally seal the seams where the two worlds meet.
And then you have the native Iraqi men "resisting an occupier" behaving in accordance with an ancient tribal mentality that supports revenge killings etc.
So while the argument of WMD falls like a sad empty paper cup, the argument of taking the fight to them before they can take the fight to us now seems to be a good rationale considering the congregation of enemies and terrorist resources dedicated to that region.
don't look at Iraq in a vaccuum I look at it as a part of a greater threat to western civilization spanning from Saudi Arabia, Syria, Iran, North Korea, Waziristan, From the former soviet states to the far east. Iraq seems, in my humble opinion, a good initial foothold in pulling the reigns on some violent and chaotic nation states. A sandbox where we will learn (and make some mistakes) how to pull chaotic unstable nations into the global fold.
My personal circumstance is I was put on the frontline on 9/11 and I never hurt anybody. I want my Children to live in a world at least as peaceful as the one I grew up in.
____________________
Sir, this blog is not addressed to you. I’m sorry but I can’t help you.
_____________________________________________________________________
Bruno,
Welcome back. I have just read your other post. You sound to be fresh and crisp from your holiday!
Fathom,
Please let me know when you have read my response so that I can delete your post and mine. They are too long and off-topic. People come here expecting a discussion of the post itself, not our bickering.
_____________________________________________________________________
Hi, This idea may sound reaaaallllly crazy, but what if the so called 'patriotic freedom fighter insurgents' stopped chopping off heads, murdering civilians, destroying infrastructure, etc.?
Would that really be so terrible? What are they risking? Is there something wrong with democracy, reconciliation, reconstruction, stability, investment, progress, prosperity, peace, etc.?!?
It just doesn't make sense. Unless of course they aren't such quaint 'freedom fighters.' Maybe they chop off heads and murder because they like the chaos? Maybe they hope it will allow them to take power for 'themselves' at the expense of everyone else? Maybe their only hope to regain power is explosive escalation that causes US to pull out? Or maybe they promote insecurity exactly because they want the US to stay so they will have a recruiting tool and something to shoot at?
Come on folks. Most of you seem intelligent. Can any of you think of legitimate reasons why the 'freedom fighters' are causing so much slaughter and destruction and TERRORIZING the Iraqi people?
_____________________________________________________________________
Anonymous No 351 (why can’t you people give yourselves names? It’s not hard. Just type a name. Arthur? Betty? Anything?)
Further to Bruno:
"Come on folks. Most of you seem intelligent. Can any of you think of legitimate reasons why the 'freedom fighters' are causing so much slaughter and destruction and TERRORIZING the Iraqi people?"
I wouldn’t call myself intelligent, but I can think of a few reasons. For example:
Roadside IED’s aimed at US convoys and patrols aren’t terrorizing the Iraqi people. They’re terrifying the foreign invaders. Same goes for blowing up mess tents in enemy forts.
Targetting "puppet" troops at recruitment and training locales isn’t terrorizing the Iraqi people. It’s terrifying those who collaborate with the foreign invaders.
Attacking anyone associated with the Interim Government and the upcoming fake elections isn’t terrorising the Iraqi people. It’s terrifying those who think there’s any "legitimacy" in an administration headed by a former traitor who was in the pay of a foreign Intelligence service for 30 years, and is a citizen of a foreign country.
And so on. It’s all a matter of perspective, but the general lesson of history is that the guerrillas usually win in the long run, unless they can be separated from the people among whom they "swim like a fish," to quote Chairman Mao.
If you read this Blog with "intelligent" attention, you would see that the author’s thesis is that the guerillas could have been forestalled, and separated from the people, if the US had implemented genuinely benevolent and constructive policies in Iraq after their successful invasion. Instead you acted with a mixture of brutality, idiot confusion, and blatant self-interest, and thereby created the current situation. Which you now can’t solve or get yourselves out of.
And consider that Bruno and I, as observers neutral to this conflict, aren’t particularly "on the side" of the insurgents, or approving of their actions. We’re just appalled by stupidity. And we didn’t elect the architect of this mess.
Go on, sweetie, tell us yer name. Just as long as it’s not "Fathom."
Circular
_____________________________________________________________________
Hello Circular,
"Roadside IED’s aimed at US convoys and patrols aren’t terrorizing the Iraqi people. They’re terrifying the foreign invaders. Same goes for blowing up mess tents in enemy forts."
Really?[So why did Al-Sistani issue a fatwa against planting any bombs in streets last year?]
"Targetting "puppet" troops at recruitment and training locales isn’t terrorizing the Iraqi people. It’s terrifying those who collaborate with the foreign invaders."
Wow, no kidding?[The 100,000+ ING, IP aren't people?]
"Attacking anyone associated with the Interim Government and the upcoming fake elections isn’t terrorising the Iraqi people."
Well, golly,gee![Then all the Sunnis who are refusing to vote because it is too dangerous are lying?]
"It’s terrifying those who think there’s any "legitimacy" in an administration headed by a former traitor who was in the pay of a foreign Intelligence service for 30 years, and is a citizen of a foreign country."
"You don't say!
Circular, you've come full circle. And they say Sufi dervishes never get dizzy.
So the Iraqi people are not terrorized by the insurgents!
So Allawi's legitamcy is more terrifying than Ansar-Al-Sunnah![I'm sure Ansar will be highly offended!]
Let me , an enemy of Bush's occupation and a lover of the truth invite you to retract these truly heartless, and transparently untrue statements(exaggerations?).
The insurgents are terrorists of a particularly vicious kind and are totally indefensible. The occupation is onerous to Iraqis and will not secure peace, which is why I oppose it. Here, my enemy's enemy is not my friend and never will be.
_____________________________________________________________________
Anonymous 7.42 above:
See what I mean, I don’t know whether you are a new voice or one of the anonymous contributors above. It is difficult to conduct a dialogue when you don’t know who you are talking to.
Your final paragraph "Let me, an enemy of Bush's occupation and a lover of the truth invite you to retract these truly heartless, and transparently untrue statements(exaggerations?).
The insurgents are terrorists of a particularly vicious kind and are totally indefensible. The occupation is onerous to Iraqis and will not secure peace, which is why I oppose it" seems to leave you firmly straddling the fence, making random noise for the sake of it and developing a pain in the crotch. Perhaps you really are Fathom after all - that certainly seems to be his speciality at the moment.
Look, try it this way: repeat after me
Terrorists are terrible
Terrorists are terrible
Terrorists are terrible
then say
The US has made a complete mess of its conquest of Iraq
The US has made a complete mess of its conquest of Iraq
The US has made a complete mess of its conquest of Iraq
These two statements don’t contradict one another. Both are true. So what is the point, every time I make the second statement, of just repeating the first one. It gets us nowhere.
What needs to happen is ...
What needs to happen is ...
What needs to happen is ...
?
?
?
Patient Circular
_____________________________________________________________________
Hello PC,
'...seems to leave you firmly straddling the fence, making random noise for the sake of it and developing a pain in the crotch. Perhaps you really are Fathom after all - that certainly seems to be his speciality at the moment.'
me..Fathom?You wound me to the quick!
You suggest that if I hate terror I must back up Bush in his counterterror campaign. In this case his first choice 'cure' is very bad, like amputation or blood letting.
Do you mind if I look for another opinion?
'So what is the point, every time I make the second statement, of just repeating the first one. It gets us nowhere.' Yes, it does sound like 'I told you so'.You remind me of the guy who loves to eat spicey food and gets an ulcer and asks the doc 'how can I keep on eating what I want and the answer is, 'you can't, you must cut it out..'
'What needs to happen is ...'
End the occupation, end meddling in Iraq and threatening Islamic countries, bring the troops home and if possible impeach manifest aggressor Bush.
Now where's that retraction?
_____________________________________________________________________
The Al-Zarqawi group was a CIA creation. The beheading's Internet show was just created after the Abu Ghruraib scandal, in order to oppose it in the Americans hearts and minds. This is called psychological operation - PSYOP - in warfare.
Yes, Charles, your government is that evil.
_____________________________________________________________________
This article is off-topic. I recall you mentioning farming. This article is beautiful written. It’s about renewal. Paradise Lost?On the topic at hand:
Even if the CPA had been perfectly executed, perfectly planned, well thought out, staffed with the most brilliant and the most competent, does not mean the insurgency of Ba’athist diehards and militant Islamists from neighboring countries would not have pursued their goals of intimidation, racketeering, terrorism, assassinations, car bombs, suicide bombings and the destruction of the country’s infrastructure. Saddam Hussein is a formidable enemy. Al Qaeda is a formidable enemy. We could argue whether Saddam Hussein was a spent force, thoroughly contained, who posed no security threat to the United States. We could argue whether Hussein and Al Qaeda were ever linked prior to the invasion of Iraq. We could argue whether deposing Saddam only to witness his followers wage war on their own countrymen to retain wealth and power was too high of a price to pay. We could argue whether continuing economic sanctions, inspections and the flyover zones for the next 20-30 years would have been the more merciful route.
I’m reminded of Kurosawa’s 1950’s film Rashômon when trying to discern the truth on Iraq:“Rashomon isn't about determining a chronology of what happened in the woods. It's not about culpability or innocence. Instead, it focuses on something far more profound and thought-provoking: the inability of any one man to know the truth, no matter how clearly he thinks he sees things. Perspective distorts reality and makes the absolute truth unknowable.” reviewerOn my reading list for tonight:
Grand StrategyNorman Podheretz, WWIVMs. Willfully Obtuse
_____________________________________________________________________
Charles:
Arrogantly, as most Americans, you said:
There are some pretty bad folks on this planet who prey upon the ignorance of others.
And as much as I am the supposedly ignorant guy and you are the supposedly intelligent one, the better I can do is to leave you alone with your supposedly intelligence...
Another proof for what I said: the only words Americans are capable to understand is IED, VIED, AK, Grad, Ababil, KIA, WIA, etecetera...
But I think I am wrong in this over-generalization and Abu Khaleel is right in writing his words to intelligent Americans and to us ... as Iraqui Resistance is right in sending the above words to the American military and their puppets in Iraq.
Alvaro Frota
------------
PS to Charles: Have you not a clue in what American Government did in Brazil, Chile, El Salvador, Nicaragua, Guatemala and Latin American in general?
_____________________________________________________________________
From Circular
Charles, thank you for giving yourself a name. It facilitates dialogue, which is the purpose of this Comments area. However, could I suggest that you not take this as a licence to flood the Blog with rather impenetrable posts - the author of the Blog has already displayed his displeasure and dismay at what might be termed "fathomitis," a determination to espouse obscurity for its own state and to avoid anything approaching a frank and succinct statement of position: are you in danger of contracting this unfortunate condition?
As far as I can make out, your basic position is that Iraqis should be more grateful to the USA for bringing them the opportunity to develop "democracy." Can you confirm that this is a correct interpretation of what you are trying to say? Further discussion could then take place.
It is generally speaking a courtesy to the author of the Blog to stick to his chosen topic of discussion. With regard to the actual subject of this chapter, "A Year of Neocon Rule," your most relevant comment appears to be, "Sure mistakes were made and are being made."
Could we have that once again, louder, with real feeling? Isn’t that what the whole discussion is about? How much mistakes is too much mistakes? What is needed before you will admit that your fubar has become a FUBAR? According to reports they’re burning the midnight oil in Washington trying to find an "exit strategy." Chimpy has finally had to admit that his declared reasons for rushing into war were all wrong. And you’re still saying it was all righteous?
_____________________________________________________________________
line 5: ... its own sake ... not ...state ...
_____________________________________________________________________
Bruno,
If your figures are correct, then by invading Iraq the US may have doomed the Iraqi Christian communities.
Be Well,
_____________________________________________________________________
Post a Comment
<< Home
Today's pundits have defined Iraq as Lebanon circa '75-80 redux. I know I'm being willfully obtuse. While I see many of the same elements, a few are critically missing: a ragtag PLO army decamped from Jordan, the Israeli retaliatory campaign and Khomeini in his ascendancy. Could civil war in Lebanon have been avoided or was it a civil war that had been long deferred? It was interesting to read that Lebanon was at war with itself in 1958 - the same year as coup d'etat in a neighboring country.
You have sons, you must have grandsons (or some on the way.) Do you want us to stop talking about Freedom & Democracy in Iraq? Wouldn't that be sadder still.
The young twits assigned to the CPA were never going to part of the long term solution - they were just window dressing. The Baathists insurgency knows the real players - they're taking you down one by one.
They bound him hand and foot and they blindfolded him. They beat and they burned his flesh. Once they had finished torturing him, they strangled him with an electric cord. As a final touch, they riddled his body with bullets.
# posted by 
: 10/1/05 10:40 PM
: 10/1/05 10:40 PM "I know I'm being willfully obtuse."
Well certainly obscure, anyway. Try making your point in plain English, that us ordinary mortals can understand.
"You have sons, you must have grandsons (or some on the way.) Do you want us to stop talking about Freedom & Democracy in Iraq?"
I’m sure Abu would love you to keep talking about it. What he and the rest of Iraq want is for you to stop trying to implement it the neo-con way. It just hasn’t worked, it isn’t going to work. Try reading what Abu is actually saying, not what you assume he is saying.
One of Riverbend’s earliest posts was, quoting from memory, about an Iraqi engineering firm she knew who, after the invasion, put in a tender to repair a damaged bridge. They cut costs to the bone and quoted $300,000 dollars. The contract went to an American firm, for many millions of dollars.
That was the neo-con way. Just as ignoring the local leadership from the start, and using too few troops for an occupation, and mis-using the ones they did have, and always being behind the play, reacting belatedly to events rather being proactive were all the neo-con way. The arrogant, unrealistic neo-con way.
And I’ll bet that bridge is still damaged.
Circular
# posted by : 11/1/05 1:46 AM
: 11/1/05 1:46 AM Wake up. Iraq is your country. Don't blame a few hundred American CPA employees--they were assisting ministries with with tens of thousands of employees. For example, the senior advisor to Iraq's oil ministry was a former CEO of Shell Oil Cmopany. He had about 12 Americans on his staff alongside about 200,000 Iraqis. What got done or did not get done WAS THE RESPONSIBILITY OF IRAQIS -- not Americans.
You seem to be falling to that common pattern I've seen where you don't take responsibility for your own actions.
Pretty soon we will be gone and I predict you guys won't be able to manager your affairs worth a shit. That's because your culture is broken and until you and your friends figure it out, it will remain broken. Corruption, tribalism, extremism, inequality of gender and race and religion, meshing of state and religion. They doom you to a failed future.
George Bush thought he could fix Iraq. That was a mistake.
I am hoping you guys will elect a government on January 30 that will formally request the US forces to leave your soil. Then we can be gone and you will have pissed away the only chance you guys have had for a decent future.
# posted by : 11/1/05 6:21 AM
: 11/1/05 6:21 AM Hello Abu Khaleel,
It seems unlikely that 'interns' also known as 'errand-boys' were actually directing the occupation. Rather rightist US thinktanks like the American Enterprise Institute, Heritage Foundation, Hoover Institution, etc.(ivory tower academics) and various US public relations firms (Rendon) did the actual policy relaying their instructions by cell phone to their stooges. Part of the continuing problems is that this system is still running Iraq into the ground. These 'thinktanks' are not 'brain-trusts' but actually special cushy jobs for toadies like Ledeen and loyal Republican political operators. They have given the US occupation its highly distinctive 'odor'.
# posted by : 11/1/05 7:07 AM
: 11/1/05 7:07 AM Goodness Gracious -
America is inherently hostile to Iraq. Not just the Neocons. Not just George W. Bush. America is hostile to Iraq.
Madeleine Albright, secretary of state under Bill Clinton was told that 500,000 Iraqi's died because of the sanctions. She said - we think overall its worth it.
Imagine how undemocratic the Iraq would have to be to consistently produce leaders who side with the Israelis against the Palestinians. (By the way, that's what's coming)
Now understand that this is how undemocratic the US would have to be to tolerate a potentially hostile power that might emerge in the middle east and conceivably threaten Israel. It wouldn't matter if that nation was democratic or not.
The difference is that the US is not now occupied by a hostile foreign power and can actually elevate leaders who represent the views of its citizens. George W. Bush is one example. Bill Clinton, who was no friend of Iraq or of any Arabs was another.
I have to agree with the conservative guy that the you are putting too much emphasis on the Neo-Cons. No American who could be elected president will tolerate a stable, prosperous, independent Iraq.
# posted by : 11/1/05 10:35 AM
: 11/1/05 10:35 AM Dear Abu Khaleel:
About this quote:
They bound him hand and foot and they blindfolded him. They beat and they burned his flesh. Once they had finished torturing him, they strangled him with an electric cord. As a final touch, they riddled his body with bullets.
Read this, about Negropont tasks in Iraq:
From El Salvador To Iraq: Death Squads Come In Waves.
As I said, the only words Americans is capable to undertand is R.P.G, I.E.D, A.K.47, Grad, Ababil, K.I.A, W.I.A, and so on. No more, no less.
Sad, but true.
By the way, I think Iraquis are just taking their responsabilities when they send these words to the occupiers.
"Willfully obtuse" anonymous above,
Your message has been received and fully understood (including the reference to the late Mr. Hadi Salih). Thank you for the warning.
Circular,
If the above sounds too cryptic to you, remember Icarus. It is actually my fault. I have been a bit reckless and crossed a couple of red lines!
________________________________________________
Fathom,
I truly find it hard to respond to your many comments and insinuations. The simple reason is that all the answers to all your questions are all already there in these blogs. All you need is some intelligence, a pair of eyes and some time to read. But evidently you are more fond of writing than you are of reading. I can tell you what is going on hear, I can tell you what I feel, I can write things and anecdotes that only an Iraqi living here can write, I have even written a couple of blogs in Arabic to dispel some doubt... but I cannot work the miracle of making the blind see.
Looks like you spoke too soon, Abu: the Saddamists haven’t gone, they’ve just metamorphosed into teenage Anonymouses making cryptic ambiguous offerings in fractured English.
Ho hum.
Fathom, my little nautical measurement, you also seem to be lapsing into ambiguity. Without going back over your previous posts, I am left again wondering where you stand. It’s quite simple: this war was a mistake, and has been lost. Or it wasn’t, and hasn’t. Care to enlighten me on your stance, instead of pointlessly speculating about my identity?
(And Bruno? He went on holiday weeks ago - I should have such holidays!)
If you read the entire Blog you would be left in no doubt that Abu is exactly who he says he is, a literate educated secular Iraqi citizen of moderate means and views, trying to communicate with the world objectively and rationally. And succeeding as far as I am concerned.
(Perhaps he is a bit obsessive about neo-cons at the moment, but he’s entitled to be - it’s his country that they are ruining. Have ruined. And in my view they are, in any case, the legitimate elected representatives of the USA, and therefore the voice and essence of it. God help us all.)
Like you, I would like to know what’s going on in his street. But it’s his Blog, he decides whether he’s a reporter or a commentator.
Circular
(Sent before Abu’s post above)
# posted by : 11/1/05 2:28 PM
: 11/1/05 2:28 PM Sorry Abu, you've lost me there.
George Bush as Icarus, flying too near to the sun? That seems a serious abuse of mythology.
Red lines I'm completely baffled about.
Circular
# posted by : 11/1/05 3:01 PM
: 11/1/05 3:01 PM Well, I’m back.
fathom –
Of course you are correct in stating that the ‘bridges’ story and many like it are more to do with endemic corruption than specifically neoconservatives. However, I also do note that many of the key neocon players have had strong links in the past with the companies now being paid to ‘reconstruct’ or ‘develop’ Iraq. This has to me has the flavour of the corruption that some criticize the Iraqi culture of inherently possessing. Merely another sick irony in this whole long saga …
Oh, and I read “To be honest Abu reads more like Circular or Bruno than any of the other Iraqi bloggers.” As a compliment. It’s always nice to be compared to sensible and informed people.
6:21 Anonymous –
Let me get this right.
You invade a country whose culture you don’t understand, whose structures you dismantle, whose economy has been gutted in good part by your country and whose language you cannot friggin’ speak. You are unable to even switch the lights back on. Your troops are stationed all over the country.
Yet you have the gall to say “What got done or did not get done WAS THE RESPONSIBILITY OF IRAQIS -- not Americans.”
Excuse me, but you sound seriously deluded. The responsibility of Iraqis for this mess ended when YOUR troops swarmed over the border.
The fact that their ancient culture is different from yours does not make it wrong – merely different. Economically speaking, I can point out to you that Saddam, whatever his moral outrages, actually managed, prior to the Iran – Iraq war, to set up quite an efficient and modern state that was prospering.
“I am hoping you guys will elect a government on January 30 that will formally request the US forces to leave your soil. Then we can be gone and you will have pissed away the only chance you guys have had for a decent future.”
Hum. I can smell an American chauvanist at the other end of this statement, somebody who automatically assumes non – American is non – functional. Man! One wonders how on earth the inhabitants of Mesapotamia managed to struggle through the last 6000 years without your divine guidance. I guess the talk of Iraq being the cradle of civilization is just an urban legend then.
I put it to you that the Iraqis will manage just fine on their own, the same as they always have … unless, of course, the US manages to inflict the civil war on Iraq which it is striving for.
TallDave –
If you are still about, I resumed our little discussion from the “The Other side of the Story” thread.
--Bruno --
(Um, technical difficulties ... )
# posted by : 11/1/05 5:21 PM
: 11/1/05 5:21 PM Fathom,
I stand by every word I wrote on this and other blogs – now and in ten years’ time. But I didn’t say I was addressing every last American. That would be absurd. Yes, there are millions upon millions of decent, compassionate Americans who may not be aware. I am addressing those people. But like any other country, there are also idiots, lunatics and fanatics. I cannot aspire to have any hope reaching out and convincing those people.
Saddamists: In your reading, didn’t you come across my definition for Saddamists? Here it is again:
Definition: A Saddamist is one who takes any blame towards, or criticism of, the Administration or Government as hatred of the country! In this doctrine, the "head of state" is considered to be an embodiment of the whole country!
When you call someone an American Saddamist, it does not mean that you are calling all Americans Saddamists. Is this so difficult to comprehend?
At the expense of wasting everybody’s time, it will try to make it simple: When you call someone an American politician, does it mean that all Americans are politicians? Similarly, when I call someone an American idiot, does it mean that all Americans are idiots?
In this blog I have done quite a bit of complaining. Yes. But people are dying every hour of every day, violently… needlessly. People are suffering. People are afraid and insecure. Right this minute, millions of people in Iraq are cold and have no electricity in a country that holds one of the largest oil reserves in the world. If you do not wish to hear what your administration has done to this country why read this blog?
You will find no rosy pictures here though. In this blog I am warning about dangers and making people aware of wrongdoings being committed in their name and in the name of Freedom and Democracy. There are many other sites, larger sites, that do just that. Go to read their material. There are also other sites that give honest accounts of what is going on down the street, if you want detailed reports, go to them. Here, I write about what I feel is important.
I also cannot give you any false hope - not with current policies running our lives. Go to your preacher for that! Instead, I attempted to give proposals for SOLUTIONS. I have done it several times in this blog and I have dedicated an entire blog for the boring details of such a scheme. Didn’t you come across them in your reading?
I have also written a lot about my country trying to give people a glimpse of the nature of the country and the people and their culture. If you are not interested, it is not my fault; others (Americans and from other countries) seem to be. I write to them.
And yet, I have lots of hope within me in the resilience and integrity of many of my own people and in the decency and integrity of many of yours. I wouldn’t have written those words if I didn’t. Go back and read those words of mine that you quoted above, then search the entire blog and tell me what I have written that is not true to those words. Will you do that please? I am an ordinary person not associated in any way with any propaganda machine, Iraqi, American or otherwise. After you’ve done that, go over your own comments and you try and figure out what you are trying to say because I have been having difficulty “fathoming” you!
Here, and to give you equal space and save you the effort of searching, I have posted a few excerpts from your own comments:
__________________
Several thousand men who would rather be at home volunteered to go into that city [Fallujah!!!] and clean it up. Disassemble the bombs, detain or kill those with dreams of winning glory by slicing throats on arab television. WThese volunteers hunt down the monsters wipe up the blood, bury their own dead, rebuild the houses and lay down a peaceful calm so family's can return.
Why was Japan so much easier to rebuild then Iraq, because more than half of their population was destroyed. They didn't have much of a stomach to fight after that. And now Japan is a shining start among nations in the globalized economy.
We didn't half the population of Iraq, we went in like surgeons trying to cut out a cancer. It's a noble pursuit although impossible to execute by perfection. Fighting this war has cost us more lives, more money and more time.
…And it's worth a deeper look: Close down the borders between secure and insecure nations. And let those insecure nations fold in on themselves. Many of those folks want to return to the middle ages. Let's let them do it and perhaps they will evolve on their own to a more peaceful place. I would feel sad for the progressive thinkers trapped in a cut off backsliding civilization.
Of course this only works if we can totally seal the seams where the two worlds meet.
And then you have the native Iraqi men "resisting an occupier" behaving in accordance with an ancient tribal mentality that supports revenge killings etc.
So while the argument of WMD falls like a sad empty paper cup, the argument of taking the fight to them before they can take the fight to us now seems to be a good rationale considering the congregation of enemies and terrorist resources dedicated to that region.
don't look at Iraq in a vaccuum I look at it as a part of a greater threat to western civilization spanning from Saudi Arabia, Syria, Iran, North Korea, Waziristan, From the former soviet states to the far east. Iraq seems, in my humble opinion, a good initial foothold in pulling the reigns on some violent and chaotic nation states. A sandbox where we will learn (and make some mistakes) how to pull chaotic unstable nations into the global fold.
My personal circumstance is I was put on the frontline on 9/11 and I never hurt anybody. I want my Children to live in a world at least as peaceful as the one I grew up in.
____________________
Sir, this blog is not addressed to you. I’m sorry but I can’t help you.
Bruno,
Welcome back. I have just read your other post. You sound to be fresh and crisp from your holiday!
Fathom,
Please let me know when you have read my response so that I can delete your post and mine. They are too long and off-topic. People come here expecting a discussion of the post itself, not our bickering.
Hi, This idea may sound reaaaallllly crazy, but what if the so called 'patriotic freedom fighter insurgents' stopped chopping off heads, murdering civilians, destroying infrastructure, etc.?
Would that really be so terrible? What are they risking? Is there something wrong with democracy, reconciliation, reconstruction, stability, investment, progress, prosperity, peace, etc.?!?
It just doesn't make sense. Unless of course they aren't such quaint 'freedom fighters.' Maybe they chop off heads and murder because they like the chaos? Maybe they hope it will allow them to take power for 'themselves' at the expense of everyone else? Maybe their only hope to regain power is explosive escalation that causes US to pull out? Or maybe they promote insecurity exactly because they want the US to stay so they will have a recruiting tool and something to shoot at?
Come on folks. Most of you seem intelligent. Can any of you think of legitimate reasons why the 'freedom fighters' are causing so much slaughter and destruction and TERRORIZING the Iraqi people?
# posted by : 12/1/05 6:10 AM
: 12/1/05 6:10 AM Anonymous No 351 (why can’t you people give yourselves names? It’s not hard. Just type a name. Arthur? Betty? Anything?)
Further to Bruno:
"Come on folks. Most of you seem intelligent. Can any of you think of legitimate reasons why the 'freedom fighters' are causing so much slaughter and destruction and TERRORIZING the Iraqi people?"
I wouldn’t call myself intelligent, but I can think of a few reasons. For example:
Roadside IED’s aimed at US convoys and patrols aren’t terrorizing the Iraqi people. They’re terrifying the foreign invaders. Same goes for blowing up mess tents in enemy forts.
Targetting "puppet" troops at recruitment and training locales isn’t terrorizing the Iraqi people. It’s terrifying those who collaborate with the foreign invaders.
Attacking anyone associated with the Interim Government and the upcoming fake elections isn’t terrorising the Iraqi people. It’s terrifying those who think there’s any "legitimacy" in an administration headed by a former traitor who was in the pay of a foreign Intelligence service for 30 years, and is a citizen of a foreign country.
And so on. It’s all a matter of perspective, but the general lesson of history is that the guerrillas usually win in the long run, unless they can be separated from the people among whom they "swim like a fish," to quote Chairman Mao.
If you read this Blog with "intelligent" attention, you would see that the author’s thesis is that the guerillas could have been forestalled, and separated from the people, if the US had implemented genuinely benevolent and constructive policies in Iraq after their successful invasion. Instead you acted with a mixture of brutality, idiot confusion, and blatant self-interest, and thereby created the current situation. Which you now can’t solve or get yourselves out of.
And consider that Bruno and I, as observers neutral to this conflict, aren’t particularly "on the side" of the insurgents, or approving of their actions. We’re just appalled by stupidity. And we didn’t elect the architect of this mess.
Go on, sweetie, tell us yer name. Just as long as it’s not "Fathom."
Circular
# posted by : 12/1/05 1:26 PM
: 12/1/05 1:26 PM Hello Circular,
"Roadside IED’s aimed at US convoys and patrols aren’t terrorizing the Iraqi people. They’re terrifying the foreign invaders. Same goes for blowing up mess tents in enemy forts."
Really?[So why did Al-Sistani issue a fatwa against planting any bombs in streets last year?]
"Targetting "puppet" troops at recruitment and training locales isn’t terrorizing the Iraqi people. It’s terrifying those who collaborate with the foreign invaders."
Wow, no kidding?[The 100,000+ ING, IP aren't people?]
"Attacking anyone associated with the Interim Government and the upcoming fake elections isn’t terrorising the Iraqi people."
Well, golly,gee![Then all the Sunnis who are refusing to vote because it is too dangerous are lying?]
"It’s terrifying those who think there’s any "legitimacy" in an administration headed by a former traitor who was in the pay of a foreign Intelligence service for 30 years, and is a citizen of a foreign country."
"You don't say!
Circular, you've come full circle. And they say Sufi dervishes never get dizzy.
So the Iraqi people are not terrorized by the insurgents!
So Allawi's legitamcy is more terrifying than Ansar-Al-Sunnah![I'm sure Ansar will be highly offended!]
Let me , an enemy of Bush's occupation and a lover of the truth invite you to retract these truly heartless, and transparently untrue statements(exaggerations?).
The insurgents are terrorists of a particularly vicious kind and are totally indefensible. The occupation is onerous to Iraqis and will not secure peace, which is why I oppose it. Here, my enemy's enemy is not my friend and never will be.
# posted by : 12/1/05 7:42 PM
: 12/1/05 7:42 PM Anonymous 7.42 above:
See what I mean, I don’t know whether you are a new voice or one of the anonymous contributors above. It is difficult to conduct a dialogue when you don’t know who you are talking to.
Your final paragraph "Let me, an enemy of Bush's occupation and a lover of the truth invite you to retract these truly heartless, and transparently untrue statements(exaggerations?).
The insurgents are terrorists of a particularly vicious kind and are totally indefensible. The occupation is onerous to Iraqis and will not secure peace, which is why I oppose it" seems to leave you firmly straddling the fence, making random noise for the sake of it and developing a pain in the crotch. Perhaps you really are Fathom after all - that certainly seems to be his speciality at the moment.
Look, try it this way: repeat after me
Terrorists are terrible
Terrorists are terrible
Terrorists are terrible
then say
The US has made a complete mess of its conquest of Iraq
The US has made a complete mess of its conquest of Iraq
The US has made a complete mess of its conquest of Iraq
These two statements don’t contradict one another. Both are true. So what is the point, every time I make the second statement, of just repeating the first one. It gets us nowhere.
What needs to happen is ...
What needs to happen is ...
What needs to happen is ...
?
?
?
Patient Circular
# posted by : 12/1/05 9:48 PM
: 12/1/05 9:48 PM Hello PC,
'...seems to leave you firmly straddling the fence, making random noise for the sake of it and developing a pain in the crotch. Perhaps you really are Fathom after all - that certainly seems to be his speciality at the moment.'
me..Fathom?You wound me to the quick!
You suggest that if I hate terror I must back up Bush in his counterterror campaign. In this case his first choice 'cure' is very bad, like amputation or blood letting.
Do you mind if I look for another opinion?
'So what is the point, every time I make the second statement, of just repeating the first one. It gets us nowhere.' Yes, it does sound like 'I told you so'.You remind me of the guy who loves to eat spicey food and gets an ulcer and asks the doc 'how can I keep on eating what I want and the answer is, 'you can't, you must cut it out..'
'What needs to happen is ...'
End the occupation, end meddling in Iraq and threatening Islamic countries, bring the troops home and if possible impeach manifest aggressor Bush.
Now where's that retraction?
# posted by : 13/1/05 12:50 AM
: 13/1/05 12:50 AM The Al-Zarqawi group was a CIA creation. The beheading's Internet show was just created after the Abu Ghruraib scandal, in order to oppose it in the Americans hearts and minds. This is called psychological operation - PSYOP - in warfare.
Yes, Charles, your government is that evil.
This article is off-topic. I recall you mentioning farming. This article is beautiful written. It’s about renewal. Paradise Lost?On the topic at hand:
Even if the CPA had been perfectly executed, perfectly planned, well thought out, staffed with the most brilliant and the most competent, does not mean the insurgency of Ba’athist diehards and militant Islamists from neighboring countries would not have pursued their goals of intimidation, racketeering, terrorism, assassinations, car bombs, suicide bombings and the destruction of the country’s infrastructure. Saddam Hussein is a formidable enemy. Al Qaeda is a formidable enemy. We could argue whether Saddam Hussein was a spent force, thoroughly contained, who posed no security threat to the United States. We could argue whether Hussein and Al Qaeda were ever linked prior to the invasion of Iraq. We could argue whether deposing Saddam only to witness his followers wage war on their own countrymen to retain wealth and power was too high of a price to pay. We could argue whether continuing economic sanctions, inspections and the flyover zones for the next 20-30 years would have been the more merciful route.
I’m reminded of Kurosawa’s 1950’s film Rashômon when trying to discern the truth on Iraq:“Rashomon isn't about determining a chronology of what happened in the woods. It's not about culpability or innocence. Instead, it focuses on something far more profound and thought-provoking: the inability of any one man to know the truth, no matter how clearly he thinks he sees things. Perspective distorts reality and makes the absolute truth unknowable.” reviewerOn my reading list for tonight:
Grand StrategyNorman Podheretz, WWIVMs. Willfully Obtuse
# posted by : 13/1/05 4:37 AM
: 13/1/05 4:37 AM Charles:
Arrogantly, as most Americans, you said:
There are some pretty bad folks on this planet who prey upon the ignorance of others.
And as much as I am the supposedly ignorant guy and you are the supposedly intelligent one, the better I can do is to leave you alone with your supposedly intelligence...
Another proof for what I said: the only words Americans are capable to understand is IED, VIED, AK, Grad, Ababil, KIA, WIA, etecetera...
But I think I am wrong in this over-generalization and Abu Khaleel is right in writing his words to intelligent Americans and to us ... as Iraqui Resistance is right in sending the above words to the American military and their puppets in Iraq.
Alvaro Frota
------------
PS to Charles: Have you not a clue in what American Government did in Brazil, Chile, El Salvador, Nicaragua, Guatemala and Latin American in general?
From Circular
Charles, thank you for giving yourself a name. It facilitates dialogue, which is the purpose of this Comments area. However, could I suggest that you not take this as a licence to flood the Blog with rather impenetrable posts - the author of the Blog has already displayed his displeasure and dismay at what might be termed "fathomitis," a determination to espouse obscurity for its own state and to avoid anything approaching a frank and succinct statement of position: are you in danger of contracting this unfortunate condition?
As far as I can make out, your basic position is that Iraqis should be more grateful to the USA for bringing them the opportunity to develop "democracy." Can you confirm that this is a correct interpretation of what you are trying to say? Further discussion could then take place.
It is generally speaking a courtesy to the author of the Blog to stick to his chosen topic of discussion. With regard to the actual subject of this chapter, "A Year of Neocon Rule," your most relevant comment appears to be, "Sure mistakes were made and are being made."
Could we have that once again, louder, with real feeling? Isn’t that what the whole discussion is about? How much mistakes is too much mistakes? What is needed before you will admit that your fubar has become a FUBAR? According to reports they’re burning the midnight oil in Washington trying to find an "exit strategy." Chimpy has finally had to admit that his declared reasons for rushing into war were all wrong. And you’re still saying it was all righteous?
# posted by : 13/1/05 11:19 AM
: 13/1/05 11:19 AM line 5: ... its own sake ... not ...state ...
# posted by : 13/1/05 11:30 AM
: 13/1/05 11:30 AM Bruno,
If your figures are correct, then by invading Iraq the US may have doomed the Iraqi Christian communities.
Be Well,
<< Home
