Welcome to PatsFans.com

Iraq starts to fix itself

Discussion in 'Political Discussion' started by reflexblue, Jun 17, 2008.

  1. reflexblue

    reflexblue PatsFans.com Supporter PatsFans.com Supporter

    Joined:
    Aug 11, 2006
    Messages:
    17,247
    Likes Received:
    20
    Ratings:
    +28 / 3 / -0

    #91 Jersey

    Its people are still suffering monstrously, but Iraq is doing far better than it was only a few months ago.
    It sounds like Iraq is doing better according to this article.But before you neo-cons(you know who you are) start blowing your horn. It seems more like the Iraqies themselves have decided to do something about the situation.

    http://www.economist.com/opinion/displayStory.cfm?story_id=11535688&fsrc=nwlgafree

    A few Sunnis, motivated by Islam or simple resentment of foreign military occupation, continue to attack American forces. But many Sunni tribes, repelled by the atrocities committed by their former and often foreign allies in al-Qaeda, have joined the so-called Sunni awakening, the Sahwa, and crossed over to America's side. At the same time, Sunnis and Shias have stopped killing each other in the vast numbers that followed the blowing up of a Shia shrine in early 2006. General Petraeus's surge is only one reason for this. Another reason, less flattering to the Americans, is that after last year's frenzied ethnic cleansing fewer neighbourhoods are still mixed. But it is also the case that a lot of Iraqis, having waded briefly into the horror of indiscriminate sectarian slaughter, have for the present made a conscious decision to step back.

    The conflict between Shias and ........
    Last edited: Jun 17, 2008
  2. DarrylS

    DarrylS PatsFans.com Supporter PatsFans.com Supporter

    Joined:
    Sep 13, 2004
    Messages:
    41,032
    Likes Received:
    112
    Ratings:
    +195 / 7 / -23

    Not sure if this opinion means this much, what I do know is on Monday 3 US soldiers killed..

    Totals so far 4101 dead americans.. over 29,000 wounded

    About 135,000 Iraqis killed

    Rampant war profiteering and fraud..

    About 3.2 tons of political rhetoric and accompanying bullshyt..

    Before Iraq fixes itself, the US should set an example...
    Last edited: Jun 17, 2008
  3. reflexblue

    reflexblue PatsFans.com Supporter PatsFans.com Supporter

    Joined:
    Aug 11, 2006
    Messages:
    17,247
    Likes Received:
    20
    Ratings:
    +28 / 3 / -0

    #91 Jersey

    The article starts out by acknowlaging that the whole thing was/is a disaster and that it could fall apart at any time. But that there is at least some hope
  4. Patriot_in_NY

    Patriot_in_NY Rookie

    Joined:
    Jan 1, 2007
    Messages:
    8,525
    Likes Received:
    12
    Ratings:
    +13 / 0 / -0

    Welcome to the the sh!t that most of who have bothered to pay attention already knew about 9 months ago. :rolleyes:

    I won't dispute whether you think the war was "a disaster", a bad idea, mismanged whatever. That's your right, and on many points we probably agree.

    But if you think the Iraqis have "fixed the problems themselves", then you are totally fukcing clueless to extrodinary courage, selflessness and sacrifice that our men and women of our military have displayed during that period. Lots of people can take credit for progress in Iraq, including MANY, MANY brave Iraqis invested in their own future, but to totally discount the role our military has placed in allowing it happen, shows your ignorance and is personally distastful.

    I know your posting the contents af an article (and perhaps your personal views) differ. But I find the premise that "Iraqis fixed it themselves" to be totally innaccurate.
    Last edited: Jun 17, 2008
  5. reflexblue

    reflexblue PatsFans.com Supporter PatsFans.com Supporter

    Joined:
    Aug 11, 2006
    Messages:
    17,247
    Likes Received:
    20
    Ratings:
    +28 / 3 / -0

    #91 Jersey

    I didn't have to post this so you could insult me. I could have left it sitting on a British magazines website. But I TRY to give credit where its do. And i never said they fixed it themselves thats YOUR interpritation.
    I DON'T THINK THE SURGE HAD A WHOLE LOT TO DO WITH IT,AND NEITHER DOES THE AUTHOR OF THE ARTICLE. The Iraqie's just got sick of what was going on in their country if you read the article.
    Last edited: Jun 17, 2008
  6. Patters

    Patters Moderator Staff Member PatsFans.com Supporter

    Joined:
    Sep 13, 2004
    Messages:
    17,769
    Likes Received:
    132
    Ratings:
    +169 / 4 / -4

    One has to feel for the Iraqis, first ruled under the fist of Saddam and then caught in the violent web of needless American agression. The families of the tens of thousands of Iraqis who died or suffered permanent injury or lost their homes are probably not going to easiy forgive the US, but it doesn't mean they won't go on with life. Gradually, Iraq will rebuild and become an ally of Iran.

    Here's an op-ed piece that has some insight into the possible future of Iraq:

    http://www.nytimes.com/2008/06/17/opinion/17meyer.html?ref=opinion
  7. PatriotsReign

    PatriotsReign Rookie

    Joined:
    Jan 15, 2007
    Messages:
    25,896
    Likes Received:
    91
    Ratings:
    +200 / 3 / -10

    Can I play the role of conservative responder and just say,

    "#$%#$#$ $##$% %#$ ##33!!!!!!!!!":mad::mad:

    Ok, now I feel better...I hope you learned your lesson!
  8. Patriot_in_NY

    Patriot_in_NY Rookie

    Joined:
    Jan 1, 2007
    Messages:
    8,525
    Likes Received:
    12
    Ratings:
    +13 / 0 / -0

    Like I said, then you don't KNOW VERY MUCH about the situation then, and NEITHER does the author then. The surge had EVERYTHING to do with it. Only a hater is so blind not to see that.

    My post was to the content of your post, which I acknowledge was content from the article and not your words. that's was why I said. - "I know your posting the contents af an article (and perhaps your personal views) differ. But I find the premise that "Iraqis fixed it themselves" to be totally inaccurate."

    I find the premise of the article factually inaccurate (despite being somewhat positive) and my point was to caution accepting it as fact. Your first clue is that it comes from the BRITISH MEDIA, which is perhaps most dishonest as our own.

    PATHETIC. I used to have more respect for you...... You used to have the ability to reason. It's disappointing to discover that you are "just another HATER". Also you don't have to accept being lied to by your PRESS. The real information is out there if you look.

    The Iraqi government is in NEGOTIATION, which means BACK and FORTH discourse. Do you EVEN know what the real sticking points are of the current government? You don't........... I don't know if it's because you don't care, or you don't have time to look into it, but it's for the reasons that some tainted NYTimes Op-ED author whose only claim to fame is preaching about the ills of British and American Imperialism in the ME.

    Seriously, TRY to make an attempt to educate yourself. There is nothing wrong with the negotiation of two SOVEREIGN nations negotiating a long-term security arrangement.
    Last edited: Jun 17, 2008
  9. Patriot_in_NY

    Patriot_in_NY Rookie

    Joined:
    Jan 1, 2007
    Messages:
    8,525
    Likes Received:
    12
    Ratings:
    +13 / 0 / -0

    Even Iraqis DISAGREE with you. They know they need us {and are scared as hell of Obama-refuse-to-go-to-Iraq-and-find-out-what-the-fukc-is-happening}
  10. Patters

    Patters Moderator Staff Member PatsFans.com Supporter

    Joined:
    Sep 13, 2004
    Messages:
    17,769
    Likes Received:
    132
    Ratings:
    +169 / 4 / -4

    The same cast of characters who helped spread the disinformation about Saddam's WMDs is now in power in Iraq. These are not necessarily honest people. Even Maliki, who I have some respect for, spent his years in exile in Syria and Iran. You can't dismiss that fact and assume he will be loyal to the United States. He will be loyal to the Iraqi people, I think, and to those who protected and helped him during his years in exile.

    Of course, it's possible that the Iraqi government is one of great integrity and devoted to the liberators of Iraq, as you seem to believe, but I am more cynical than that. Given the role that Arab nationalism has played and continued to play, I think it's far more likely that Iraq will end up aligned with Iran more than with us. My main hope is that if we leave the Middle East, the next Iranian elections will choose someone relatively moderate. I think people like Bush and Ahmadinejad only get elected because people are scared, and frightened people often turn to violent and militaristic leaders who promise quick solutions rather than to leaders who favor diplomacy and rational thinking.
  11. Patriot_in_NY

    Patriot_in_NY Rookie

    Joined:
    Jan 1, 2007
    Messages:
    8,525
    Likes Received:
    12
    Ratings:
    +13 / 0 / -0

    Well, it's hard to have a debate with the uninformed, but it's been about 2-3 years since it has been ACCEPTED fact that the PRIMARY spreader of disinformation about Saddam's WMDs was SADDAM HUSSAIN. It's been documented that he had almost everyone convinced, including the upper echelon of his own military cadre that he in fact had chemical/bio weapons. They have recorded audio of commanders openly calling for and questioning why the weapons were not being used as we marched on Bagdad in 2003. Interviews with captured Republican Guard Generals show their astonishment at the fact they did not have them. The Iranians DON'T choose their leader. Come' on Patters. DinnerJacket is a figurehead. Iran is RUN BY THE MULLAHS.

    Your ignorance of the history between the two countries shows with the second bolded statement. Iraqis distrust the Iranians as much as anyone. There is much to be cautious about between the two. It's logical that they are trying to normalize relations a bit, but they will hardly EVER likely to become allies. Almost everyone I know (that has a clue), understands this.
    Last edited: Jun 17, 2008
  12. otis p. driftwood

    otis p. driftwood Rookie

    Joined:
    Feb 4, 2008
    Messages:
    5,271
    Likes Received:
    4
    Ratings:
    +4 / 0 / -0


    I freely admit I don't know as much about the region as I should, but I thought part of the problem was that with Saddam gone, the opposition--the group friendly with Iran because of shared religious beliefs or whatever it is--was becoming more dominant, and that's why the fears of Iraq, or a portion of Iraq allying with Iran?
  13. Stokes

    Stokes Rookie

    Joined:
    Sep 1, 2006
    Messages:
    2,423
    Likes Received:
    1
    Ratings:
    +1 / 0 / -0

    This is right, the honchos in Iran are Shia, as is the majority of the gov't in Iraq now. During Hussein's rule there was more animosity because it was the Sunni minority in Iraq that was in control. You could imagine relations going either way with Iran, either they get friendlier because of greater shia influence (bad times), or people in Iran become more disenfranchised with their oppressive government if they see a successful, shia-led democracy right next door (good times!). Or I suppose the most likely outcome is that not much changes between the two at all, considering the sunnis do have a voice in the new Iraqi government and won't be real keen on buddying up with the mullahs in Iran.

    I'm glad to see the Iraqis taking control of their future, although I would disagree that the surge had nothing to do with it, the decreased violence resulting from the surge provided conditions which allowed the healing to begin for the Iraqis.

    Totally unnecessary for you to jump all over reflex for a thoughtful post Patriot in NY, not cool!
  14. Patriot_in_NY

    Patriot_in_NY Rookie

    Joined:
    Jan 1, 2007
    Messages:
    8,525
    Likes Received:
    12
    Ratings:
    +13 / 0 / -0

    Don't beleive everything you HEAR. Ordinary Iraqis know that Iran is meddling with them, and DO NOT LIKE IT. Even the Shiites

    The Iran-Iraq conflict was bittern and resentment/distrust runs VERY DEEP.

    ......and Stokes, I was speaking to the context of the article he posted and even DIRECTLY told him so (and deflected criticism away from him). If that's UNCOOL, then It's equally uncool (not THOUGHTFUL at all) for him to post a UK article that, as we both agree, denigrates and undermines the REAL contributions made by our military. I didn't even attack him when he agreed with the premise of the article. I just said he was uninformed. Seems a lot of that is going around when it comes to the whole conflict.

    Other than that, I think you are touching on a more important dynamic. Iraq's shift towards democracy has some in Iran sh!tting bricks (as it should), I think that Iran will try several different tactics, from buddy-buddy diplomacy to continued undermining in the southern regions. Either way, it will be an interesting development, but both will tread very uneasily with each other, FOR SURE. It's becoming very apparent everything that Iran has been doing to undermine progress in Iraq, and the government of Iraq knows and understands this.
    Last edited: Jun 17, 2008
  15. patsfan13

    patsfan13 Hall of Fame Poster PatsFans.com Supporter

    Joined:
    Jan 4, 2005
    Messages:
    24,643
    Likes Received:
    67
    Ratings:
    +128 / 7 / -13


    The surge created the situation and context for what has happened. Also in the background the work building the Iraqi security forces. without both these, the progress and chance for success would not have been possible. One of the goals was to empower the Iraqi's to stand on this own. This seems to be happening now.
  16. Stokes

    Stokes Rookie

    Joined:
    Sep 1, 2006
    Messages:
    2,423
    Likes Received:
    1
    Ratings:
    +1 / 0 / -0

    We just have to hope that Maliki and others continue to put the fact that they are Iraqi first, and shia second. The way he's handled Sadr has been better than I could have hoped for.

    Stuff like this might also help the Iraqis realize buddying up with the mullahs might not be what they're looking for:

    "Fashion Police

    Iranian women usually counter the hot summer months in that country by wearing lighter clothing such as calf-length pants or pushing back their hair with scarves. But now an Iranian newspaper reports police there have launched a more extensive crackdown on what is called "social corruption" — such as un-Islamic dress.

    An Iranian official tells the paper, "Police will confront those who appear in public in an indecent way — and will also seal off shops selling un-Islamic dress."

    And the rules also apply to men.

    The newspaper says that, "Men with western-style haircuts were confronted by police and also barber shops that gave them such haircuts were sealed off on Sunday.""

    As a side note in the same article it says that casualties for January - May 2007 in Anbar were 124, Jan - May 2008? 14. That is awesome news. Let's hope for Jan - May 2009 it is the big zero.

    http://www.foxnews.com/story/0,2933,367761,00.html

    (Fox News Alert! Everyone on the left, we have a Fox News Alert!!! Set your phasers to "skeptical"!!!)
  17. wistahpatsfan

    wistahpatsfan Rookie

    Joined:
    Jul 30, 2005
    Messages:
    15,672
    Likes Received:
    11
    Ratings:
    +11 / 0 / -0

    Where have I heard that before?

    This is great news for Iraq and her people. Now can we bring all the troops home and quit delaying the inevitable...the breakup of Iraq. It's and artificial country. THere are three different societies living under pressure and containment. There is no purpose to keep it intact especially when our kids are at risk there.

    But keep responding to those polls. Keep believing the BS coming out of the Pentagon and White House. Go right ahead.

    [​IMG]
  18. patsfan13

    patsfan13 Hall of Fame Poster PatsFans.com Supporter

    Joined:
    Jan 4, 2005
    Messages:
    24,643
    Likes Received:
    67
    Ratings:
    +128 / 7 / -13



    The lower causalities speak for themselves. Maliki going after his fellow Shia in Mookie is doing a lot to reassure the Sunni's that they will get a fair shake. Maliki has slao sttod up to the Mullahs in Iraq. The Iraqi security forces are now carrying most of the load (but probably not ready to do it themselves yet).

    Why are you so hellbent to cut and run and possibly throw away to progress that has clearly been made? and in the process throw away the sacrifces made by our soldiers.
  19. BelichickFan

    BelichickFan B.O. = Fugazi PatsFans.com Supporter

    Joined:
    Sep 13, 2004
    Messages:
    31,419
    Likes Received:
    145
    Ratings:
    +299 / 9 / -9

    #24 Jersey

    You like talking out of both sides of your mouth don't you. Without "needless American aggression" they would still be "ruled under the fist of Saddam".

    If you want to argue that we'd have been better off leaving them with Saddam, great. But don't bemoan Saddam then bemoan the U.S. without acknowledging that first first wouldn't be gone without the second.
  20. Patters

    Patters Moderator Staff Member PatsFans.com Supporter

    Joined:
    Sep 13, 2004
    Messages:
    17,769
    Likes Received:
    132
    Ratings:
    +169 / 4 / -4

    While I can appreciate your defense of incompetence, i.e., everyone thought he had WMDs, therefore it's okay for us to think he had WMDs. But, as the Nigerian uranium rumor, among others shows, there was plenty of evidence that the evidence was lousy. The Nigerian thing, for instance had bad forgeries, wrong names, and other misinformation. Also, even David Kaye (I think that was his name), Bush's handpicked inspector, failed to find any evidence, so skepticism was already starting to rise, which forced Bush's hand early if he wanted a war. Also, much of evidence came from Iraqi exiles who provided all sorts of misinformation, including some the stuff about Al Qaeda. Also, while it's true that the mullahs run Iran, it's also true that the President has some power, and their last president (Rasfanjani) while certainly not a friend to the United States was far less threatening than the current nut.

    Iraqi Sunnis and Baathists, i.e., Saddam's allies, obviously distrust the Iranians, but those who now rule Iraq distrust the Sunnis, and many of their key people, including Maliki, were in exile not in the US or Europe but in Iran and Syria. While it's true that Iraqis will want to preserve their sovereignty, it's also true that Arab nationalism and religious identification run deep. Given that most Iraqis want us out out there and that we insist on staying and given that we have created the circumstances that have killed tens of thousands of people, I think it's reasonable to suppose there's a lot of animosity towards us.
    Last edited: Jun 17, 2008

Share This Page

unset ($sidebar_block_show); ?>