Sig.
What I find so frustrating is the lack of attention Iraq gets in the US. I watch US TV via satellite here and it would seem the biggest concern for most Americans is that Britney Spears isn’t wearing underwear. America is simultaneously losing two wars and all we care about is that some hillbilly skank has a shaved twat. In my opinion here is wat it would take to change the dynamic in Iraq:[ul]
[li]A complete disbanding and reset of the Iraqi government[/li][li]A masive increase in the number of US troops into Iraq (50k or more)[/li][li]Breaking up the Green Zone and moving all reconstruction efforts into the city proper[/li][li]10 or more years of heavy occupation[/li][/ul]
The effort would mean a huge spike in casaulties for US troops and aid workers. The US would have to flood the country with reconstruction efforts. The abduction and beheading of aid workers, contractors and soldiers would become so common that it wouldn’t even be noteworthy to the public after awhile.
In short, the US would have to get serious about Iraq. It would have to pay attention for a long time. The government would have to adjust public opinion to this reality and set expectations accordingly. The public would have to experience hardship in order to realize this goal: increased military (maybe a draft?); less fuel consumption; and increased taxes to pay for the wars we are fighting (plural, anyone else remember Afghanistan?). The US would have to shift to a war footing.
Of course, there is no effort to do any of this. This administration has not demonstrated any willingness to make the hard choices and has again and again shown itself to be incredibly short-sighted, incompetent and dogmatic. There is no evidence that any of this has changed.
Take for instance the latest surge plan: it satisfies no one. Proponents of an escalation advocated a major increase of at least 40k troops into Baghdad, but Bush lacks the political courage to advocate this. Instead he choose a plan no one wants: an escalation too small to make a difference, but big enough to increase casaulties.
I read comments by Chuck Hagel to the effect that there are really only two exit strategies in a war: winning or losing and any other proposal is just another name for one of these options. Hagel has clearly come to the conclusion that the US has lost in Iraq. I think, especially given the fact that any serious effort in Iraq will have to wait until a new administration is in power in 2 years, that he is probably correct.
What is so frustrating about this is how predictable it all was. The critics of the war were exactly right. Everything we said would happen has happened and we were called cowards and traitors for saying it. Now, we are hated for being right.
The supporters of this administration and this war have a lot to answer for. As a culture we should engage in some serious soul searching as to how we could be so wrong about so much. We need to ask ourselves hard questions about what we have done and why we did it. And then I read that some Americans think Iraqis should be grateful for what we have done to them and I ask myself who are these people? How can they be this ill-informed? In an age where Americans have access to an unprecedented amount of information about the world around us, there is no excuse for this level of ignorance, none whatsoever.
madmonk28, should the USA wander off once Bush is out, what do you think will happen in Iraq, and what do you think will happen in the region vis a vis Iran?
BTW, did anyone ever tell you that you are one brave son of a bitch – a true hero, for your stance prior to the invasion, and for your ongoing humanitarian efforts.
madmonk28, I just wanted to add another voice of appreciation for your posts in this thread and elsewhere. It seems like every time I hear thoughts on Iraq from someone who actually knows what the hell is going on, I find that it’s somehow worse than I had imagined.
I appreciate the well wishes from all. To answer Muffin’s question, I think Iraq after the US exit will look a lot like present day Iraq. The US is increasingly irrelevant to the facts on the ground here and I expect that to continue.
As for Iran, I think our invasion of Iraq empowered the radical elements within Iranian society and undermined reformists elements. In general, the Bush administration has hurt the cause of democratization in the Middle East because proponents of democracy are now seen as tools of the US. Also, a lot of people who were once fairly pro-American are now truly disillusioned with us.
Whether one things Al Jazeera is balanced or not doesn’t matter: the images beamed out of Iraq and into living rooms throughout the Middle East are doing more to engender hatred of America than a thousand bin Ladens ever could do. Every day 24 hours a day, the Arab world is treated to imagery that reinforces the rantings of the most hate filled jihadist.
The damage is done, it is not as if the negative imagery will stop just because America leaves Iraq. The world will say (justifiably) that this chaos and suffering is the result of the US destabilizing Iraq.
I actually agree with McCain when he argues that the consequences of this loss are truly catastrophic. I think that the Saudis will enter this conflict, as will the Turks. The Syrians are already very active as are the Iranians. I think this conflict will spread beyond the borders of the Middle East: I’ve said before that I think that eventually we will see Shunni vs. Shi’a sectarian violence in the cities of Europe wiht large Muslim populations.
What makes my blood boil is how predictable this all was. Before the war, I said that this was a mistake, but if the US was going to do it, it had better get it right. And then Bush invades, but with insufficient force to do the job. How could he be so stupid as to not understand that it would be the occupation, not the invasion that would be the hard part? Three decisions at the beginning of the invasion sealed our fate:
-
Not stopping the looting: in the summer of 2003, everyone was kind of holding their breath and wondering what kind of rule the Americans would impose and then the lawlessness made it clear that they were not going to impose any order. It was utter chaos with peoplel running through the streets carrying all they could steal. I think anyone watching Katrina on CNN understands that no society can long suffer that kind of chaos.
-
DeBaathification: In a totalitarian society such as Iraq, any kind of manage, or expert belonged to the Baath party. Membership was a requirement for advancement, and yet the US barred them from working for the government and purged Iraq of an entire class of people who knew how to make it work.
-
Disbanding the army: Thousands of armed, idle and humilated men, turned away from the gates of the Green Zone with not way to make a living. Garner (Bremer’s predecessor) had plans for these men, he was going to form them into work gangs and get them busy rebuilding roads, cleaning streets, etc. Most importantly, he was going to give them something to do. Later a fiction arose that the Iraqi army didn’t really exist after the war (someone is likely to chime to say this in this thread), bus Garner had already started to pay the army salaries which they were collecting which would undermine the argument that the army had simply melted away.
Ultimately, I have come to the conclusion that we have lost, especially given our incompetent and weak willed leadership. But what I can’t stand to hear is that the Iraqis owe us something for all this misery. Maybe they do owe us something, but I sure hope I’m not there when we get what we have coming.
And we all know what is coming next. Defeat and humiliation for us, chaos and more bloodbaths for the Iraqis. We’ll write off as sour grapes the complaints of Europe as their capitals see more terrorist attacks. The next terrorist attack on US soil, people will whine on CNN “why do they hate us?” and when some of us point out that we created the conditions that made this attack possible we’ll be called cowards and traitors.
Finally, we’ll make a new Rambo movie in which we win in Iraq and everything will be fixed.
Another sad example of this board’s liberal bias. Here we got an on-the-scene correspondent giving us all the bad news. But Sean Hannity was just there, and things are going pretty darn good! Probably Madmonk is just in the wrong part, not the part with ruddy-cheeked Iraqi girls floucing off to freshly painted schools in their Islamic communion dresses…
For the sake of balance, we should hold a favored place for such persons currently in Iraq who can present the* positive* view. I propose that we reserve the next space for just such a posting, and urge such a correspondent to hold forth soonest!
Yes, those are crickets. I’ve got crickets, got a problem with crickets? I like crickets…