I want to spread the blame in order to assure that the reconstruction is done right. The U.S. stands little to no chance of ever convincing the Iraqi people that it is acting in their best interests. As long as that continues, the citizens of Iraq have no reason to cooperate with the American reconstruction effort. By internationalizing that effort and diluting the U.S. role via the participation of nations that the Iraqis do trust, you take away a huge chunk of their motivation for continued resistance and recalcitrance.
There are a number of problems with this comment.[ol][li]You have shown no evidence that the Iraqi people don’t think the US is acting in their interest…[]I provided two cites showing that the Iraqis strongly support the Americans.[]The Iraqis ought to appreciate that we liberated them from Saddam, Uday, Qusay, et. al. [] America is re-bulding Iraq – water, electric, oil exports, etc.[]There have been no humanitarian disasters – no starvation, lack of medical care, dying of thirst.[]America has made massive ecological improvements in the Mesopotamian swamps. []America introduced the begimnning of an Iraqi government via an Iraqi council.[/ol][/li][quote]
As long as that continues, the citizens of Iraq have no reason to cooperate with the American reconstruction effort.
[/QUOTE]
Even if America weren’t doing all the good things listed above, the Iraqis have a reason to cooperate in the reconstruction – they live there.
Its all a matter of perception and perspective…
If the URSS invaded the USA and then did a better job at governing your country than the previous american president… would you hate them less ?
Even then wouldnt you think the URSS is doing this to better control the population ? Would you beleive the former “great satan” suddenly is there to help even when he really is helping ?
If the US is so nice and caring about the Iraqi people then why isnt the UN backing them ? Why are so many against it ?
Do you remember what the europeans did to Nazi collaborators in WWII ? They were shot. Some of them were just trying to make the Nazi occupation less harmful. Anyone that helps the US help the Iraqi is a collaborator to most peoples view. Even those that like the US see too many cronies and politics involved. They also feel humiliated by foreign occupation... especially a unilateral one. If you are too helpful to americans you are unpatriotic...
Even if Iraq was handed 100% to the UN... Iraqi will still have resentment of the situation. Saddam supporters will still want their power back. The lone ranger stance of the US/UK just makes this way bigger.Not to hijack this thread too much, but that’s an interesting assertion. Do you have a description of what’s been done so far ? All a quick search reveals is Italy Contributes 1.2 Million Euros To Restore Mesopotamian Marshes In Iraq.
It sounds as if wetlands restoration is a job for the future rather than a fait accompli.
I remember when we got the water flowing back in a couple of months ago. That’s the first step.
december, my learned friend and old adversary, the last thing I want to see is for this thread to be turned into a left-right pissing match. I fully appreciate your adherence to the policies and objectives of the present Administration and that you will try to take the rosiest possible view of the situation. The quoted portion of your post and the header on your post, however lead me to think that you are much more concerned with climbing up on your some what battered soap box than you are interested in discussing the best way to restore Iraq to self government –which is after all one of the stated objectives of the present Administration, albeit pretty late in the game and well after the goals of foreclosing Iraq’s use and dissemination of weapons of mass destruction.
It is a little hard to accept the idea that there is steady progress being made in restoring essential services and commercial function in Iraq. In the last week or ten days we have seen the level of destruction increase, not decrease. In addition to the steady stream of dead and wounded service people we have now seen some pretty big scale sabotage and terrorism. Are we to say everything is going according to plan, and incidentally pay no attention to that blown up oil pipe line (we will have that fixed right away, until the next time somebody plants a demo charge under it) or to the blown up water lines or the electric system that works only part of the time or not at all, or to the smoking ruins of the Jordanian Embassy, or the smoking ruins of the Canal Hotel where the UN operation was headquartered?
When there is continual random gunfire and hostile demolition going on all around it hardly seem like the time to suggest that we can’t know what the Iraqi people think without a scientific poll of public opinion. I question how much faith I’d put in the observations of the Wall Street Journal’s random jarhead (who seems to be stationed well out of Baghdad) about the joy of the general Iranian population over having armed foreigners patrolling their streets.
If December it is your contention that every thing in Iraq is just hunky-dory then let me suggest that you are not analyzing the raw data very well. It is clear that we have trouble in Iraq. We are some five months into the occupation and we have yet to gain enough control to restore services to the level the Iraqi population enjoyed in the bad old days. The question is how can it be fixed without the imposition of a heavy and repressive hand?
Got an answer, old friend? Something other than denying the problem and recommending more of the same? What we have been doing for the last five months doesn’t look like it’s working.
On preview december, I see your response to Minty Green. Both your citations are opinion pieces, not hard news. Both seem to be writtem by people who are very busy digging through the horse manure in hopes of finding a pony.
How much more of a demonstration do you need that the Iranian population does not think that the US is acting in their best interest than that they are freaking shooting at us?
You would think that the population would be just hysterical with joy that Sadam and the boys are not in charge any more. They are shooting at us. Why do you suppose that is happening?
Do you suppose that the Iraqis either don’t care about the Iraqi Counsel or think that it is just a pupet for the American authority? The Counsel had daclared that the day US forces entered Baghdad is a holiday. Baybe they will rename some streets now.
Were I squating in a cement block house in 130 degree heat, with limited freah water and unreliable electric service and gunfire in the streets, the last thing I would be worried about is how clean the swamp is.
From Spavined Gelding
Where does the widespread (on this board anyway) belief come from that this is a popular movement by the people against the US occupying forces? Looking at this rationally, it seems a pretty small movement (a couple of hundred organized fighters could do all we’ve seen so far IMO) of well trained and highly motivated people, not a vast guerilla movement (or freedom fighters or whatever as per the other interesting thread on symantics). Are there any actual facts or just pure bullshit and speculation that this is a wide spread popular movement. If it is, why are so many of the old leadership being betrayed and turned in? Hardly a week goes by that some new face is turned over or betrayed to the government. I read about raids happening almost daily on the ‘freedom fighters’ betrayed by some tip by the people. This doesn’t sound like a classical popular uprising to me.
Anyone have anything hard on how the generally populace really feels about the US occupation? Or is this “Iraqis hate the US” just speculation and wishful thinking because it goes with your world view? OTOH, is the view that “Iraqis love and respect the US” equally just wishful thinking (if anyone believes this of course)? Can anyone back up either position with some facts, as opposed to the common bullshit and speculation? For myself, I haven’t seen any hard data either way, just a lot of speculation, and I’d be interested if anyone has any credible sources for either position (sorry december, yours seemed biased to me and devoid of anything really hard data wise).
I’m not appearently very politically savy. Why exactly is it a good thing for the anti war crowd (or anti American occupation crowd, or whatever) that it was AQ that attacked the UN embassy and not Baathist rements? Personally I think it WAS AQ, or possible some of these foriegn weekend warrior types coming in from SA and other countries that did the deed. But how is that a good thing? I’m not getting it. And why if they could do that, could they not be responsible for doing much of the other damage we’ve seen? Isn’t it reasonable that the Baathist remenants, along with some outside and organized groups like AQ are doing the majority of the damage? How does the left profit by this? Or do they? Maybe I’m misunderstanding…
Does anyone have any hard facts on what conditions actually ARE in Iraq? My cousin is over there, and he basically says that the people seem reserved but friendly enough for the most part (the exception being those actively trying to kill him, which he feels are mostly Baathist or foreign fighter types). This is anacdotal though. Anyone have anything solid? Anything solid on how things are actually progressing? How much power has been restored, if any? Is food getting to the people, or are they starving? Water getting to the people or are they dying in numbers of thirst? Are services being restored in a timely fashion? How are the people of Iraq getting on? I think that making these points with some hard data will go a long way to showing if there is any real ‘hope’ for Iraq. After all, it hasn’t even been 6 months yet. For myself, again I haven’t seen a lot of real hard data on this, just speculations on both sides of the political news spectrum.
-XT
There seem to be two sets of reports coming out of Iraq. One group of stories focuses on the attacks and sabotage. The others focus on all the improvement that they say is occurring. E.g., the article I cited says,
Maybe both sets of stories are accurate – the pessimists may be right about Baghdad and the optimists may be right elsewhere.
Of course not.
There’s no contradtion. Look at Israel. They have terrorist attacks all the time. Yet, the country works very well indeed.
Only a handful of Iraqis and al Qaeda are causing the trouble.
Of course. They never promised us that post-war would be a rose garden.
As I say, that depends on who you believe.
The WSJ piece was written by someone who’s there.
I agree that the Ba’athists and non-Iraqi al-Qaeda terrorists in Iraq are shooting at us, but not the bulk of the Iraqi people.
According to my cite, they are hysterical with joy.
Good points actually… so two main opposite points:
-
Iraqi hate Americans because they shoot them.
-
Iraqi love Americans because they turn in “old leaders” and “freedom fighters”.
-
Naturally its not the whole population shooting back. Still I dont think the people shooting americans in various different cities and with a increasing frequency number only hundreds. To keep this pace of attacks they would have to number many thousands… and these need to be supported by others with money and hiding places… so that would be tens of thousands participating. Then you have the witnesses that arent talking or dont care. Thousands of armed “freedom fighters” can’t exist without popular support. The love if any for the US has little reason to be increasing either.
-
There is little love for Saddams men. So the “old leaders” being captured all the time arent a sign of love for the occupation… just hate for Saddam’s reign. The raids on “freedom fighters” thou is a different matter… it might be normal people ratting on them… but its most likely paid informants, rival groups that want less rivals when the US is gone or just plain US high tech surveillance. Only US intelligence knows how much the population is collaborating or not.
Like you said… there is a lot of speculation. Speculation about those “foreign fighters” too. I dont think there are that many… as for Iraqi Baathists. They are hated in many places and fair game for other iraqi resistance.
Progress is slow
But that doesn’t mean there is no progress. Finishing the job in Iraq may well cost the US more than Bush or anybody was willing to spend. But the US will probably finish it.
Even if the US does a pretty good job, there will be those who will claim for decades the whole place was ruined by the Americans.
The language barrier is no doubt slowing things down.
Naturally the question of “Could it have been done better by the UN” always arises.
Curiously the attack on the UN HQ show that the “freedom fighters” take the abilities of the UN more seriously than Bush does.
Yeah, they seriously took advantage of the fact that the UN building was guarded by UN troops not the US military and that they have designated these as “soft” targets not hard ones.
Nothing like a sucker punch to prove your fighting skills.
Somebody feed the hamsters. I tried to post this a couple hours ago and it would not take.
December while it may well be that a small number of Iraqis are actually doing the shooting and bombing, if we learned anything in Vietnam, in the Philippines at the turn of the 19th century, in western Missouri following the American Civil War, by the example of Northern Ireland, the Irish Civil War, the Civil War in Algeria and the Revolt of the Generals, the British experience in Rhodesia and in half a dozen countries, including Iraq, in the years following the Second World War, and on the West Bank and Gaza in Israel/Palestine it is that a guerilla movement cannot exist and cannot function without substantial support from the local population. The fact that our people are being constantly sniped and shelled and otherwise killed and maimed means that the shooters and shellers and blowers up are finding support and refuge in the local population. A population that is happy to have us there does not support a guerilla movement.
And don’t break out that old chestnut about the Werewolves, demobilized SS types, in occupied Germany. What happened with unreconstructed Nazi in 1945-1946 was not even a pimple on the butt of what is going on in Iraq.
Clearly, you and I do not agree about the success of the present Nation Building in Iraq. I say it is , if not going badly, not going as well as could be reasonably expected. I think something needs to change. I don’t know what has to change and specifically what the US can change. It is apparent to me that nothing significant is going to change until the security situation markedly improves. How do you do that?
Well, maybe not the population at large. The Baathist regime was very large. There could be as many as 20,000 or more Fedayeen and other Baathists involved, and the ‘population’ that’s hiding them could be little more than their families and friends. Also, don’t underestimate the power of intimidation. These are the people who ruled Iraq with an iron fist, and they could have the population terrified.
So the mighty US of A, saviour of the world, cannot instill confidence enough that these people wont rat on the hated Baathists ?
I dont think terror is the only thing holding the population from helping out... its disgust and years of hate in relation to the US. You wont change that with nice words, shooting of civilians and bad plans.The success of Iraq is up to Iraqis, not the US. We’ve done the dirty work and are now trying to restore the basics. The money is there if they would help stop the destruction. They litterally don’t understand that they are their own worst enemy. You can’t stand in the street and bitch about electricity and expect to have a future. If someone was trying to frag my utilities I would be out there with a vigalante group trying to find them. But hey, standing next to 50,000 of your fellow citizens yelling “God is great” will probably solve the problem. NOT.
Bottom line, they are supposed to be well educated. I expected more from them and maybe Bush should too. I think he ought to deliver a “get off your ass and help yourselves” speech. And then tell them “otherwise, we’re out of there”.
And if you were in Baghdad carrying weapons, american soldiers would shoot you.
This is rich. Really. Your post just shows how brainwashed some people can be about the absoluteness of their position. A population is fighting an invader and you say they are their own worst enemies. Everything would be better if they just submitted to the invaders, huh? That would end all conflict. So why doesn’t the USA end all conflicts by just submitting to Usama Ben Laden?
And the problem is the Iraqis “are supposed to be well educated”? Shit, why didn’t someone warn Rumsfeld that the Iraqis were uneducated hicks who would fight for their freedom?
The fact is they are fighting against the occupation of their homeland by a foreign and hated force and the situation is deteriorating. The Red Cross has pulled out half of their people because they feel the occupation forces cannot guarantee law and order and the Red Cross people are at risk. UK-based charity and relief organization Oxfam has also pulled out for the same reasons. U.S. deaths surpass Iraq war total.
But now we have the usual suspects telling us that the situation in Iraq is much better than reported and/or it is all the fault of the Iraqis for not assenting to the invasion and occupation.
Quote filed under “compassionate conservatism”.
Enjoy,
Steven
[QUOTE]
*Originally posted by sailor *
**This is rich. Really. Your post just shows how brainwashed some people can be about the absoluteness of their position. A population is fighting an invader and you say they are their own worst enemies. Everything would be better if they just submitted to the invaders, huh? That would end all conflict. So why doesn’t the USA end all conflicts by just submitting to Usama Ben Laden?
**
Brainwashed? Nice. Start a debate by insulting me.
I was very clear about my position. You have thousands of people expending a lot of energy protesting their conditions instead of doing something about it. It doesn’t require an armed militia, just a neighborhood watch group. Better to light a candle than curse the dark…
**
The fact is they are fighting against the occupation of their homeland by a foreign and hated force and the situation is deteriorating. **
You used the word “fact” in a sentence involving your opinion. I disagree with your premise that US troops are universally hated by Iraqis. The troops were welcomed in the North and the South when they came in. That was documented by imbedded reporters. It would be safe to say that any situation that involved civilian deaths would be looked upon unfavorably. I have not seen anything to suggest there is a popular movement to remove the troops, including and specifically, Muslim clerics supporting such an event.
If there was universal hatred for such a small US force I would anticipate a quick defeat in a guerilla war. It doesn’t take much imagination to see what would happen if thousands of protesters in the streets were armed with only pistols.
The protests in the streets appear to fall into 2 categories, dissatisfaction with a lack of utilities, and castigation over civilian deaths. None of the protests have erupted into a warring situation despite having to deal with 100 degree heat and rolling blackouts (something that could easily trigger a riot in an American city). Civilian deaths have been dealt with using blood money (money paid to the surviving family). Although this isn’t going to start a love fest it shows an attempt to do the right thing… Utilities are slowly being restored which should reduce the sheer discomfort they are experiencing. This in turn, should reduce the demonstrations. That is my prediction.