Related to the Do Iraqis support the Interim government? thread, but I didn’t want to hijack it too much.
For those who may not be aware, “Red Dawn” was a movie where the US got invaded by the USSR and Cuba. A group of teenagers (led by Patrick Swayze) fought back against the occupiers using guerilla tactics, sabotage, and sniping.
Now that we know the insurgents aren’t “foreign fighters”, could it be possible they aren’t really “bad guys” or terrorists but are fighting back against an occupying force? While I know they aren’t just attacking US soldiers, but other Iraqis, could the insurgents just be fighting a puppet government?
If the US was invaded and they installed a government, wouldn’t we also fight it?
It makes me wonder how much we’re really wanted there. On the other hand, I still think we can make things better than when Saddam is in charge.
Moreover, I’m sure the average Iraqi doesn’t care one way or the other, just wants the fighting to end so they to get back to work and on with their families and lives.
The insurgents don’t seem to realise that they are the ones manipulated and used as puppets by their own leader Al Sadr, rather than Allawi, the thing is, Sadrs army is made up of crooks, prisoners, murders and poor people of Najaf and elsewhere in Iraq. They have very little legitimatcy in the eyes of the majority of Iraq, but they do recieve sympathy, this because of it fighting the ‘occupation’
Ok, in essense yes, the Iraqi government is a puppet government until it can train its own armed forces to a standard where it can protect itself and its citizens from outside and internal attacks. The main thing everyone keeps forgetting is that there will be elections in January.
Not unless the previous government was worse than the one they installed.
All the more reason to support the interim government.
Well, I’d hate to say that the insurgents are the moral equivalent of the Wolverines, but some certainly are the practical equivalent.
What’s pretty damn clear in Iraq is that there are different people taking up arms for different reasons. While Ryan_Liam (in this thread and the other one mentioned) seems to think that it’s all Sadr’s fault, there are also those who still love Saddam, some Zarqawi/Al Qaeda types, common criminals, and a few militant nationalists, all alongside religous extremists.
Basically, we shoved a stick into a hornet’s nest. Worse yet, we don’t really know the extent to which those groups are working with each other.
But back to the point at hand, one news story a few months back cited anonymous intelligence officials as saying that there might be as many as 20,000 insurgents, some of whom are part-time,not associated with any political group, and completely focused on getting the Americans kicked out of Iraq. Like it or not, that is awfully reminicient of Red Dawn.
In the future (six months, three months, a year, whatever it works out to), what happens when Al Sadr is no longer the Big Bad Guy?
Will you then be posting stating how “Muhammed Al Muhammed” is actually the threat, and blah blah blah. Before this, Hussein and his boys were the ones who were really controlling the resistance, right?
Then it will be someone else, hey, even if it turned out to be the Interim government I would be against that.
Because it is mostly Sadr and Al Zarqawi who are the main perpetrators, besides the Saddamist and Baa’th types, they are an extreme minority. Is it that hard to believe that maybe the Iraqis see the interim government as the only way out of the shit they’ve seen for the past 30 odd years?
The Iraquis are an educated and sophisticated people. It IS hard to believe that they would be that stupid.
They have seen enough British and American Puppets to be able to recognize the latest incarnation.
The bottom line:the agenda of this pack of cia terrorists (“Allawi the Arm”, famous for throwing bombs at busses full of schoolgirls…) is not one that will shepherd the Iraqis “out of the shit”
Even though they all know it is a temporary measure, and that ELECTIONS (I cannot stress this enough) are in Janurary. The only stupid way out of all this is too see Sadr as a legit alternative to what the Americans have put out, unless you like Islamic theorcracy.
Heh, maybe it still doesn’t mean that somehow we change our thoughts and opinions and think ‘hey maybe if we installed democratic gov instead of all that repression shit, they’d think twice about seeing us a legitimate terrorist targets’
Need I remind you that this ‘incarnation’ is supported throughout Iraq, have you even heard of their new National Congress? Even Al Sistani supports the measure set up by the interim government. You seem to forget that Iraq was created by the British.
Yeah I guess its better to see the US government and the Iraqi gov proved wrong and to see the actualy disintergration of that state as a lesson to us all :rolleyes: the U.S occupied Japan and democracy came out of there, why is it so destined to fail in this country? Because it’s Arab and Islamic? B.S
Yes. And our troops will still be there. And then there will be elections in December 2005, and our troops will still be there. So, what’s your point?
Remember back in April when roughly 150 American troops were killed in and around Falloujah? It wasn’t Sadr and Zarqawi who were responsible for that violence. Just because our troops have pulled out of there – except for the occasional airstrike – doesn’t mean that those Baathist bad guys aren’t still around and growing more numerous.
For a good article about Falloujah and insurgents, see the NYT article here (registration req)
Look, more power to it if the IIG succeeds. But it has not been tested yet. The National Assembly was just formed last week, and there’s no way to tell if intra-governmental disputes, when they really get serious, will be settled by debate or by bullets.
And yes, Allawi is a popular figure right now. There’s also been lots of reports that his support has been bolstered by the rumors that he personally executed Iraqi prisoners, because in the eyes of many Iraqis, that makes him more of a tough man. Whatever floats their boat, I suppose, but I wouldn’t be too quick to brand him as the next George Washington.
We discussed the “Red Dawn” similarity some time ago… and many agreed that the situations were close. Its the same old idea that it was “our Son of a B***”.
Iraq may be a british creation but they have developed a fervent nationalism. To dismiss that nationalism as only anti-americanism is silly. Iraqis are nationalistic and therefore regard the US troops as occupiers no matter what.
You could compare the Iraqi insurgents with american colonial forces too. Ignorant*, dirty* and heavily armed ! :) Guerrila tactics. (* = British point of view)
The Iraqi experience with elections is not a good one. They watched Saddam routinely achieve 100% of the vote. They watched America make an international laughingstock out of its own democracy in 2000. They know very well how to spell ‘hanging chad’.
That people saying that the US government can somehow prevent a democratic election without enraging the local Iraqi population even further is silly. The fact that people believe US troops = election swindling is pretty absurd. Wouldn’t we have seen that in Afghanistan?
Then when Sadr is dealt with, then that ‘boogeyman’ will be defeated as well. . All those groups are as bad as each other I agree, and need to be defeated. They do not, any of them, represent a popular majority of Iraq. The reason why Sadr seems so popular is because of the violence he’s instigated against the Allawi government and US forces.
Maybe not, but this ‘oh lets laugh when Iraq and America fucks up’ attitude isn’t going to get anyone anywhere. Give these people a friggin chance.
At least when American forces act in foul play, theres someone there to prosecute them.
:rolleyes: nice to know where your sentiments lie. Are you the type of person who having the chance, get into a bus to Baghdad and position yourself at a powerstation so it wouldn’t get hit, because it was ‘morally wrong’
Well, no, but to say that because he thinks the American election was a farce along with the Iraq ones, cancels out the prospect of an Iraqi democratic government is offensive. But then I forgot, America is wrong in everything it has done in the past 50 years :rolleyes:
What have you used to make you assessment of (a) the sympathy ‘he’ (Sadr?) has and (b) the numbers who care if ‘he’ (Sadr?) “succeeds or not”?
The most recent CPA poll shows:
97% believe Coalition Forces are occupiers and must leave immediately
55% answered that they’d feel more safe if Coalition Forces left immediately
As far as Sadr’s goal is to remove the Coalition force from Iraq it would appear that he has more than a few sympathizers.
Sadr garnered support numbers of 68% (35 ‘strongly’, 32 ‘somewhat’) and oppose numbers of 29% (10 ‘strongly’, 19 'somewhat)
These numbers are nearly the inverse of Allawi’s (23 suport, 61 oppose).
Yeah we did. The consensus was that folks that used the :rolleyes: too much here were persons who would benefit from some remedial work at a debate clinic.
Because he let numerous criminals and thugs join his militia. He could of gone the route of political action, but he didn’t.
Well thats understandable, any force which has invaded a country is going to be resented, I understand that, but its the political alternatives that have openly attacked the US army and Interim government which are unpopular and unsupported by majority.
No it isn’t he’s not that dumb, he wants to keep the Coalition forces there as long as he can to garner support to legitimise his resistance, he knows if it goes, and a successful democratic Iraqi government is there, his opportunity will be gone.
:rolleyes: yet two percent would vote for him to become president of Iraq. They don’t support Allawi as much because they seem him not doing enough to combat the assholes like Sadr and AlQueda from launching attacks. Their support and the reasons for it differ widely.
Using this smiley ( :roll eyes: ) does not help your argument. While it is not in response to me, I still find it insulting to those sharing their opinion with you. If you want me to continue to evaluate your points, please stop using it.
persons who would benefit from some remedial work at a