# Lounsbury on Iraq & MENA: War, Politics, Economy & Related Questions **URL:** \ **Category:** Great Debates\ **Created:** [March 26, 2003, 8:44am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/lounsbury-on-iraq-mena-war-politics-economy-related-questions/164259 "2003-03-26T08:44:33Z")\ **Posts on this page:** 20\ **Page:** 4
**Author:** ![Liberal](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/l/848f3c/32.png) [@Liberal](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Liberal)\ **Post date:** [March 26, 2003, 3:35pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/lounsbury-on-iraq-mena-war-politics-economy-related-questions/164259/61 "2003-03-26T15:35:51Z")
I would certainly hope that using children as shields is not something that Arabs would do in general, but rather is something that is done by a barbarian who happens to be Arab. ---
**Author:** ![system](https://global.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/original/2X/e/e489c3b7d8fce19c4b355dd4fc3f88cc39c34b87.png) [@system](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/system)\ **Post date:** [March 26, 2003, 3:35pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/lounsbury-on-iraq-mena-war-politics-economy-related-questions/164259/62 "2003-03-26T15:35:56Z")
> [@](#): > > \*Originally posted by blanx \* > When the Iraqi’s increase the use of “non-kosher” tricks- e.g. human shields, fighting in civillian clothes, pretending to surrender, basically using the tools they have in the face of overwhelming military might- if the US is able to not respond in kind- _razing city blocks, using Israeli-style anti terrorism tactics-_ it may help with the public opinion. Where? In this region, like hell it would. Or are you saying if the US is able to defeat guerrilla w/o the italicized part, that would help with PR. Yes, it would. But that is hard. > [@](#): > > Too bad about the king- a royal family might serve as a decent intermediary step. Family was British imposed. Those kinds of solutions do not work. ---
**Author:** ![tagos](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/t/bbe5ce/32.png) [@tagos](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/tagos)\ **Post date:** [March 26, 2003, 3:37pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/lounsbury-on-iraq-mena-war-politics-economy-related-questions/164259/63 "2003-03-26T15:37:42Z")
> [@](#): > > \*Originally posted by blanx \* > \*\*I think I was too brief in saying guerrilla warfare- > > When the Iraqi’s increase the use of “non-kosher” tricks- e.g. human shields, fighting in civillian clothes, pretending to surrender, basically using the tools they have in the face of overwhelming military might- if the US is able to not respond in kind- razing city blocks, using Israeli-style anti terrorism tactics- it may help with the public opinion. > > The likelihood of this is not great. > > Too bad about the king- a royal family might serve as a decent intermediary step. > > blanx \*\* It’s my understanding, based purely on something said on the News the other day, that an occupied people are entitled to wage guerilla warfare under the terms of the Convention. That opinion may be wrong although it seems reasonable. The question is, what counts as an occupation? As far as the Arab street is concerned I suspect they’ll see it as an occupation regardless of what the UK/USA want them to believe, and certainly so if a US headed administration as conceived by Bush is installed, regardless of any Iraqi figure-heads. Only free elections can resolve that, or possibly a UN controlled interim administration. ---
**Author:** ![xenophon41](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/xenophon41/32/253_2.png) [@xenophon41](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/xenophon41)\ **Post date:** [March 26, 2003, 3:39pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/lounsbury-on-iraq-mena-war-politics-economy-related-questions/164259/64 "2003-03-26T15:39:16Z")
**Coll** , that’s what I think **blanx** was saying; if the US has to engage in urban warfare, we should eschew the kind of destructive/brutal tactics which would be most effective, due to the unacceptably high collateral damage. While this kind of goes along with your ‘blood committment’ comment, I don’t know if the resulting protracted street fighting would be any more beneficial to the US from a PR standpoint… ---
**Author:** ![blanx](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/b/f04885/32.png) [@blanx](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/blanx)\ **Post date:** [March 26, 2003, 3:43pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/lounsbury-on-iraq-mena-war-politics-economy-related-questions/164259/65 "2003-03-26T15:43:19Z")
yeah- **xenophon** got it right- if we are able to use the restraint and not just smite the cities from above, it will certainly cost us troops, but may save lives in the long run. This is why I thought “shock and awe” was such a spectacularly bad idea for symbolic purposes. blanx ---
**Author:** ![IzzyR](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/i/2acd7d/32.png) [@IzzyR](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/IzzyR)\ **Post date:** [March 26, 2003, 3:47pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/lounsbury-on-iraq-mena-war-politics-economy-related-questions/164259/66 "2003-03-26T15:47:39Z")
When you say the US needs a short war, how short is short enough, in your estimation? And about the likelihood of destabilizing regimes - how likely is it that the various regimes get overthrown? Are we closer to 15% or 75%? Obviously it depends on how things play out, and will vary by country - it sounds like you think Mubarak is doomed in any event (many people have said the same about the Saudis). What is the worst-case scenario (in terms of the regional fallout - not the actual war itself)? I imagine that a number of local nations become Iran-style radical Islamic theocracies. What happens then? Are we concerned about the use of oil as an economic lever (irrelevent in some cases, like Egypt)? Or are we primarily concerned about support for terrorism? ---
**Author:** ![Liberal](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/l/848f3c/32.png) [@Liberal](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Liberal)\ **Post date:** [March 26, 2003, 3:47pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/lounsbury-on-iraq-mena-war-politics-economy-related-questions/164259/67 "2003-03-26T15:47:47Z")
> [@](#): > > Where? In this region, like hell it would. Or are you saying if the US is able to defeat guerrilla w/o the italicized part, that would help with PR. Yes, it would. But that is hard. To be clear, are you saying that they make no distinction between being sneaky (e.g., dressing up in enemy uniforms) and being cowardly (e.g., holding up a child as a shield)? ---
**Author:** ![system](https://global.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/original/2X/e/e489c3b7d8fce19c4b355dd4fc3f88cc39c34b87.png) [@system](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/system)\ **Post date:** [March 26, 2003, 4:07pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/lounsbury-on-iraq-mena-war-politics-economy-related-questions/164259/68 "2003-03-26T16:07:06Z")
> [@](#): > > \*Originally posted by IzzyR > When you say the US needs a short war, how short is short enough, in your estimation? One month is the maximum before we begin to see bad shit. However, making it short at the cost of terrible destruction in civilian areas is worse than going long and being seen as willing to spill a little of our own blood for liberty and civilian life. [quote] And about the likelihood of destabilizing regimes - how likely is it that the various regimes get overthrown? Are we closer to 15% or 75%? Obviously it depends on how things play out, and will vary by country - it sounds like you think Mubarak is doomed in any event (many people have said the same about the Saudis). [/quote Bah the Saudis have money and an efficient redistributional mechanism. If they can somehow manage to liberalize their economy and slowly break the welfare state down, they can survive. It would also be nice to bring down the birthrate. These are hard things to do, but with a century of oil reserves, it can be done. In theory. The Ibn Saud may be doomed, but for longer term reasons. Mubarek is not doomed, the nouveau-Mamluk system that is the Egyptian government now is doomed. Although I would give 25% odds that a month long war would see nasty things happening in Cairo. Really nasty. Or more distancing by the Egyptians from the US. The regime is going to live another 10 years, but it would be better to see it go now, than in the disaster that awaits. I don’t see, if the war is short, any regime collapsing, but no matter what, I see a surge in al-Qaeda recruitment and sympathy and a consequent weakening in activities against. Reconstruction is as important as the combat. > [@](#): > > What is the worst-case scenario (in terms of the regional fallout - not the actual war itself)? I imagine that a number of local nations become Iran-style radical Islamic theocracies. What happens then? Are we concerned about the use of oil as an economic lever (irrelevent in some cases, like Egypt)? Or are we primarily concerned about support for terrorism? Well, worst case is Egyptian regime collapses in the midst of some kind of economic crisis in part triggered by the liquidity & currency crisis I noted prior. Maybe Yemen too, but eh, who cares. The real issue is the surge in support for al-Qaeda, the people able to say, look they are out to kill us (the Muslims) so let’s give it back to them. In re Lib’s comments… “They”? Desperate people do desperate things. If it makes you feel better to condemn that, go ahead. I’m not there, I don’t know what the reality is. Are women and children joining in the fight, are they hostages, both? ---
**Author:** ![IzzyR](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/i/2acd7d/32.png) [@IzzyR](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/IzzyR)\ **Post date:** [March 26, 2003, 4:08pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/lounsbury-on-iraq-mena-war-politics-economy-related-questions/164259/69 "2003-03-26T16:08:32Z")
BTW, I would disagree with taking increased US casualties in order to avoid hardship or casualties for civilians. While one might hope that the Iraqis or other Arabs would be won over by such a demonstration, I think generally people who are already enemies do not interpret such things charitably. I think it is more likely that this sacrifice will be ignored, and instead there will be a focus on the great number of casualties that the glorious Iraqi fighters managed to inflict on the enemy. Which will provide greater anti-American heroes to look up to and an enduring image of American weakness. Even if it is possible that taking these casualties might have some positive impact, it is at least uncertain as to the overall impact, while the increased casualties are almost certain. Unjustifiable, IMHO. Also, for **col** , could you be a bit more specific about your second item (the difference between British & US rhetoric)? And I agree with your third point but not your fourth. Unless you merely mean that the US should stop _talking_ about Iraqi oil paying for the reconstruction, but ultimately do it anyway. One crucial aspect, IMHO, is that the US should get out ASAP. The longer the occupation is, the longer it will stick in the eye of people in Iraq and the rest of the region. (This is also true in Afghanistan and elsewhere. As time goes on, it seems like the US is occupying a larger and larger percentage of the world - not good). One thing to look at - and something I’m not clear on myself - is the US occupations of Germany & Japan. Those countries had fought bitter wars against the US, and had been hard in the grip of ultra-nationalist feelings, and yet somehow the occupations seemed to go relatively well. Again, I’m not familiar with those situations, and they might be very different. ---
**Author:** ![CTB](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/c/e9a140/32.png) [@CTB](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/CTB)\ **Post date:** [March 26, 2003, 4:27pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/lounsbury-on-iraq-mena-war-politics-economy-related-questions/164259/70 "2003-03-26T16:27:33Z")
**Collounsbury** , There has been no end of debate here regarding the effects of domestic dissent in the US having some sort of bearing on the feelings of the military and civilian population of Iraq and thus potentially prolonging the war. I would be very interested to hear any insight you could provide regarding this topic both for the folks in Iraq, and those in other neighboring countries. How is it being played in the local media? Does it project a weakened resolve on the part of the current administration? Thank you for your copious time in providing some genuine first-hand information. CTB ---
**Author:** ![system](https://global.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/original/2X/e/e489c3b7d8fce19c4b355dd4fc3f88cc39c34b87.png) [@system](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/system)\ **Post date:** [March 26, 2003, 4:30pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/lounsbury-on-iraq-mena-war-politics-economy-related-questions/164259/71 "2003-03-26T16:30:04Z")
> [@](#): > > Originally posted by IzzyR BTW, I would disagree with taking increased US casualties in order to avoid hardship or casualties for civilians. … Which will provide greater anti-American heroes to look up to and an enduring image of American weakness. The last part of that line is utter rubbish. Winning while taking casualites is not weakness. What will be seen as weakness, and sow hatred is a greater regard for our blood while “rescuing” Iraqi civilians than Iraqi civilian blood. Already opinion is running against us: see appendum. [quote] Even if it is possible that taking these casualties might have some positive impact, it is at least uncertain as to the overall impact, while the increased casualties are almost certain. Unjustifiable, IMHO. [/uote] Well the whole motherfucking war is unjustifiable on any **well-informed** rational cost benefit analysis, and war itself is uncertainity. Don’t want to break any eggs, don’t undertake to make a big fucking omelette. > [@](#): > > Also, for **col** , could you be a bit more specific about your second item (the difference between British & US rhetoric)? I’ll have to take notes while watching the news this evening if my damned satelite dish is repaired. > [@](#): > > And I agree with your third point but not your fourth. Unless you merely mean that the US should stop _talking_ about Iraqi oil paying for the reconstruction, but ultimately do it anyway. No I mean that in addition to Iraqi oil paying for things, we should bloody well pony up some of our own goddamned money to rebuild. Nothing worse than cheapskate bigmouthed bullies. > [@](#): > > One crucial aspect, IMHO, is that the US should get out ASAP. The longer the occupation is, the longer it will stick in the eye of people in Iraq and the rest of the region. (This is also true in Afghanistan and elsewhere. As time goes on, it seems like the US is occupying a larger and larger percentage of the world - not good). Well yes, except you’ve just waltzed into the mother of all tarbabies, cause if it ain’t done right, well we’ll have to come back. Again and again. Pandora’s Box > [@](#): > > One thing to look at - and something I’m not clear on myself - is the US occupations of Germany & Japan. Those countries had fought bitter wars against the US, and had been hard in the grip of ultra-nationalist feelings, and yet somehow the occupations seemed to go relatively well. Again, I’m not familiar with those situations, and they might be very different. (a) Japan and Germany were unitairy states with well developed economies and infrastructures, and the war against them was widely supported outside of their homelands. (b) Both Japan and Germany were solid historiies, not riven by internal dissension verging on civil war. © Neither Japan nor Germany had colonial histories and the deep seated resentments stemming from them. (d) Neither Japan nor Germany were subject to or open to by cultural conne xions to an extent and undefeated virulent anti-Western counter-ideology (Islamism a la al-Qaeda or Shiite radicalism). I could go on but I need to do real work. In re the ‘liberation’ and opinion, I offer the following brief selection. Arab media obviously is yet more negative, but I believe this is balanced. On Internal Iraqi Opinion Obviously, there are no polls, some insights then: Eyewitness: Baghdad’s shock and anger [http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/middle\_east/2888429.stm](http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/middle_east/2888429.stm) Shia leader warns US not to stay on By Najmeh Bozorgmehr in Tehran Published: March 25 2003 19:08 [http://news.ft.com/servlet/ContentServer?pagename=FT.com/StoryFT/FullStory&c=StoryFT&cid=1048313130742&p=1012571727172](http://news.ft.com/servlet/ContentServer?pagename=FT.com/StoryFT/FullStory&c=StoryFT&cid=1048313130742&p=1012571727172) Saddam Hussein’s power base [http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/middle\_east/2886163.stm](http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/middle_east/2886163.stm) Battle for hearts and minds at Umm Qasr [http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/middle\_east/2887545.stm](http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/middle_east/2887545.stm) 2 Very interesting for it matches my own experience: Talking war with Iraqi exiles [http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/middle\_east/2882439.stm](http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/middle_east/2882439.stm) Basra: Why they are not cheering [http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/middle\_east/2884769.stm](http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/middle_east/2884769.stm) Doubts and Questions [http://abcnews.go.com/sections/wnt/World/iraq\_safwan030322.html](http://abcnews.go.com/sections/wnt/World/iraq_safwan030322.html) Par sursaut patriotique, des civils rejoignent les forces irakiennes [http://www.lemonde.fr/article/0,5987,3462--314331-,00.html](http://www.lemonde.fr/article/0,5987,3462--314331-,00.html) If one follows the quotes from Iraqis on the ground in these articles, from diverse sources, it is very clear that there is almost no popular enthusiasm for a foreign invasion. Reluctant acceptance in some quarters but not enthusaism. It is not hard to turn that into something nasty. ---
**Author:** ![bordelond](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/bordelond/32/150_2.png) [@bordelond](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/bordelond)\ **Post date:** [March 26, 2003, 4:34pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/lounsbury-on-iraq-mena-war-politics-economy-related-questions/164259/72 "2003-03-26T16:34:20Z")
**Collounsbury** , I appreciate your contributions here. What you’ve written makes me throw up my hands. It seems that without Western intervention, Iraq would have been ruled by Saddam Hussein’s descendents _ad infinitum_. But Western intervention is resented (forever?), so no good options seem available for ousting Saddam. The picture you painted seems hopeless. I guess over the years, Iraqi society may have eventually “healed itself” somehow, but could America really afford to wait for this? BTW, how come there aren’t any Middle Eastern Pancho Villas or Simon Bolivars knocking down the more brutal of dictators? The Republican Guard can’t shoot everybody, I would think. Don’t the have-nots in the Middle East get tired of … well … not having? Or is it that Saddam, Khomeini, Qaddhafi _have_ been the Villas and Bolivars all along? Ugh … like I said before – it looks hopeless. How could the Middle East ever self-democratize? ---
**Author:** ![system](https://global.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/original/2X/e/e489c3b7d8fce19c4b355dd4fc3f88cc39c34b87.png) [@system](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/system)\ **Post date:** [March 26, 2003, 4:34pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/lounsbury-on-iraq-mena-war-politics-economy-related-questions/164259/73 "2003-03-26T16:34:37Z")
On domestic opposition. I do not believe it has any impact on what the Iraqis are doing up or down the hierarchy. It is very played up in the Arab press, exaggerated I would guess in re the small demos in the States but seemed to be on target on the global level. I don’t know how one would characterize this: it would seem to me that it helps humanize the image of the West and even the States and allows local opinion to be mad at the Government rather than the American people. But that is tenuous. Too complex to answer in the end. > [@](#): > > \*Originally posted by CTB \* > \*\ ***Collounsbury** , > > There has been no end of debate here regarding the effects of domestic dissent in the US having some sort of bearing on the feelings of the military and civilian population of Iraq and thus potentially prolonging the war. I would be very interested to hear any insight you could provide regarding this topic both for the folks in Iraq, and those in other neighboring countries. How is it being played in the local media? Does it project a weakened resolve on the part of the current administration? Thank you for your copious time in providing some genuine first-hand information. > > CTB \*\* ---
**Author:** ![hawthorne](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/h/c89c15/32.png) [@hawthorne](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/hawthorne)\ **Post date:** [March 26, 2003, 4:44pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/lounsbury-on-iraq-mena-war-politics-economy-related-questions/164259/74 "2003-03-26T16:44:18Z")
You didn’t like **IzzyR** ’s characterisation of the question, so let me recast it: > [@](#): > > _Collounsbury_ > One month is the maximum before we begin to see bad shit. What is the trade off between this and killing civilians wholesale? ---
**Author:** ![system](https://global.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/original/2X/e/e489c3b7d8fce19c4b355dd4fc3f88cc39c34b87.png) [@system](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/system)\ **Post date:** [March 26, 2003, 4:44pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/lounsbury-on-iraq-mena-war-politics-economy-related-questions/164259/75 "2003-03-26T16:44:26Z")
> [@](#): > > \*Originally posted by bordelond \* > What you’ve written makes me throw up my hands. It seems that without Western intervention, Iraq would have been ruled by Saddam Hussein’s descendents _ad infinitum_. But Western intervention is resented (forever?), so no good options seem available for ousting Saddam. The picture you painted seems hopeless. No I very much doubt Saddam’s sons would have been able to take over. Unlike the much more clever al-Assads of Syria, Saddam’s regime is just too nasty, and too clumsy. On his death a very nasty revolution would occur. Prior to that, I could see this being much better placed had the proper diplomatic and cultural ground work been done. It was not, we were too clearly rar’in to go. > [@](#): > > I guess over the years, Iraqi society may have eventually “healed itself” somehow, but could America really afford to wait for this? Can it afford to wait for Egypt? Yemen? Saddam was one guy, a nasty regime but only a degree different. There is nothing unique about this, and there was no real direct threat. Long term threats, yes. Direct, no. > [@](#): > > BTW, how come there aren’t any Middle Eastern Pancho Villas or Simon Bolivars knocking down the more brutal of dictators? The Republican Guard can’t shoot everybody, I would think. Don’t the have-nots in the Middle East get tired of … well … not having? 1960s were revolutionary, since then things have been tamped down. This is not new, and there will be revolutions, but they come in their own time. BTW, Simon Bolivar is not a good analogy. > [@](#): > > Or is it that Saddam, Khomeini, Qaddhafi _have_ been the Villas and Bolivars all along? Ugh … like I said before – it looks hopeless. How could the Middle East ever self-democratize? Saddam was a revolutionary at one stage. The Egyptian regime has its roots in the Nasserist revolution. Algeria, its war against France. Liberation has happened here, and peopel recall its history. Thus the turn to Islamicism in the 1980s and 1990s. Frustration. However, I would point to Jordan, Tunis, Morocco as countries that are slowly developing, building up economies slowly but somewhat surely. Not democracies, but letting it seems to me the first hardy roots go down. Syria might evolve in that direction, and Lebanon, for all its flaws is not irredemiably lost. Oman – Oman is an odd place which I don’t feel I know well enough to comment on. But we need peace for that. Evolutionary change. ---
**Author:** ![system](https://global.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/original/2X/e/e489c3b7d8fce19c4b355dd4fc3f88cc39c34b87.png) [@system](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/system)\ **Post date:** [March 26, 2003, 4:46pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/lounsbury-on-iraq-mena-war-politics-economy-related-questions/164259/76 "2003-03-26T16:46:06Z")
> [@](#): > > \*Originally posted by hawthorne \* > \*\*You didn’t like **IzzyR** ’s characterisation of the question, so let me recast it: What is the trade off between this and killing civilians wholesale? \*\* I’m not sure. We get into the military realm here, and this is not my area. I gave you my best opinion on how massive casualties would go down. I frankly can’t do any better. ---
**Author:** ![Liberal](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/l/848f3c/32.png) [@Liberal](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Liberal)\ **Post date:** [March 26, 2003, 4:46pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/lounsbury-on-iraq-mena-war-politics-economy-related-questions/164259/77 "2003-03-26T16:46:06Z")
> [@](#): > > Desperate people do desperate things. If it makes you feel better to condemn that, go ahead. I’m not there, I don’t know what the reality is. Are women and children joining in the fight, are they hostages, both? Here is what I saw. A child stumbled out the door. Right behind her was a man with a rifle, another child and a woman. The man grabbed the first child under her arms and held her up to his chest while he shot at British troops from the hip. They did not return fire. Yes, desperate people do desperate things. Barbaric people do barbaric things. And cowards do cowardly things. It certainly doesn’t make me feel any better to condemn cowardice and barbarianism. But the only men I can imagine who would not condemn them are cowards and barbarians. ---
**Author:** ![system](https://global.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/original/2X/e/e489c3b7d8fce19c4b355dd4fc3f88cc39c34b87.png) [@system](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/system)\ **Post date:** [March 26, 2003, 4:52pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/lounsbury-on-iraq-mena-war-politics-economy-related-questions/164259/78 "2003-03-26T16:52:35Z")
Well Lib old man the fact I am where I am pretty much excludes cowardice, so I guess I am a barbarian. However, leaving aside your not so subtle dig, that sounds well beyond the pale, but was this shown on Arab TV, I dunno so I can’t say what the awareness is. I suspect, however, that people are so angry (they are angry) that many will overlook, just as many Americans have excused our own past atrocities. Regretably, war seems to bring out our inner barbarian. > [@](#): > > \*Originally posted by Libertarian \* > \*\*Here is what I saw. A child stumbled out the door. Right behind her was a man with a rifle, another child and a woman. The man grabbed the first child under her arms and held her up to his chest while he shot at British troops from the hip. They did not return fire. Yes, desperate people do desperate things. Barbaric people do barbaric things. And cowards do cowardly things. It certainly doesn’t make me feel any better to condemn cowardice and barbarianism. But the only men I can imagine who would not condemn them are cowards and barbarians. \*\* ---
**Author:** ![system](https://global.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/original/2X/e/e489c3b7d8fce19c4b355dd4fc3f88cc39c34b87.png) [@system](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/system)\ **Post date:** [March 26, 2003, 4:56pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/lounsbury-on-iraq-mena-war-politics-economy-related-questions/164259/79 "2003-03-26T16:56:10Z")
BTW the prior post is not to imply Americans alone are prone to atrocities nor that we are committing such in the present war, but rather it is was in re how war distorts one vision. ---
**Author:** ![IzzyR](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/i/2acd7d/32.png) [@IzzyR](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/IzzyR)\ **Post date:** [March 26, 2003, 4:58pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/lounsbury-on-iraq-mena-war-politics-economy-related-questions/164259/80 "2003-03-26T16:58:25Z")
> [@](#): > > \*Originally posted by Collounsbury \* > Winning while taking casualites is not weakness. That depends on what the range of possible outcomes is. To use a sports analogy, it’s as if the top ranked team was taken to double overtime by the last place team - even if they win it is a sort of moral victory for the underdogs. Here, as you note, the US is the 800 pound gorilla, and even if they win, the Iraqis “win” too, if they can at least bloody the gorilla’s nose. Meanwhile he gorilla looks more vulnerable than it did previously. [Here’s](http://www.nytimes.com/2003/03/26/international/worldspecial/26ARAB.html?pagewanted=all&position=bottom) a good article. > [@](#): > > DAMASCUS, Syria, March 25 — Normally the appearance of Saddam Hussein on television prompts catcalls, curses and prayers for his demise from a regular gathering of about 20 Saudi businessmen and intellectuals, but Monday night was different. When he appeared, they prayed that God would preserve him for a few more weeks. > > “They want Saddam Hussein to go and they expect him to go eventually, but they want him to hold on a little longer because they want to teach the Americans a lesson,” said Khaled M. Batarfi, the managing editor of the newspaper Al Madina, describing the scene in a sprawling living room in Jidda, Saudi Arabia. > > “Arab pride is at stake here,” he added, describing a sentiment sweeping the region from Algeria to Yemen. “American propaganda said it was going to be so quick and easy, meaning we Arabs are weak and unable to fight. Now it is like a Mike Tyson fight against some weak guy. They don’t want the weak guy knocked out in the first 40 seconds.” > [@](#): > > “The Iraqis are real men, and I am proud of them,” said Gasser Fahmi, a 30-year-old computer engineer interviewed on a Cairo street. “At the start of the war, I was very frustrated and did not want to hear the news, but now I watch the news closely to see how many losses the Americans suffer.” I think this describes a similar phenomena to I’m talking about. > [@](#): > > Well the whole motherfucking war is unjustifiable on any well-informed rational cost benefit analysis, and war itself is uncertainity. Don’t want to break any eggs, don’t undertake to make a big fucking omelette. Quite possible - I was not a supporter (or opponent) of this war. But the war is upon us and can’t be undone, and now we focus on getting the best possible outcome. It is not at all surprising that most Iraqis don’t want the US to invade their country. Actually what is a bit surprising is how many Americans believe that this is not the case. I think it is an example of people falling victim to their own propaganda and self-image. But another good point is one that you’ve brought up earlier. Many people are simply incapable of believing that a lot of people out there simply don’t share their values. These people assume as a matter of course that if they regard Saddam’s actions as being unmitigated evil, that everyone else will too and to the same degree. I think this is, in part, both the result and cause of a tendency for the government and media to portray the currently-reigning Bad Guy as being solely responsible for all evils in the country - clearly he must be acting in violation of the wishes of his terrified citizens. This latter assumption does not always hold. [Previous page](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/lounsbury-on-iraq-mena-war-politics-economy-related-questions/164259.md?page=3) [Next page](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/lounsbury-on-iraq-mena-war-politics-economy-related-questions/164259.md?page=5)