I have connected the two repeatedly. I’ve just never seen the continuance v. dismantling of established national institutions associated with either nationalism or its opposites, whatever they might be.
In 1975, Pol Pot dismantled pretty much every institution Cambodia had had up to that point. In no way was he considered an adversary of Cambodian nationalism, and not just because such a minor sin would have gotten lost in the shuffle in Pol Pot’s case, but because he was basically a nationalist, as his opposition to Communist Vietnam’s invasion of Cambodia in 1979 demonstrates.
The belief that one can tear down institutions wholesale and replace them with entirely new ones without big problems, is neither nationalist nor anti-nationalist, but a pathologically radical idealism that thinks it knows what’s best for other people without considering basic attributes about people - such as, that it takes time for us to build up trust, whether it’s trust in other people, in institutions, whatever. In this, neoconservatism and Maoism are close cousins.
Many Iraqis surely disliked the Ba’athist-led Iraqi army. But they also knew what to expect of it. Ditto the government as it was during Saddam. What we’ve created since, nobody knows whether they can trust it in any way at all.
This seems to have been in reply to my response to your earlier comment about “military groups.” Pretty much any military groups in Iraq now are U.S.-created or trained. When you talk about “raiders” and “military groups” in the same vein, you could mean anything, and it stretches the limits of my ability to carry on a conversation with you.
The military groups are perhaps vestigages of local war lords. If they are attempting to just take advantage of the chaotic situation for quick reward or are trying to establish a state within a state is unclear. There also are more amorphous groups which may be looters taking advantage of the lack of police .
There is a movement toward moving people out of neighborhoods into another which would have a greater concentration of their religious group. They say you wake up and see a Klashnikov bullet in an envelope mailed to your door with a message telling you to leave.What are the political implications. Who knows? Who finances them?
Fake roadblocks where people are robbed and shot are known. Is Iran funding military groups? To what end. Many Saudis are in Iraq. Is Turkey active in the north?Lots of questions ,no andwers. I talk to people from Iraq almost everyday. One place I go has 2 Iraqis and 2 Lebanese workers. They think Israel is in back of oit all working with the US to get what I don’t understand.Whatever happens in Iraq ,they will give some blame to Israel.
Vestiges of local war lords? Thanks for playing, but under Saddam, there weren’t any ‘local war lords’ in the sense that we generally understand the term - that is, semi-independent local/regional strongmen.
Any such warlords have emerged since the fall of Saddam, hence are not ‘vestiges’ of anything at all.
Well yeah, but gangs of criminals and looters don’t need to be funded by anyone.
This is one of the things this thread’s about. The ethnic cleansing is going on already. Given that reality (and our inability to prevent it), I’d like to see it happen in a more nonviolent manner. Get everybody out of the places they’ll otherwise be forced out of, and into areas where their own ethnic and religious groups are dominant. Then leave.
To what end, indeed. The fact is, the Shi’ite militias that the Iranians might fund, are getting weapons and training from us since they’re also government security forces.
Well, they’ll blame Israel for everything. I’m satisfied with blaming Israel for stuff it actually does, which is all closer to home.