That’s a bit naive. Sorry, but the Kurds hate y’all, too. They remember that they were cynically used and then fucked up the arse by the Nixon administration, even if you don’t. Let me guess: You think they’re warm and squishy for Uncle Sam because he turned on Saddam, right? And they don’t like Saddam because of that little genocidal campaign, right? So we connect the dots and they’ve all got framed “GOD BLESS AMERICA” samples hanging in their parlours. Sorry, they remember that the U.S. was supporting Saddam when that unpleasantness took place, looked the other way, and kept supplying Saddam’s regime with cash and materiel.
You know why Saddam was allowed (perhaps even encouraged) to kill off the resistance, right? Because that resistance was Shi’ite, and it was felt that a secular government like Saddam’s, warts and all, was a better alternative (from a U.S. POV) than the possibility of a radical Islamist government, like Iran’s.
“Pro-American resistance?” Right. The enemy of your enemy is not your friend.
Sigh. Must be another secret Limbaugh admirer. Opposites attract. You so much weaned on conservative talk shows, you can’t recognize free-thinking argument at all.
I’m not saying that “Clinton would have screwed up just as bad!”; I’m saying war is terrible business, whether Kosovo or Iraq. The bigger the war, the more horrible it gets. However, prez after prez, across party lines, somehow find it necessary to wage wars. Could it be there is no other way?
I always maintained that “either Clinton or Gore would have had the balls to do it”, and would do similar thing, perhaps a little better or worse. Even much maligned Carter would do closely as well as Reagan against USSR. Because there was no other way then and there is no other way now!
If anything, Dem. presidents are more warlike then Rep. ones.
Meanwhile, opposition always snipes from the sidelines. Bush was trashing Clinton Kosovo tactics, now Dems are trashing Bush. Much as you contort yourselves, you are not saying anything new.
What the fuck ? Are you seriously implying that it’s simply your country’s destiny to start war after war with no choice in the matter ?
So to make it completely clear: Yes, there is another way. Iraq was a war entirely by choice, and you and yours very well knew it, yet you pushed for it, against the warnings of your allies, a good part of the US electorate and basically speaking the rest of the world. But war you wanted and war you got. Now you have the fucking gall to come wringing your hands and say “it could be there is no other way”, as if you were just a helpless pawn of destiny. You were not. You got the dirty little war you wanted so badly. Do not try to unload the responsibility, thanks.
Can someone explain this to me? Or is it just a matter of “We thought the elections wouldn’t be held because we were boycotting them - since they weren’t cancelled we’d like to take back our boycotting and have a do-over”?
Normally NI was wont to be about twelve feet from snout to tail, but when Spiny Norman was depressed NI could be anything up to eight hundred yards long
Regardless of the results of January’s elections, the Sunnis comprise a majority in Anbar, Salahadin, and Nineveh provinces. In other words, they can kill an unpalatable constitution if they choose to do so.
Tribalism seems much stronger than nationalism there, which is pretty typical for nonindustrial postcolonial nondemocracies with nonorganic borders.
Thumbnail: The Sunnis have been in power for decades, and have used it oppressively, but they’re a minority. A real election means they lose to a different faction, much larger than themselves, and with scores to settle. The longer the Sunnis can avoid the Shiites gaining power, especially with some veneer of legitimacy, the better, er, less bad for them.
Meanwhile, for those Sunnis who see the Shiite revenge as inevitable, it’s better to fight back first, eh? And if the Americans are on the Shiite side by pushing this democracy stuff, they’re the enemy too.
The Kurds? They get their own nation one way or another, with little or no fighting. There aren’t many Arabs in the region, and the Shiites figure to be too busy establishing control over the rest. All the Kurds want from this new constitution is the right to secede.
So what’s the beef with federalism, which so many Americans defend as such an important principle for ourselves? We went through this in the 1850’s and 60’s already, sound familiar?
Look for two more flags in the UN in a couple of years or less.
Looks like they made it! Frankly I won’t see how Iraq will be any different tomorrow, then it was yesterday, but at least Bush gets to tote some “progress”. :rolleyes:
Well, that’s what you get when your president doesn’t read the newspapers – a nice, heartwarming divorce from reality. In reality, the Shi’ites and Kurds decided to go it alone, cutting out the Sunnis almost completely over the past week. They have the votes in Parliament to get away with it in the short term, but what they don’t have is the votes in enough of the provinces to pass the referendum in October. What are we left with? Status quo ante, I’m afraid.