|
||||||||||
|
||||||||||
|
||||||||||||||||||
|
Go
|
New
|
Find
|
Notify
|
Tools
|
Reply
|
|
Member |
|
||
|
|
Member |
Competing militias are not necessarily a bad thing for stabilization of Iraq. The U.S. should go with the flow of the dynamics of militia-centric government. There will never be a single militia leader or political figurehead who can unify the country. But, once sure of their respective support bases, these militias could "barter" their way to a stable "Iraq". This is not "4th Generation Warfare". This is tribal warfare, so ancient that it precedes the creation of the "state".
It has been years since Senator Biden picked up on an analysis, which figured that the least bad solution to the mess in Mesapotemia would be 3 autonomous states, all loosely confederated into a country called "Iraq". This is "unthinkable" to the current U.S. Administration; but it is the one which reflects the facts on the ground. A "Sunnistan" could evolve out of the Awakening Councils which are so highly praised by the Petraeus accolytes. Saudi Arabia and Syria will compete for influence over this mini-state. "Shiastan" will itself be loosely confederated within itself. Iran will have a great deal of influence in this area; but I get the feeling, from reading about the recent fighting in Basra, that there are as many anti-Iranian Shiites as there are pro-Iranian types. Kurdistan will be contained by competing interests in Turkey, Syria, and Iran. All of these countries don't want an independent Kurdistan to project itself into their own Kurdish regions. Baghdad will be the centralising and unifying factor among these 3 states. Since the days of Churchill, the territory called Iraq has been regarded this way. |
|||
|
|
suspended pending review,Nemesis |
Not necessarily. Iraqi's HAD a State and have had one since the end of WW I. Granted, not a State as we are accunstomed to the term. But 4GW is not merely the question of a State or not. It's the power that modern weaponry gives to small determind groups, when there is a break-down of the State. The rise of Warlords, COMBINEd with modern weaponry, makes the situration far more volatile than men armed with muzzle loading rifles or bows and arrows. Dave
|
|||
|
|
New Member |
This guy is a big joke and a bush hater.....keep crying you punk *** ***** petraeus is totally right we have our teeth on the jugular and are going to finish the job....our military has tons of backbone, but some of our citizens dont and always want to back out and back off like little *****es well not this time
|
|||
|
New Member |
I read somewhere that "people are stupid" |
|||
|
|
Member |
Yes Mr Lind this is a defining moment. Who is in charge of the country? Who has the backing of the majority of the country? Did some govt forces break and run? Yet who is in charge? Who is still hiding with his network and militia in tatters?
Mr Lind you profess to be so smart, why can't you see the reality?The Iraqi government is still standing with backing from the majority of the population. And that will not change as long as the support for Sadr comes from the Persians. You may know something of the moment Mr Lind yet your grasp of Middle East history only extends back far enough to feed you bias against a president that you dislike. |
|||
|
|
New Member |
I hate to admit it, but I think this guy is on the money. Iraq like Somilia and South Vietnam
is doomed to be a failed nation. The fighting has been going on there since the first civilazation - The Summarians - was established there. There is no piece pipe in this nut-house. |
|||
|
|
Member |
Gee gunsmoke I'm glad the French didn't take that attitude 200 years ago, we might still have to put up with tea time and bowing to the throne. Yes their history is not the best bet and their hold of tribal ways are tough to beat; there is hope when confronted with the same brand of tryanny they just got rid of. One needs to realize even now our democracy is a work in progress and isn't perfect. Just watch this upcoming conventions.
Europe's history isn't the best bet either when dealing in a tribal way. Yes there is going to be blood spent but does anyone want to face of the alternative? |
|||
|
|
suspended pending review,Nemesis |
Underestimating Sadr may certainly feel good, but doesn't exactly explain what's going on in Iraq. Sadr has set up social service netwerks and provides more help and support to the Shia majority than the government does (In fact the government provides almost nothing). You can read over and over that he's "toast," but I've been hearing that line since 2004. All the stories about Maliki picking up political support are straight out of fantasy world. Dave |
|||
|
|
Member |
Dave Sadr's own lunatics are falling away from him. The moderates are beginning to see him for what he is, a Persian pawn. The media seems more interested in pushing their agenda than telling the truth. And Mr Lind with access to more than the media seems to push an agenda. That is sorry.
Sadr is falling and Iraq knows it. Look under all the media coverage, which right now there is none. That in it self should tell anyone that things are going right. If Sadr was gaining strength the media would be shouting it in headlines allover. What really aggrevates me is that an intelligent individual with better access to more than media hype puts out an article like this. Please Mr Lind quit shaping this war to you theories on war. Just the facts. |
|||
|
|
suspended pending review,Nemesis |
Your starting with an interesting premise. That the media ONLY reports stories that make the administration look bad. May I ask how many stories have you read from the mainstream media that report on Al Sadr's humanitarian programs? What translates into power? Being known for your humanitarian programs?
In fact, I cannot recall one story in the media that accurately describes why Al Sadr has any popularity. He's toast. He's been toast since 2003. He's always described as being toast. Every time there's a story in the media, EVENTUALLY it ends with him being toast. Five years of being toast? Could it be that Mr. Lind is more accurate than the media or the Administration? Aren't you getting bored with the repitition?
Isn't this rather deja vu experience getting to you? Dave |
|||
|
Experienced Member |
It is amazing how people continue to deny and dismiss relevant evidence. Mr. Lind has certainly hit the nail on its head with his observations...there is no substantial government structure within Iraq.
Last polling numbers from Iraq showed in excess of 70% of Iraqi's do not trust their government, do not think the government is doing much about improving their situation and want American troops out of Iraq. Like the South Vietnamese government, we are propping this one up and all to no avail. The corruption, lack of control, lack of accountability, poor troop and police performance and the closer and closer ties being established with Iran should all give us pause and ask what the hell is going on? Regarding Sadr, he doesn't want a confrontation with Iraqi police or military, nor does he want contact with American and British troops for one simple reason; he knows the fight is down the road and wants to preserve the military gains the Shiia have made during this time of respite. Sure, we are trying to stir up a hornets nest but for the most part, the Shiia have not taken the bait. Between the US arming, training and paying in excess of 90,000 Sunni, the Shiia know they have their work cut out for them down the road when the real battle begins between Sunni and Shiia. The only thing they are waiting for is for the US to begin drawing down combat troops. And that will happen if a Democrat is elected president. Both Democratic candidates know and realize the American public wants out of Iraq at the earliest possible time. Not only is the war having a negative impact upon our military but it is also helping to drive the economic chaos we see in America. We cannot continue creating debt when real wages have been stagnent for more than a decade, people are maxed out on their sources of borrowing, the falling value of the dollar, job eliminations, rising food prices and fuel prices and the printing of more money and a tax code that discriminates against the average worker being the realities of our current situation. The bleeding has to come to an end or we will again see whar happened to America in the early seventies. My suggestion is, for those who believe McCain will win, and if you have the luxury of having some cash, buy gold company stocks or gold, some ETF's in Euro's. To protect yourselves on the down side if one occurs, do some options on what you buy...it will cushion any loses you may sustain. But if McCain wins, my guess is the value of gold will go up as well as the value of the Euro...all because he will continue the war and do nothing about our economic situation...it could be another Hoover debacle. S/F Gordon |
|||
|
| Powered by Eve Community |
 | Please Wait. Your request is being processed... |
|
