And after the war in Iraq. will there be peace?

Chaos?

The relatives of those killed by the Saddam regime want vengeance
The Kurds want more autonomy
The Sji'its want independance
The Muslim Fundamentalists want the US Soldiers out
.....

There is a lot that can go wrong.

And what about Iraqi leaders? Will they face trial? The first case before the International Court of Justice?

i HOPE the US will not end up policing the whole world. What a nightmare to imagine! Considering the brutality of the war, former Yugoslavia is licking its wounds rather well and successfully, given other possible scenarios that were realistically possible, don't you think? The OSCE is also doing a great job there,especially in the Kosovo region, and I believe other regional mechanisms can come into play after the war in Iraq. I wish that U.S. would not feel its duty to spread the 'one and only truth' across the world, sometimes against the world's wishes. It is such a missionary approach, so arrogant. Well at least it appears to me that way.

I agree with the arrogance of it, Dag. I also agree that while I thought yugoslavia's demise would produce a very messy situation that it has gone along rather well. Up to the assassination.

How about the opportunity to chose their own 'truth', instead of the 'one and only truth'. This is also an option.

we should be helping them to build what would be best for them as long as it doesn't create continuing issues with the rest of the world.

nothing wrong with helping anyone, that's not where i was going. there are plenty of instances when intervention may be needed and desirable. but the u.s. going into the conflict despite the un decision not to implies that missionary belief in ' the one and only truth' that the u.s. establishment seems to think it stands for. that is what i dislike.

I wasn't disagreeing with you, Dag.

i know, you wrote twice that you agree ;-) i thought roger did, at least somewhat, but hey, i am an alien, i often get things wrong.

Damn, you keep pointing out the obvious.

they pay me for that! oops,nobody pays me, i didn't say anything, where's that delete button?!

Peace after the war?

What about this scenario? (animated, funny, perhaps frightening)

Scenario

After the war -- there will be peace.

If we win it.

And if we win it quickly.

And if we don't kill a lot of Iraqis to get it done.

Ah...one more thing. Pigs gotta learn to whistle and fly.

Then we'll have peace.

(U.S. Army Special Forces Master Sergeant Stan Goff examines what we can expect on the battlefield when the United States begins its invasion. The former instructor of military science at West Point describes a scenario that is vastly different from what was expected last September before the Bush administration encountered effective political opposition. Denied a multi-front invasion from Turkey and Saudi Arabia, the U.S. war strategy has changed. The bottom line is that a great many more innocent civilians are going to be killed. And the first and potentially crippling breakdown of U.S. plans will happen in Kurdistan: )

The order of battle is widely available on the web, and there's no reason to recount it here. The reason is, even with all these debilities and setbacks, the results of the invasion are certain. Iraq will be militarily defeated and occupied. There will be no sustained Iraqi guerrilla resistance. There will be no Stalingrad in Baghdad. We should not buy into the US bluster about their invincibility, but neither should we buy into Iraqi bluster.

Last September retired Marine General Paul Van Riper was selected to play the Opposing Forces (OPFOR) Commander named Saddam Hussein for a 3-week-long, computer simulated invasion of Iraq, called Operation Millennium Challenge.

He defeated the entire multi-billion-dollar US electronic warfare intelligence apparatus by sending messages via motorcycle-mounted couriers to organize the preemptive destruction of sixteen US ships, using pleasure vessels. At that point, the exercise controllers repeatedly intervened and told him what to do; move these defenders off the beach. Stop giving out commands from mosque loudspeakers. Turn on your radar so our planes can see you. Because every time Van Riper was left to his own devices, he was defeating the US.

While all this is surely amusing, does it really mean the Iraqis will defeat the US during an invasion?

Certainly not. It will, however, make it far more expensive, slow, difficult, and deadly for Iraqis.

The Iraqi military won't prevail because they can't. They are weak, under-resourced, poorly led, and demoralized. What the delays mean is that the US will depend on sustaining the initiative and momentum through brutal, incessant bombing designed to destroy every soldier, every installation, every vehicle, every field kitchen in the Iraqi military.

War will inflict terrifying casualties on the Iraqi military. There will be collateral damage to civilians, even with attempts to attenuate that damage, and in case we fail to remember, soldiers are like everyone else. They have families and loved ones.

What is uncertain is the aftermath.

This is the variable that is never factored into the thinking of our native political lumpen-bourgeoisie; their deeds plant the seeds of future and furious resistance.

If half million Iraqi soldiers die, and 100,000 civilians are killed in collateral damage, we have to remember that there are at least (for the sake of argument) five people who intensely love each of the dead. And if we think of the grief of millions after this slaughter, and of the conversion of that grief into rage, and combine that with the organization of the internecine struggles based on historical ethnic fault lines (that the Ba'ath Party has repressed), we begin to appreciate the explosive complexity of post-invasion Iraq.

This invasion will also ignite the fires of Arab and Muslim humiliation and anger throughout the region.

Most importantly, in my view, there are the Kurds.

Rest here.

(timber, Asherman: looking forward to your input...)

PDiddie - scary

Bush is the kinda rancher that strings barbed wire across the range, drills wells and bulldozes
stock ponds everywhere, drives off the elk and antelope and bighorn sheep,
poisons coyotes and prairie dogs, shoots eagle and bear and cougar on sight,
supplants the native bluestem and grama grass with tumbleweed, cow ****, cheat
grass, snakeweed, anthills, poverty weed, mud and dust and flies--and then
leans back and smiles broadly at the Tee Vee cameras and tells us how much he
loves the West. a rather simple analogy but what the hell. I shall monkey-wrench the best laid plans of Bush and Co whenever and wherever. patriotism is defending your country from your government.

fbaezer - more frightening than funny. the people in and in the vicinity of iraq will ineed be the long-term victims. the u.s. is conveniently too far for most of it, although things may roughen up there as well.

Frank - love your response! hehehehe "pigs can..."

Dys: I see the Marlboro man somehow in your picture. Lessee, put in Bush's boyish grin, wink and somehow take away the smirking and the self-righteousness - yeah, now I am picturing him as you say. But, back to reality, NOT

PDiddie

(U.S. Army Special Forces Master Sergeant Stan Goff ] Finally someone has posted something that addresses the question. Yes, we can win the war but can we win the peace and build the cohesive democratic nation the Bush seems to visualize. If so what will it take?