The War - How do ya like it so far?

Responding to dyslexia:
Bush wants to install a military (US) govt in Iraq, Blair yesterday said NO.
************************

I thought the disagreement was Bush balking at France et al non-coalition countries moving in to get a voice in post-war Iraq after coalition forces have done all the heavy lifting. I understood that Bush wants coalition members to form the post-war consortium, and Blair was desperate to use post-war Iraq as a stage for pulling the UN back together...

I can understand both men, and think Blair is on the higher ground.

Do you have a link proving from an administration source that Bush is pushing for an American dominated post-war gov? I'd have to see one to believe it. I suspect this is another assumption of the eager press.

"The head of the US military's Central Command, Gen. Tommy Franks, will rule Iraq in the initial aftermath of a US invasion to overthrow President Saddam Hussein."The senators were told that even under good circumstances, it would take two years before the military could fully transfer control to an Iraqi government. As presented, the plan recalls postwar Germany and Japan, where American military occupations paved the way for transfers of power to democratic and constitutionally backed governments.

Some Iraqi opposition leaders are already attacking the plan, saying it amounts to a US military rule of Iraq that will favor the existing power structure in the country. Instead of turning Iraq into a beacon of democracy in the Middle East, an ambition articulated by some US policymakers, the opposition leaders say the US plan seems designed to ease the fears of Arabs and Turks unhappy with the prospect of a democratic, federal Iraq.
http://www.csmonitor.com/2003/0213/p01s03-woiq.html

COMMENTS:

Dys,

This is where the romance between Bush and Blair will fall apart.


There seems to be little doubt that Bush is thinking in terms of "conquering" Iraq." I think Bush can sell that to enough Americans to make the day for him.

I don't think that is the position of Blair -- and I dare say he would have one hell of a time selling the notion to the British.

gives the term "liberation" a new meaning

Dyslexia,
Direct quotes from admin officials in the article you shared didn't do it for me, but a quick snoop around the net did.

I did know coalition forces would have to stay a while and clean up... (keep the peace and maintain borders until the Iraqi gov rose from the ashes,) but I think it is a very bad idea to place an American at the top, and unless everybody is wrong, that seems to be the intention.

It appears that Bush is unwilling to relinquish our soon to be stranglehold on Iraq, for fear France, Germany, Russia and others will slither in under the radar.

In my estimation, we will surely suffer more distain globally for this. It doesn't look good. Thanks for your information. Of course, it is bad news and now I will have to shoot you.

Since I sort of led us down a side road, back to topic:

We are pressing on the outskirts of Baghdad.
I have felt compelled to pray for our young men and women three times tonight, and will again when I lay my head down on my pillow.

I think the worst is now and in the two or three days ahead. I am gravely concerned about WMD used on our forces in Baghdad.

This has been a historically powerful display of military technology and strategy. But, I don't think that is what will be remembered about this war.

And, I think we will suffer more casualties in the post-war, than during the fighting. I hope I am wrong.

Sofia -- This may interest you -- for the historical perspective and the lead-up to "post-war." Quite compelling.

Pentagon plans for worst nightmare
Urban warfare Lessons of other battles, from Hue to Mogadishu, do not bode well for street fighting in Baghdad

http://www.guardian.co.uk/Iraq/Story/0,2763,928456,00.html

Innocent Iraqi citizens will bear the brunt of the war. This is one of my major reasons for objecting to cowboy Bush's invasion in the first place. It calls to mind a song from the 60s, updated here by me: "If we don't kill them then Saddam will
If you don't want Americans to play second fiddle
Kill kill kill for peace."

Tartarin--
Thank you for the link. It was very good reading.

I have dreaded our forces' arrival in Baghdad. I will never forget the images of our young men being dragged around Mogadishu.

edgarblythe-- I respect your feelings and views about Iraq. When the fighting is over, I really believe the great majority of Iraqis will speak up and reveal a deep gratitude to the coalition forces for freeing them--
Knowing the life Iraqis have been forced to endure under Saddam, don't you think they will benefit from his removal?

Sofia

Hello hatchling. At this point, it is not possible to estimate what Iraqi response might be, or how varied it might prove. So far, we can establish that the response has not been what the war planners suggested or hoped. And as many commentators have pointed out, this clear mis-estimation doesn't inspire confidence in how the planners understand the situation or the people there.

But more critical are the arguments which suggest the US is indeed not involved in order to bring about such 'liberation', but that this stated motive is just a means of justifying (for public consumption) the US action. The most telling support for this argument comes from US foreign policy history - eg the previous support for Sadaam and the Baath party, or any number of other examples where ugly dictators have been propped up by the US, even while torture or death squads marked such dictators' reigns over their quite unliberated populations.

Sofia -- I have a family member who is very smart, very organized, a good mom, and very articulate. But she loses it when she sees others doing things the "wrong way." Once, on a visit, she decided I keep my tableware in the "wrong drawer" and switched it to another "to be helpful." She decided another family member was bringing up her kids all wrong and wouldn't stop until turned that household inside out. Her way or the highway. It became a disaster of anger and recriminations and, thanks only to the good humor of her victim, things didn't get bloody. To this day, Ms. Smart and Organized doesn't see a problem -- her view is that she knows what's right and she's doing people a favor when she marches into their homes to "set them right."

That's how many of us here and abroad see the US. And having experienced this in our own lives, we know that the Iraqis may be dazzled by the results of having their house forcefully cleaned, but the insult will not evaporate any time soon. They are people with a house so dirty other people came from half a world away to clean it, saying: Our actions benefit you. You WILL be grateful.

The next door neighbors are, don't forget, witnessing this beneficence and may be worrying about their own houses.

When 1,000 Iraqi soldiers die we have 1,000 bereft families. Not much incentive for liking Bush.

Please let me know, Edgar, when you come across an incentive for liking Bush. I once learned to eat eyeballs and fried crickets. I mean, anything is possible.

Liking Bush is impossible for me. I fail to see how anybody else could.

blatham-- Thank you for the welcome. I was aware of the distain and round criticism of the particular brand of US 'help'. I also haven't been able to avoid the view that 'liberation' is a code word for imperial domination and oil grabbing. Reading Kristol, Kagan and others, it seems imperial domination is not far from accurate. Though I sneer (sneer, I tell you) at comparison's of the British Empire's famed imperial colonialism, the US is planning to use our unchallenged power 'for the good of the world', which is troubling... (Tartarin's analogy...)

I think the war is a desperate attempt to stablize the ME. Most of the world's terrorism seems to originate there (certainly the terrorism we've had to endure); the very heart of it being in Israel. It does seem to me to be a worthwhile goal, but the variables are exponential, and slippery when wet.

Liberation of Iraqis is not a reason, but a by-product of the war. Bush has added the Iraqi Freedom rhetoric very thickly into his talk of war, but it was never a reason--it was just a bright ray of sunshine beaming through a maleficent storm cloud. As you stated, we can't go about 'freeing' oppressed peoples.

I've recently come to the conclusion that I am satisfied to wait and see what actually happens, rather than be swept away with each daily current of new accusations and conspiracy theories. Criticisms of the unseen war plan, arguments over Iraqis appreciation: Are they dancing in the street? Are enough of them dancing? Are they dancing out of fear? Not dancing out of fear?...

I have seen dancing in the street, but I am aware there are some Iraqis, who though they desperately want freedom from Saddam, hate the sight of us. Jordan deals under the table, but backs us up in the pinch... Syria talks out of both sides of their mouth... Russia and today Germany are making nicer noises in our direction. What do you make of this? Is it an attempt to get in on the post-war? A cozying up to US power? What do you think? What is Jordan's motivation in risking so much to align with the US?


It's not all black or white. I had to squirm under some hurdles as I decided, for me, this military action is necessary. I hate the fighting. I hate that this action lends itself heavily to the Ugly American characterization. And I hate the black eye we've given ourselves with the spectre of pre-emption. That was a hard one to choke down.


Tartarin-- Agree with your analogy. I think now that the nice do-gooder is feeling the freeze from the relatives, she may take her dust pan home. Poor thing, she was just trying to help. :wink:

PS Tartarin-- Heard on the news today that the admin is trying to put together an Iraqi representative gov as we speak, and Franks would only be in charge of the deBa'athification and security.... Will try to bring back a link.

Tartarin, LOVE your analogy.

Welcome, Sofia.

There will never be an argument that justifies this invasion. The Chinese invaded Tibet in the 50s and have ever since committed atrocities against its people with scarcely a murmer in the US. Korea has weapons that can reach our shores. So we take a nation that we ourselves helped to commit its attrocities and decide to clean its house - a nation that is not even threatening us or its neighbors.

The question is, Edgar, why so many Americans just can't see that. Releasing this country from its ignorance, opening up the system, is the difficult job for the next real president.

sofia

That's a lovely and thoughtful post.

You said..."I think the war is a desperate attempt to stablize the ME." I agree.

At least, I think that is one perceived or hoped for benefit of this action. And, of course, when one asks why stabilize this area (but to heck with East Timor or AIDS ravished Africa) then other factors start to become visible, eg oil and client-state Israel.

I think too, that US militarism is dynamically encouraged by precisely what Ike warned us of. A common statement seen here on this site and elsewhere is that 'no one wants war'. Clearly, that idea is false. Different folks, for different reasons, did want this war. The suggestion from various quarters that some portion of the administration (it's usually suggested within Defence and the military)believes that a vigorous and aggressive conquering would help to correct the embarrassment of Viet Nam and would accomplish the 'head on a pike' deterrent effect, seem to me to be likely spot on. Link up that sort of pathology (my opinion) with huge corporate benefits, and war becomes desired - a good thing.

But even if my skepticism of stated motives are wrong, I believe the notions of increased stability (for the world, for the diminishment of terrorist attacks against the US) being achieved by this action are as foolish as any set of political notions I've bumped into.

Tartarin--

I think the assignation of ignorance to those who don't share your views may possibly be a tad simplistic...

They have the same information you do; they just interpret it differently.

Viva la difference.......(?)