THE US, THE UN AND IRAQ, ELEVENTH THREAD

spendi, For one of the few times, I agree with your opinion. It's because our economy is so tied up with the world economy as never before in the history of this world. Bush has succeeded in increasing national debt at a time in our economic history when our ability to compete in the world markets was already strained by cheaper labor costs in China and India. Our balance of payment gets worse every day, and our ability to support that debt becomes impossible during a time when our economy is facing recession from the subprime debacle, and the cost of the war in Iraq is costing upwards of 2.7 billion every week. There is no way to sustain our economy in this environment even when our gross national product is 12 trillion dollars/year - and will be decreasing in the many months to come.

All hell will break loose in a few months time when all the banks and mortgage institutions report their losses. It's going to get uglier.

The drop in the DOW last Friday of 2,500 points is just the beginning of the end. And that was precipitated on just the drop in payroll.

0 Replies

Petraeus will be asking for more time, but for what purpose?

Bombing in Baghdad's Sadr City kills 12

By BASSEM MROUE, Associated Press Writer
44 minutes ago

BAGHDAD - A suicide bomber drove through a checkpoint and blew up his car in Baghdad's Shiite district of Sadr City, killing at least 12 people in an attack apparently aimed at a nearby market, police and hospital officials said.

Iraqi police fired at the attacker after he refused to stop at the checkpoint, but he managed to detonate the explosives, officials said. Thirty-five people were wounded and many cars and shops were destroyed.

0 Replies

cicerone imposter wrote:

spendi, For one of the few times, I agree with your opinion. It's because our economy is so tied up with the world economy as never before in the history of this world. Bush has succeeded in increasing national debt at a time in our economic history when our ability to compete in the world markets was already strained by cheaper labor costs in China and India. Our balance of payment gets worse every day, and our ability to support that debt becomes impossible during a time when our economy is facing recession from the subprime debacle, and the cost of the war in Iraq is costing upwards of 2.7 billion every week. There is no way to sustain our economy in this environment even when our gross national product is 12 trillion dollars/year - and will be decreasing in the many months to come.

All hell will break loose in a few months time when all the banks and mortgage institutions report their losses. It's going to get uglier.

The drop in the DOW last Friday of 2,500 points is just the beginning of the end. And that was precipitated on just the drop in payroll.

On Friday, September 7, 2007, the Dow dropped 259.97 points, or 1.9%, to 13113.38. That's bad enough. Thankfully it did not drop 2500 points.

The biggest drain on federal expenditures are the so-called Entitlements, which constitute more than 50% of the federal Budget. It is the Entitlements, which are increasing every year, that Alexander Tyler was warning wil drive our republic to a dictatorship. You see, it is the Entitlements that are the consequence of the USA
"majority always vot[ing] for the candidates promising the most money from the public treasury, with the result that [our] democracy [will collapse] over loose fiscal policy followed by a dictatorship."

It is the power to enact Entitlements that our Supreme Court illegally included in the so-called Living Constitution in 1937. It is that power that delegates to the Congress and the President the power to bestow on the majority "money from the public treasury." This Entitlement power is not delegated to the Congress and the President by the true lawfully amended USA Constitution. So in truth, this Entitlement power is illegal and a violation of the "supreme Law of the Land."

0 Replies

cicerone imposter wrote:

Petraeus will be asking for more time, but for what purpose?
...

To make more progress.

0 Replies

Here is some evidence that al-Qaeda's true intentions are to get Americans to leave Iraq, and follow up our departure with many more 9/11 equivalents or worse.

Quote:

http://www.pbs.org/newshour/terrorism/international/fatwa_1996.html
Osama Bin Laden "Declaration of War Against the Americans Occupying the Land of the Two Holy Places"-1996.

I say to you ... These youths [love] death as you love life.
Those youths know that their rewards in fighting you, the USA, is double than their rewards in fighting some one else not from the people of the book. They have no intention except to enter paradise by killing you. An infidel, and enemy of God like you, cannot be in the same hell with his righteous executioner.

Few days ago the news agencies had reported that the Defence Secretary of the Crusading Americans had said that "the explosion at Riyadh and Al-Khobar had taught him one lesson: that is not to withdraw when attacked by coward terrorists".

We say to the Defence Secretary that his talk can induce a grieving mother to laughter! and shows the fears that had enshrined you all. Where was this false courage of yours when the explosion in Beirut took place on 1983 AD (1403 A.H). You were turned into scattered pits and pieces at that time; 241 mainly marines solders were killed. And where was this courage of yours when two explosions made you to leave Aden in lees than twenty four hours!

But your most disgraceful case was in Somalia; where- after vigorous propaganda about the power of the USA and its post cold war leadership of the new world order- you moved tens of thousands of international force, including twenty eight thousands American solders into Somalia. However, when tens of your solders were killed in minor battles and one American Pilot was dragged in the streets of Mogadishu you left the area carrying disappointment, humiliation, defeat and your dead with you. Clinton appeared in front of the whole world threatening and promising revenge , but these threats were merely a preparation for withdrawal. You have been disgraced by Allah and you withdrew; the extent of your impotence and weaknesses became very clear. It was a pleasure for the "heart" of every Muslim and a remedy to the "chests" of believing nations to see you defeated in the three Islamic cities of Beirut , Aden and Mogadishu.

Quote:

http://www.ict.org.il/articles/fatwah.htm
Osama Bin Laden: Text of Fatwah Urging Jihad Against Americans-1998
On that basis, and in compliance with Allah's order, we issue the following fatwa to all Muslims:
The ruling to kill the Americans and their allies -- civilians and military -- is an individual duty for every Muslim who can do it in any country in which it is possible to do it, in order to liberate the al-Aqsa Mosque and the holy mosque [Mecca] from their grip, and in order for their armies to move out of all the lands of Islam, defeated and unable to threaten any Muslim. This is in accordance with the words of Almighty Allah, "and fight the pagans all together as they fight you all together," and "fight them until there is no more tumult or oppression, and there prevail justice and faith in Allah."

Quote:

http://www.mail-archive.com/[email protected]/msg00035.html
Al-Qaida Statement Warning Muslims Against Associating With The Crusaders And Idols; Translation By JUS; Jun 09, 2004 from the Al-Qaida Organization of the Arab Gulf; 19 Rabbi Al-Akhir 1425
No Muslim should risk his life as he may inadvertently be killed if he associates with the Crusaders, whom we have no choice but to kill.

Everything related to them such as complexes, bases, means of transportation, especially Western and American Airlines, will be our main and direct targets in our forthcoming operations on our path of Jihad that we, with Allah's Power, will not turn away from.

Jordanian journalist, Fouad Hussein in his 2005 book, Al-Zarqawi: al Qaeda's Second Generation, wrote:

Al Qaeda's seven phase plan for world conquest.

Phase 1, the "wakeup call." Spectacular terrorist attacks on the West
(like September 11, 2001) get the infidels (non-Moslems) to make war on
Islamic nations. This arouses Moslems, and causes them to flock to al
Qaedas banner. This phase is considered complete.

Phase 2, the "eye opening." This is the phase we are in, where al Qaeda
does battle with the infidels, and shows over a billion Moslems how
it's done. This phase is supposed to be completed by next year.

Phase 3, "the rising." Millions of aroused (in a terrorist sense)
Moslems go to war against Islam's enemies for the rest of the decade.
Especially heavy attacks are made against Israel. It is believed that
major damage in Israel will force the world to acknowledge al Qaeda as a major power, and negotiate with it.

Phase 4, "the downfall." By 2013, al Qaeda will control the Persian
Gulf, and all its oil, as well as most of the Middle East. This will
enable al Qaeda to cripple the American economy, and American military
power.

Phase 5, "the Caliphate." By 2016, the Caliphate (one government for
all Moslem nations) will be established. At this point, nearly all
Western cultural influences will be eliminated from Islamic nations. The
Caliphate will organize a mighty army for the next phase.

Phase 6, "world conquest." By 2022, the rest of the world will be
conquered by the righteous and unstoppable armies of Islam. This is the
phase that Osama bin Laden has been talking about for years.

Phase 7, "final victory." All the world's inhabitants will be forced to
either convert to Islam, or submit (as second class citizens) to
Islamic rule. This will be completed by 2025 or thereabouts.

0 Replies

Quote:

links at the source

0 Replies

revel, The only reporter in Iraq who has any credibility is Michael Weir. He said that al Qaeda in Iraq is a very small percentage of the total, although they receive over 50 percent of the news. I trust Mr Weir over any Bush rhetoric.

0 Replies

UPDATE 2

We must defeat Al Qaeda, because if we don't, they will attack the US with wave after wave of suicide bombings and other attacks, all carefully designed to get the US populace to give up trying to protect our democratic republic, and allow those in America who seek a dictatorship (FOR EXAMPLE, Islamic dictatorship, Soros Gang Dictatorship, NEO-CONSERVATIVE DICTATORSHIP, et cetera) to institute a dictatorship.

0 Replies

Quote:

0 Replies

Quote:

How To Change Iraq
Bush Should Start By Admitting Fault
By Madeleine K. Albright
Washington Post
Thursday, September 6, 2007; Page A21

The threshold question in any war is: What are we fighting for? Our troops, especially, deserve a convincing answer.

In Iraq, the list of missions that were tried on but didn't fit includes: protection from weapons of mass destruction, creating a model democracy in the Arab world, punishing those responsible for the Sept. 11 attacks and stopping terrorists from catching the next plane to New York. The latest mission, linked to the "surge" of troops this year, was to give Iraqi leaders the security and maneuvering room needed to make stabilizing political arrangements -- which they have thus far shown little interest in doing.

A cynic might suggest that the military's real mission is to enable President Bush to continue denying that his invasion has evolved into disaster. A less jaded view might identify three goals: to prevent Iraq from becoming a haven for al-Qaeda, a client state of Iran or a spark that inflames regionwide war. These goals respond not to dangers that prompted the invasion but to those that resulted from it. Our troops are being asked to risk their lives to solve problems our civilian leaders created. The president is beseeching us to fear failure, but he has yet to explain how our military can succeed given Iraq's tangled politics and his administration's lack of credibility.

This disconnect between mission and capabilities should be at the center of debate as Gen. David Petraeus and Ambassador Ryan Crocker report on the war's status and congressional leaders prepare their fall strategies. Despite the hopes of many, this debate is unlikely to end the war soon; nor will it produce fresh support for our present dismal course. Although U.S. troop levels will surely start to come down, big decisions about whether and under what circumstances to complete the withdrawal seem certain to remain for the next president, when he or she takes office. Yet this should not preclude Democrats and Republicans from trying to agree on ways to minimize the damage before then.

According to the National Intelligence Estimate released last month, the recent modest but extremely hard-won military gains will mean little "unless there is a fundamental shift in the factors driving Iraqi political and security developments."

Given the depth of the sectarian divisions within Iraq, such a fundamental shift will not occur through Iraqi actions alone. Given America's lack of leverage, it will not result from our patrols, benchmarks, speeches or "surprise" presidential visits to Anbar province. That leaves coordinated international assistance as the only option.

The Balkans are at peace today through the joint efforts of the United States, the European Union and the United Nations -- all of which worked to help moderate leaders inside the region. A similar strategy should have been part of our Iraq policy from the outset but has never been seriously attempted.

Is such an initiative still viable? Perhaps. The United Nations has pledged to become more involved. Europe's new leaders -- led by Nicolas Sarkozy, Angela Merkel and Gordon Brown -- understand their region's stake in Iraq's future and seem willing to assist. The Saudi, Jordanian and Syrian governments all view Iraqi instability as a profound security threat. Turkish and Kurdish representatives recently signed an agreement to cooperate along their troubled border. Iran is the wildest of cards, but it would be unlikely to isolate itself from a broad international program aimed at reconciliation. If it does, it would only hand a political victory to us and to the many Iraqi leaders, Shiite and Sunni alike, who would prefer to minimize Iranian influence.

President Bush could do his part by admitting what the world knows -- that many prewar criticisms of the invasion were on target. Such an admission would be just the shock a serious diplomatic project would need. It would make it easier for European and Arab leaders to help, as their constituents are reluctant to bail out a president who still insists that he was right and they were wrong. Our troops face death every day; the least the president can do is face the truth.

A coordinated international effort could help Iraq by patrolling borders, aiding reconstruction, further training its army and police, and strengthening legislative and judicial institutions. It could also send a unified message to Iraq's sectarian leaders that a political power-sharing arrangement that recognizes majority rule and protects minority rights is the only solution and is also attainable.

If there is a chance to avoid deeper disaster in Iraq, it depends on a psychological transformation so people begin preparing to compete for power peacefully instead of plotting how to survive amid anarchy. The international community cannot ensure such a shift, but we can and should do more to encourage it.

The writer was secretary of state from 1997 to 2001. She is principal of theAlbright Group LLC.

0 Replies

ican711nm wrote:

UPDATE 2

We must defeat Al Qaeda, because if we don't, they will attack the US with wave after wave of suicide bombings and other attacks, all carefully designed to get the US populace to give up trying to protect our democratic republic, and allow those in America who seek a dictatorship (FOR EXAMPLE, Islamic dictatorship, Soros Gang Dictatorship, NEO-CONSERVATIVE DICTATORSHIP, et cetera) to institute a dictatorship.

ican, You continue your drone on about al Qaeda attacking the US. Please explain how they will accomplish the attack, and why home-grown terrorists are less dangerous?

0 Replies

cicerone imposter wrote:

ican711nm wrote:
UPDATE 2

We must defeat Al Qaeda, because if we don't, they will attack the US with wave after wave of suicide bombings and other attacks, all carefully designed to get the US populace to give up trying to protect our democratic republic, and allow those in America who seek a dictatorship (FOR EXAMPLE, Islamic dictatorship, Soros Gang Dictatorship, NEO-CONSERVATIVE DICTATORSHIP, et cetera) to institute a dictatorship.

ican, You continue your drone on about al Qaeda attacking the US. Please explain how they will accomplish the attack, and why home-grown terrorists are less dangerous?

I answered these questions this past week. I'll repeat those answers.

"how they will accomplish the[se] attack[s]"

FOR EXAMPLE

Al-Qaeda trained suicidal terrorists:

1. Come to Mexico via airliners.

2. Enter the USA by foot and are driven by al-Qaeda members or supporters now in the USA to wherever they want to go.

3. Buy rent, or steal ingredients from Home Depot et al to make bombs.

4. Make bombs.

5. Buy, rent, or steal vehicles (e.g., cars, trucks, general aviation airplanes) capable of carrying at least 500 pounds in addition to their drivers or pilots.

6. Load their vehicles with bombs.

7. Drive or fly those vehicles to their desired targets (e.g., schools, universities, factories, office buildings, hospitals, theaters, stadiums, power plants, airports, etc.).

8. Explode their vehicle's bomb contents.

"why home-grown terrorists are less dangerous?"

1. Home grown terrorists who are not members of al-Qaeda are very much fewer in number and far less trained and organized than the terrorists who are members of al-Qaeda.

2. Al-Qaeda, unlike home grown terrorists that are not members of al-Qaeda, in 1996 declared war on Americans and had been waging war on Americans for at least 5 years, 5 months before we invaded Afghanistan and 6 years, 10 months before we invaded Iraq--they are currently waging war on us in Afghanistan and in Iraq.

3. Oh, yes, now here's one more! Al-Qaeda terrorists are currently much better financed than are home grown terrorists.

0 Replies

drone
We must defeat Al Qaeda, because if we don't, they will attack the US with wave after wave of suicide bombings and other attacks, all carefully designed to get the US populace to give up trying to protect our democratic republic, and allow those in America who seek a dictatorship to institute a dictatorship (for example, Islamic Dictatorship, Soros Gang Dictatorship, Neo-Conservative Dictatorship, et cetera).

0 Replies

watched an interview with the chairman and a member of
"the independent commission on security forces of iraq" .
full report at link .

in a nutshell :
they see NO possibility of a NATIONAL iraq security force being established in the forseeable future .
the problem with a national security force , in their opinion , is the continued and serious strife between shias and sunis - neither side is willing to concede power to the other . they do not believe a reconciliation can be achieved anytime soon .
their suggestion is to establish LOCAL (tribal) security groups not under a central command with the hope of promoting security and reconciliation - eventually .
(one might call it a breakup of iraq imo).

they cited just one example of what's irritating to many iraqis :
stationing U.S. FORCES in one of SH's former PALACES !
hbg

IRAQ SECURITY FORCES

MEMBERS OF THE COMMISSION

Quote:

General James L. Jones USMC (Ret.) - President and CEO, Institute for 21st Century Energy, U.S. Chamber of Commerce. Former Supreme Allied Commander Europe and 32nd Commandant of the United States Marine Corps.

General John Abrams USA (Ret.) - Board of Directors, Virginia National Defense Industrial Authority. Former Commanding General, Army Training and Doctrine Command.

Lt. General Martin R. Berndt USMC (Ret.) - Former Commander, U.S. Marine Corps Forces.

General Charles G. Boyd USAF (Ret.) - President and CEO, Business Executives for National Security. Former Deputy Commander, U.S. European Command.

Command Sergeant Major Dwight J. Brown, USA (Ret) - Former Command Sergeant Major, U.S. Central Command.

The Honorable Terrance Gainer - Sergeant at Arms, U.S. Senate. Former Chief, United States Capitol Police.

The Honorable John J. Hamre - President and CEO, Center for Strategic and International Studies. Former Deputy Secretary of Defense and Under Secretary of Defense (Comptroller).

Colonel Michael Heidingsfield, USAF (Ret.) - President and Chief Executive Officer of the Memphis Shelby Crime Commission. Former Chief of Police and Director of Public Safety and Chief of Police Emeritus, Scottsdale, Arizona.

Admiral Gregory G. Johnson, USN (Ret.) - Founder, Snow Ridge Associates. Former Commander, U.S. Naval Forces, Europe and Commander in Chief, Allied Forces, Southern Europe.

General George Joulwan, USA (Ret.) - President, One Team, Inc. Former Supreme Allied Commander Europe.

Lt. General James C. King, USA (Ret.) - President and CEO, Athena Innovative Solutions. Former Director, United States National Imagery and Mapping Agency.

Assistant Chief Constable Duncan McCausland - Assistant Chief Constable, Urban Region, Police Service of Northern Ireland.

Lt. General Gary S. McKissock, USMC (Ret.) - Board of Directors, Sapient Corporation. Former Deputy Commandant, Installations and Logistics, United States Marine Corps.

Sergeant Major Alford L. McMichael, USMC (Ret.) - Founder, The 4-DREW Foundation. Former Sergeant Major, United States Marine Corps.

Brigadier General Richard Potter, USA (Ret.) - Sierra Nevada Corporation - Integrated Mission Systems. Former Deputy Commanding General, United States Army Special Operations Command.

Major General Arnold Punaro, USMC (Ret.) - Executive Vice President, SAIC. Former Director, Marine Corps Reserve and Commanding General, 4th Marine Division.

Chief Charles H. Ramsey - Consultant, United States Senate Sergeant-at-Arms. Former Chief of the Metropolitan Police Department, Washington, D.C.

Chief John F. Timoney - Chief of the City of Miami Police Department.

Lieutenant General John A. Van Alstyne - Commandant, Corps of Cadets, Texas A&M University. Former Deputy Commanding General for initial entry training, U.S. Army Training and Doctrine Command.

General Charles Wilhelm, USMC (Ret.) - Former Commander, U.S. Southern Command.

see also :
BREAKUP OF IRAQI NATIONAL POLICE RECOMMENDED

Quote:

Iraqi Army Unable To Take Over Within A Year, Report Says
Breakup of National Police Is Urged

By Karen DeYoung
Washington Post Staff Writer
Thursday, September 6, 2007; A01

Iraq's army, despite measurable progress, will be unable to take over internal security from U.S. forces in the next 12 to 18 months and "cannot yet meaningfully contribute to denying terrorists safe haven," according to a report on the Iraqi security forces published today.

The report, prepared by a commission of retired senior U.S. military officers, describes the 25,000-member Iraqi national police force and the Interior Ministry, which controls it, as riddled with sectarianism and corruption. The ministry, it says, is "dysfunctional" and is "a ministry in name only." The commission recommended that the national police force be disbanded.

0 Replies

hamburger wrote:

watched an interview with the chairman and a member of
"the independent commission on security forces of iraq" .
full report at link .

in a nutshell :
they see NO possibility of a NATIONAL iraq security force being established in the forseeable future .
the problem with a national security force , in their opinion , is the continued and serious strife between shias and sunis - neither side is willing to concede power to the other . they do not believe a reconciliation can be achieved anytime soon .
their suggestion is to establish LOCAL (tribal) security groups not under a central command with the hope of promoting security and reconciliation - eventually .
(one might call it a breakup of iraq imo).

...

Excellent idea! First establish tribal police, then town, then provincial ... and eventually ... maybe even national police.

Sounds familiar! ... Where did I read about that being exactly what was done over time some place else?... Let me think! ... 1620? ... Colonies? ... Towns? ... States? ... a Nation? Shocked

... Well I'll be a ringdangdo! Idea

0 Replies

No, ican, you're a "dang-dodo" who doesn't understand the first thing about terrorism or terrorists. You don't fight terrorists like you would a war with a country. Airplanes and bombs end up killing too many innocent people - who are just as important as "you."

You claim terrorists can fly into the US from Mexico; bull shite! The security in Mexicto into the US is the same as flying into the US from any foreign country. Anybody landing in the US has to go through customs. It doesn't mean all terrorists will be stopped, but how do terrorists travel from the Middle East to the US? Little details you seem to be ignoring. Everybody has to go through several security/check points before they are allowed to board the plane/enter into the US. Show us how terrorists will accomplish this? You are full of it, and only show your ignorance - repeatedly.

0 Replies

ican wrote :

Quote:

Excellent idea! First establish tribal police, then town, then provincial ... and eventually ... maybe even national police.

Sounds familiar! ... Where did I read about that being exactly what was done over time some place else?... Let me think! ... 1620? ... Colonies? ... Towns? ... States? ... a Nation? ... Well I'll be a ringdangdo!

but isn't that what the U.S. ABSOLUTELY did NOT want : the breakup of iraq ?
wether or not iraq can be stitched together later can of course NOT be guaranteed !
think of europe after the 30 year war/reformation - seems to have taken a few hundred years , two world-wars and several "minor" skirmishes before europeans started to understand that there is strength in unity .
perhaps it is still the best and only option for iraq .
perhaps eventually a new SH will emerge to bring iraqis back together .
hbg

0 Replies

cicerone imposter wrote:

...
You claim terrorists can fly into the US from Mexico; bull shite!
...

I claimed no such thing! I'll enlarge my EXAMPLE for you so that you may be able to read it with greater comprehension.

"how they will accomplish the[se] attack[s]"

FOR EXAMPLE

Al-Qaeda trained suicidal terrorists:

1. Come to Mexico via airliners.

2. Enter the USA by foot and are driven by al-Qaeda members or supporters now in the USA to wherever they want to go.

3. Buy rent, or steal ingredients from Home Depot et al to make bombs.

4. Make bombs.

5. Buy, rent, or steal vehicles (e.g., cars, trucks, general aviation airplanes) capable of carrying at least 500 pounds in addition to their drivers or pilots.

6. Load their vehicles with bombs.

7. Drive or fly those vehicles to their desired targets (e.g., schools, universities, factories, office buildings, hospitals, theaters, stadiums, power plants, airports, etc.).

8. Explode their vehicle's bomb contents.

Here is a somewhat modified version of the previous example:

1. Come to Venezuela via airliners.

1a. Be driven driven to Mexico from Venezuela by al-Qaeda members or supporters now in Venezuela.

1b. From their be driven to the Mexican-USA border by al-Qaeda members or supporters now in Mexico.

2. Enter the USA by foot and are driven by al-Qaeda members or supporters now in the USA to wherever they want to go.

3. Buy rent, or steal ingredients from Home Depot et al to make bombs.

4. Make bombs.

5. Buy, rent, or steal vehicles (e.g., cars, trucks, general aviation airplanes) capable of carrying at least 500 pounds in addition to their drivers or pilots.

6. Load their vehicles with bombs.

7. Drive or fly those vehicles to their desired targets (e.g., schools, universities, factories, office buildings, hospitals, theaters, stadiums, power plants, airports, etc.).

8. Explode their vehicle's bomb contents.

0 Replies

Oh, and how many came to the US by FOOT? 1, 5, 10, 20, 100?

0 Replies

hamburger wrote:

ican wrote :

Quote:
Excellent idea! First establish tribal police, then town, then provincial ... and eventually ... maybe even national police.

Sounds familiar! ... Where did I read about that being exactly what was done over time some place else?... Let me think! ... 1620? ... Colonies? ... Towns? ... States? ... a Nation? ... Well I'll be a ringdangdo!

but isn't that what the U.S. ABSOLUTELY did NOT want : the breakup of iraq ?
wether or not iraq can be stitched together later can of course NOT be guaranteed !
think of europe after the 30 year war/reformation - seems to have taken a few hundred years , two world-wars and several "minor" skirmishes before europeans started to understand that there is strength in unity .
perhaps it is still the best and only option for iraq .
perhaps eventually a new SH will emerge to bring iraqis back together .
hbg

I neither know or care what the US (e.g., the Bush administration) did or did not want.

I think the idea of building up a nation from Iraqi tribes over n years is an excellent solution. It took the American colonists from 1620 (the Pilgrims) to 1789 to get their act together and form a stable Constitutional government. They must have learned something from the 100 years and 30 years European wars to bring that off within 169 years without fighting much among themselves, while defending themselves against the British.

Will it take the Iraqis more or less time to do the same thing? I don't know, but I bet they'll do it in less tha 30 years. And, if they do it in less than 7 years, we westerners will have something to learn from them!

0 Replies

THE US, THE UN AND IRAQ, ELEVENTH THREAD

Related Topics

Quick Links

My Account

able2know