"The data from an Interior Ministry official, widely viewed as an indicative but only partial record of violent deaths, showed 1,971 people died from attacks in Iraq in January, slightly up from the previous high of 1,930 deaths in December".
this from My Yahoo: http://news.yahoo.com/s/nm/20070201/ts_nm/iraq_dc_103
regarding the newest wave of suicide bombers.
This is where the WAR is now, on the streets and markets of Baghdad, Iraqi killing Iraqi. It's not the USA killing people.
SO tell me, what should be done about this? I am open to hear your suggestions. Should the USA pull out and let the Iraqi's deal with this on thier own? do you think they CAN deal with this on thier own? or should we stay, and try to stop these people, help them train a police force, help them rebuild thier country.
What
GG
For Eliko, Humanist and Zan
For Eliko, Humanist and Zan
by GorillaGal » Fri Feb 02, 2007 12:22 am
-
GorillaGal - Main Contributor
- Posts: 4458
- Joined: Wed Aug 09, 2006 12:31 am
- Location: new york
by zan » Fri Feb 02, 2007 12:54 am
GG
I have no real answer to this. I know that they cannot and should not just pull out because they and the British have caused this mess to a degree. What I would like to see is the Americans keeping a low profile and not to kick in peoples family homes doors and tie up the grandmother on the floor so they can do a search. This sort of tactic is what has turned most of the Iraqis against them. This is not the tactics that the UN use and it is not the tactics of the British, from what I have seen on the news reals. They have seen that a massive presence has not achievd anything and has even got things worse. It made my blood boil to see those armed US soldiers kicking in doors and scaring children. They have no experience in what it is like not to be American and that the Arab world might not want to be American.
I have no real answer to this. I know that they cannot and should not just pull out because they and the British have caused this mess to a degree. What I would like to see is the Americans keeping a low profile and not to kick in peoples family homes doors and tie up the grandmother on the floor so they can do a search. This sort of tactic is what has turned most of the Iraqis against them. This is not the tactics that the UN use and it is not the tactics of the British, from what I have seen on the news reals. They have seen that a massive presence has not achievd anything and has even got things worse. It made my blood boil to see those armed US soldiers kicking in doors and scaring children. They have no experience in what it is like not to be American and that the Arab world might not want to be American.
-
zan - Leading Contributor
- Posts: 16213
- Joined: Wed Nov 02, 2005 8:55 pm
by cypezokyli » Fri Feb 02, 2007 2:42 am
i dont know how many times i should say this.
the US is responsible for creating a power gap. they should have known (or they knew) the concequences of such an act. they are responsible bc they thought that by removing saddam (who was indeed a bloody dictator) , next day democracy would miraculously ...just happen. had they read what their own universities say about the outbreak of civil wars and the prerequisites for a functionable democracy , it was clear that democracy in iraq "wouldnt just happen".
besides that , there is an apparent difference in the scale of violence in the areas under the control of british troops and under the control of the americans. apparently the british didnot follow the same forcefull tactics , in contrast with the americans who managed to create enough counter reaction.
the more force they use they de-legitimise the voices of democracy within iraq who are blamed as cooperating with the enemy.
kissinger himself (a traditional republican and realist ) said that they failed.
the committee apointed from the white house proposed a new strategy, bc this one is failing...badly.
nevertheless george doesnt seem to get it....
personally i have no sympathy for the elites in iraq who are also responsible for this bloody civil war.
today an freedom and democracy activist from egypt Saad Eddin Ibrahim held a seminar at my uni. he was inprisoned in egypt bc of hiw views. thanks to pressure from the US he was released after 3 or 4 years. despite the fact that he was greatful for that, and despite that he believes in the western democratic values , he stressed that if one really wants to helps the democrat arabs it cannot be done with army boots and tanks.
heres some of his articles. please do read the opinion of activist arabs....make an effort to understand them :
http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/co ... 00978.html
http://www.logosjournal.com/issue_4.2/i ... erview.htm
Q: One last question. What do you think America’s role in future should be in Middle East?
A: They should be concerned, but from a distance. If they move too close, then they will discredit us, the reformers and the human rights activists and those pushing for democracy. What we need for the United States to do now is to weaken their support for the tyrants: for the Mubaraks, for the Abdullahs. We can do battle with them on our own terms if they do not have the backing and support of the United States or other western powers.
http://www.ikhwanweb.com/Home.asp?zPage ... =E&ID=6022
Saad Eddin Ibrahim: That is definitely part of the popular reaction to events in Iraq. And it’s a reaction that has been fed by events but also fed by the autocratic rulers of the other world, who have no use or interest in democracy and who want to turn people against democracy, so they use Iraq as a negative example and we as democracy advocates have to fight that. It’s making our task far more difficult but we keep citing Turkey, we keep citing Morocco, we keep city Malaysia, we keep citing Indonesia because these are Muslim countries--to make the point that yes, democracy could be installed, could be internalized, could evolve and the example of Iraq should be viewed as a--rather the exception that is an unfortunate series of mistakes done by the invaders of Iraq or the conquerors of Iraq and by the occupation and also that Iraq had problems to start with and what the invasion or occupation did was to open up many of these dormant conflicts that had always existed but were always managed in an authoritarian fashion. Now they are playing out publicly.
Saad Eddin Ibrahim: Yes.
Fareed Zakaria: --the sectarian conflict was getting worse; the Sunni versus Shia element was getting worse?
Saad Eddin Ibrahim: And therefore you have to look for other external [inaudible] factors to explain this chaos and that is in my mind so long as there is an occupation and so long as there is no alternative plan to phase out that occupation I think there will be--that mix of foreign elements coming in to set this course with the Americans, plus genuine patriotic impulse among the Iraqis who do not like to see they’re getting occupied--as simply as that.
Fareed Zakaria: But you think the Americans are causing the Sunni/Shia split?
Saad Eddin Ibrahim: No; I don’t think so. I don’t go that far that they are fermenting it but their very presence without a clear plan, without a clear vision, and without having worked out some kind of a minimal consensus among the Iraqis is contributing to the bloodshed.
its not blame-it-all on the americans game.
but , to argue that the "good americans" came and removed a "bad dictator" - concequently they carry no responsiblity, is as bad.
the US is responsible for creating a power gap. they should have known (or they knew) the concequences of such an act. they are responsible bc they thought that by removing saddam (who was indeed a bloody dictator) , next day democracy would miraculously ...just happen. had they read what their own universities say about the outbreak of civil wars and the prerequisites for a functionable democracy , it was clear that democracy in iraq "wouldnt just happen".
besides that , there is an apparent difference in the scale of violence in the areas under the control of british troops and under the control of the americans. apparently the british didnot follow the same forcefull tactics , in contrast with the americans who managed to create enough counter reaction.
the more force they use they de-legitimise the voices of democracy within iraq who are blamed as cooperating with the enemy.
kissinger himself (a traditional republican and realist ) said that they failed.
the committee apointed from the white house proposed a new strategy, bc this one is failing...badly.
nevertheless george doesnt seem to get it....
personally i have no sympathy for the elites in iraq who are also responsible for this bloody civil war.
today an freedom and democracy activist from egypt Saad Eddin Ibrahim held a seminar at my uni. he was inprisoned in egypt bc of hiw views. thanks to pressure from the US he was released after 3 or 4 years. despite the fact that he was greatful for that, and despite that he believes in the western democratic values , he stressed that if one really wants to helps the democrat arabs it cannot be done with army boots and tanks.
heres some of his articles. please do read the opinion of activist arabs....make an effort to understand them :
http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/co ... 00978.html
http://www.logosjournal.com/issue_4.2/i ... erview.htm
Q: One last question. What do you think America’s role in future should be in Middle East?
A: They should be concerned, but from a distance. If they move too close, then they will discredit us, the reformers and the human rights activists and those pushing for democracy. What we need for the United States to do now is to weaken their support for the tyrants: for the Mubaraks, for the Abdullahs. We can do battle with them on our own terms if they do not have the backing and support of the United States or other western powers.
http://www.ikhwanweb.com/Home.asp?zPage ... =E&ID=6022
Saad Eddin Ibrahim: That is definitely part of the popular reaction to events in Iraq. And it’s a reaction that has been fed by events but also fed by the autocratic rulers of the other world, who have no use or interest in democracy and who want to turn people against democracy, so they use Iraq as a negative example and we as democracy advocates have to fight that. It’s making our task far more difficult but we keep citing Turkey, we keep citing Morocco, we keep city Malaysia, we keep citing Indonesia because these are Muslim countries--to make the point that yes, democracy could be installed, could be internalized, could evolve and the example of Iraq should be viewed as a--rather the exception that is an unfortunate series of mistakes done by the invaders of Iraq or the conquerors of Iraq and by the occupation and also that Iraq had problems to start with and what the invasion or occupation did was to open up many of these dormant conflicts that had always existed but were always managed in an authoritarian fashion. Now they are playing out publicly.
Saad Eddin Ibrahim: Yes.
Fareed Zakaria: --the sectarian conflict was getting worse; the Sunni versus Shia element was getting worse?
Saad Eddin Ibrahim: And therefore you have to look for other external [inaudible] factors to explain this chaos and that is in my mind so long as there is an occupation and so long as there is no alternative plan to phase out that occupation I think there will be--that mix of foreign elements coming in to set this course with the Americans, plus genuine patriotic impulse among the Iraqis who do not like to see they’re getting occupied--as simply as that.
Fareed Zakaria: But you think the Americans are causing the Sunni/Shia split?
Saad Eddin Ibrahim: No; I don’t think so. I don’t go that far that they are fermenting it but their very presence without a clear plan, without a clear vision, and without having worked out some kind of a minimal consensus among the Iraqis is contributing to the bloodshed.
its not blame-it-all on the americans game.
but , to argue that the "good americans" came and removed a "bad dictator" - concequently they carry no responsiblity, is as bad.
- cypezokyli
- Regular Contributor
- Posts: 2563
- Joined: Sun Jul 17, 2005 6:11 pm
- Location: deutschland
by Eliko » Fri Feb 02, 2007 8:33 am
GorillaGal, your questions have the same ring of uncertainty as those of your own government in that they reveal how much harm your country has done to Iraq.
I think the USA need not pull out just yet because ultimately they will be driven out and made to suffer the shame of defeat that will come with it.
The hatreds, destruction and confusion they will leave behind, will be a testament to the evil they have created there and will serve as an example to other nations, (or do you suggest that the USA is not responsible ?).
Whatever the outcome of the conflict between the Iraqi factions once they have driven you out, it will be the result of a struggle between Iraqis which will determine their future, I do not have the authority to suggest which might be the best solution since what takes place in other countries is none of my business, (don't you agree?).
Should you stay and 'Help' ?, what a laughable suggestion, the only constructive help available to you now is to return all the profits you have made from the invasion, pay for the damage and compensate for the destruction and suffering caused by such and finally, drag your defeated army back to the land of the decadent with their heads hung in shame for what they have done.
Not the response you expected I imagine GorillaGal, but you posed the questions, no offence to you, good luck.X
I think the USA need not pull out just yet because ultimately they will be driven out and made to suffer the shame of defeat that will come with it.
The hatreds, destruction and confusion they will leave behind, will be a testament to the evil they have created there and will serve as an example to other nations, (or do you suggest that the USA is not responsible ?).
Whatever the outcome of the conflict between the Iraqi factions once they have driven you out, it will be the result of a struggle between Iraqis which will determine their future, I do not have the authority to suggest which might be the best solution since what takes place in other countries is none of my business, (don't you agree?).
Should you stay and 'Help' ?, what a laughable suggestion, the only constructive help available to you now is to return all the profits you have made from the invasion, pay for the damage and compensate for the destruction and suffering caused by such and finally, drag your defeated army back to the land of the decadent with their heads hung in shame for what they have done.
Not the response you expected I imagine GorillaGal, but you posed the questions, no offence to you, good luck.X
-
Eliko - Main Contributor
- Posts: 3068
- Joined: Tue Oct 03, 2006 2:48 pm
- Location: Cyprus
by GorillaGal » Fri Feb 02, 2007 1:18 pm
devil wrote:What the hell is this doing in the Joke section? The OP may be a distortion of the truth, but it is certainly no joke.
uh oh! i thought i put this under general chat. my eyes must really be bad. my apologies-- this is NO joke
-
GorillaGal - Main Contributor
- Posts: 4458
- Joined: Wed Aug 09, 2006 12:31 am
- Location: new york
by GorillaGal » Fri Feb 02, 2007 1:19 pm
humanist wrote:GG please read my post under What is a refugee it might give you an idea of where I stand on the matter of war.
i know you are not for war (as am i), which is why i asked for a solution. i will go there shortly, when i have more time, to read your comments under the What is a Refugee....
-
GorillaGal - Main Contributor
- Posts: 4458
- Joined: Wed Aug 09, 2006 12:31 am
- Location: new york
Who is online
Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 0 guests
© 2002 - 2015 Cyprus-Forum.com
