Quote:
Originally Posted by Ray
Nabi.
Iraq is a complex issue.
At the outset, while the US has gone about in a most weird gung ho manner, they cannot be faulted in what they have done since it was essential from their strategic perception, in the same way the Islamic terrorists are hard at it to prove their point!
I will confess that both the invasion of Iraq or the actions of Islamic terrorist worldwide does not warm the co_ckles of my heart!
‘
As far as the US is concerned, true to form, having used Saddam to suit their purpose found it prudent to dump him. On another thread (Australians are in Iraq for Oil, I think) I have appended a link on the issue of the Iraq – Iran War and why it happened! The bottomline there was OIL and the Shia Sunni rivalry wherein they were willing pawns. Now, if you Moslems can be manipulated, why blame anyone? Basically, you all are selfish and craving for power and supremacy amongst the Shia Sunni divide! So, let us not blame the US or anyone else. YOU are to blame and be courageous enough to realise and accept it so. If you look at the Islamic world, it is full of inter sectarian ‘wars’. So, you’re at fault. Stop, blaming others!
The US is in Iraq, not only for Oil, but greater strategic reasons. I have amplified on it in many a thread and so I will not do so here.
Anyone who understands Islam will realise that Saddam cannot be a friend of AQ., notwithstanding the publicity to that effect in the western media. Unfortunately, it serves the western purpose to tar Saddam as a villain (since his value for western interest had become zero, having assisted him to be a top villain).
Saddam has gone. None shed a tear and there is no requirement either. But where has it left the US? Flapping in the wind of the Sunni – Shia divide! They are supporting the Shias and at the same time getting ballistic with the Shia mentors – Iran! Don’t blame the US, they are clueless about Islam. Their experts are those who are His Master's Voice! Having you seen the logo of HMV. It is a dog sitting next to the horn of an old type of gramophone!
Surges will not help and the drawdown will be more disastrous, given the heritage bestowed by the British wherein incongruity of borders with the clans was ideal for further intervention as it is seen everywhere the British have ruled .
It is time, to hand over to some international agency which is acceptable to all concerned if some peace is desired (indeed if it is possible after all this unrivalled mess up). But then, it may not be to western interests.
So, status quo will prevail!
Also be bold enough to admit that you Moslems asked for it!
Don't cry over spilt milk!
|
'we moslems'?
what does being moslem or whatever have to do with anything? and who said anything about me being a muslim anyway? I am speaking as a human being, and anyway this generalization of yours is unwarranted. You cannot include someone for attrocities done by people claiming to be muslims just because he/she are muslims. Or are we going back to medeival times where people are being persecuted on their faith just in case? The US after it cannot find WMDs in Iraq(oops), 'changed' their reasons to fighting these evils and ethnic segregation, and now I'm hearing THIS? even if we were to follow this reasoning of yours, what about the Iraqi christians? they're not muslim, or should we blame them for being Iraqis?
The Iraq-Iran war happened because Saddam Hussien had expansion policies, the same reason he invaded Kuwait later. He started it. End of story.
'don't blame the US because they don't understand Islam'? Are you kidding?? if they don't understand then it IS their fault for going in with their guns without understanding. Not understanding is a shamefully poor excuse for what is going on there now. If you have a criminal on trial, 'not understanding' what he did was wrong does not make him innocent. Even the UN which frequently rubber-stamp US policy even when it is clearly a mistake refused to support the US in this disaster.
As for what our friend said above about 'life was not better for iraqis under saddam', that's an uninformed statement and oh yes it was, and this a very hard thing for me to say because I detested the creep. HE has never been to Iraq. I was in Iraq before and after. Back then they at least had enough to eat, now they don't. they had electricity and running water, now they dont. Children then can walk to school with relative saftey, now everytime someone leaves home it's a high risk never to be seen again. These people can't be bothered with these American globalization values of voting or whatever when they have to worry about feeding their children and being indiscriminently killed with all factions-americans included-considering them nothing more than collateral damage. And what's this about having to accept this situation as 'inevitable'? NOW it's inevitable because the US sent in their forces without this 'understanding' of yours. AND this is necessary for the interest of the US??? Last time I checked, the US doesn't own the planet. WWII came about because Hitler thought that germans had the right and in their 'interest' to invade other countries and take their resources and force to live under Nazi or pro-Nazi regimes and acted on it this megalomanic dillusion, and now the Americans are in Iraq to 'protect american interests', 'enforce democracy' and for the 'good of the Iraqis'?? are we going to go through this charade every time some schmuck and his gung ho generals have resources at their disposal to invade and bring extra misery on people far away in the name of 'interests' or an abstract form of political concept??? Once the value of human life has gone so low as to be worth wasting in such horrific numbers on these things for individuals then these individuals are barbarians, and it makes no difference wether they are religious radicals or american leaders or whatever, assuming that is the 'reason'.
So much for the 'principles' this sorry affair is based on. Now for practicality:
I have NEVER said the US forces should leave, at least right away. THey made the mistake. Too bad. If they leave now en masse, there will be a vacuum that will be filled by these warring factions, including AQ who never would have been on Iraqi soil if it hadn't been for the Americans in the first place, they'll just turn on each other and the situation will get even worse, a full scale civil war. That's why I said that when the first soldier set foot on Iraq it was already too late. What I DID say is that sending in more troops is a mistake, it would make no difference and serve no purpose other than getting more lives unnecessarily lost. I have already stated the reasons for this above and other military institutions and analysts see this, including americans. How many Vietnams, N.Irelands, Afghanistans and Gulf wars will it take for the White House to understand that sending in more guns to a country already ripped apart by civil strife and destitution is of no practical military use, dammit??
You are correct that an international role by a body acknowledged by Iraq and the rest of us is the only way to go. I have said as much before and the US need to integrate itself in this effort, because Iraq acknowledges that it is part of the world community and the UN and needs to comply by the rules and conventions it is signatory to which protect the sanctity of human life and rights to safety and security and to back them with force WHEN NECESSARY. Otherwise everybody should just stay home and shut up. Policing the world is a job for the world altogether, not for individual countries to go vigilante-like forcing things just because they have the weapons to do it.
The rest that is new is just a repeat of previous posts worded differenly. I've already answered them, and I have nothing to add.