Nothing fires the ire more than having to listen to the wankers, in both parties, talking about the Iraqi Government achieving benchmarks.
I wonder how well would fair themselves, these advocates and setters of "Benchmarks," in achieving any of the unrealistic tasks it sets for the Iraqis.
Iraq is broken, nobody is going to put it back together, not now, not for the foreseeable future, and realistically probably not ever.
Congress knows it and Bush knows it, if you think the troops are coming home before Bush leaves office and can wipe his hands of the biggest fuck up in modern history then think again.
Update; In reply to comment made by HH.
I hear all what you say H, I honestly don't think there is a solution given the present climate and the number of factions on the ground.
Morally we are obliged to try and fix what we have broken, but I truly believe the situation has gone far beyond what is fixable.
Stay and be damned, leave and be damned. There will be a bloodbath far worse than what we are witnessing now if we leave, the only scenario I can envisage on withdrawal is a greater regional war and eventually the strongest leader/country will take control, but that in itself could mean years if not decades of conflict.
All I know it's a mess of gargantuan proportions. But reverting to what I wrote earlier I don't want to see "failed benchmarks" become the modern day equivalent of Nixon's "peace with honour"
Have a read of Arthur Silber from a year or two back.
Keep the scope of this catastrophe in mind -- and never forget that we chose to launch an utterly unjustified, aggressive invasion and occupation of a nation that did not threaten us in any serious manner whatsoever. Given the incomprehensible horror that Iraqis now must live with every minute of every day -- horror that is the direct result of our actions -- who the hell are we to be making demands of anyone? We ought to beg their forgiveness, with every fiber of our being. But for Kerry, and for all our other national leaders, none of this matters and it is hardly ever discussed in any detail in terms of how it affectsMore
the Iraqis themselves. Oh, no: it's all and only about us.
2 comments:
Sometimes I sit and think about how it will all end in the middle east. I never seem to reach the same conclusion each time, however, in most instances the results are not good. I do not think it is realistic to think one can tear a country apart, destroying its people, infrastructure, economy, hope, and culture and think that at the end of the day all will be well. There seems to be two main camps concerning the war 1. get out now and 2. stay and force reform. Neither one of these alternatives is realistic. It is very hard to force a state to conform to your wishes without total destruction of the state itself. At that point one would need to have a population in the state willing then to introduce and enforce the new rules. The people who do this must be from the population comprising the old state; from the state, to the state. An outside entity does not have the knowledge, or desire to introduce and enforce change to the degree of acceptance needed to illicit long term, permanent change. This is why the military control of Iraq by American troops will not succeed. Americans are not of the state and cannot regulate morals, laws, codes, rules, and culture to the state.
On the other hand, I do not feel that just packing up bags and leaving will work in the benefit of the Iraqi people either. America took the act of destruction very seriously and now to leave would be to leave the country in total ruin with an economy not fit to rebuild. The troops need to stop bullying and killing and torturing and begin to repair. In the end I do not think the troops themselves can do what is needed. Corporations, private contractors, and independent businesses need to take productive parts in building the infrastructure and economy of this region. The people need to be free to elect or appoint their own government, regardless of American wishes. If there is a civil war, then there is a civil war. To keep them from fighting for their state would have been like the other countries of the war telling America they could not have their civil war. The war was tragic with many, many deaths. However, in the end the state was stronger. The war was undertaken by the people, for the people and the resulting rules and legislation was to the people. This may be the only recourse the Iragi people have now, and by denying them the right to determine their own fate we are denying them their rightful state. America has killed more innocent people in Iraq than is likely to be killed in a civil war at this point. I guess the only thing we can do is wait for Iraqis to take a page from history and draft their own Declaration of Independence. HH
Reply on the blog.
Post a Comment