Forums | MacLife

k

Not like this - this is bad, and may impact the withdrawal. I'd be very surprised if it didn't.

How does this do anything but demonize the organization responsible?

This really illustrates how foreign a mindset some groups have versus what most people view as sane.

AP says 147.

BAGHDAD, Iraq - A pair of suicide car bombings Sunday devastated the heart of Iraq's capital, killing at least 147 people in the country's deadliest attack in more than two years. The bombs targeted two government buildings and called into question Iraq's ability to protect its people as U.S. forces withdraw.

The bombings show that insurgents still have the ability to launch horrific attacks even as violence has dropped dramatically in Iraq. Many fear such attacks will only increase as Iraq prepares for crucial January elections.

The dead included 35 employees at the Ministry of Justice and at least 25 staff members of the Baghdad Provincial Council, said police and medical officials speaking on condition of anonymity because they were not authorized to speak to the media. At least 721 people were wounded, including three American contractors.

robco wrote:

It should affect the withdrawal - we should be getting out ASAP.

So we should bow to terrorism?

resedit wrote:

robco wrote:

It should affect the withdrawal - we should be getting out ASAP.

So we should bow to terrorism?

The alternative being..?

You were all gung ho about deposing Saddam. Mission Accomplished. Hoping for much another than this as a  longer-term result was likely a fool's errand.

Yeah... that's never gonna happen.

resedit wrote:

Why not?

Do you believe Iraqi's are somehow an inferior people not capable of it?

For starters, Iraqis are a made-up construct. The country was cobbled together by the British in the aftermath of World War I during the breaking up of the Ottoman Empire, and its inhabitants are rival tribes of Sunnis, Shiites, and Kurds that have been murdering each other for centuries. Under the authoritarian regimes of the Ottomans, British colonials, and Saddam Hussein, they were forced to live together or face the consequences, but in the current power vacuum, there's nothing holding back the urge for tribal warfare that's lain suppressed for ages.

This doesn't apply to everyone living in the region, but the factions willing to duke it out are also the ones with guns and bombs.

In my opinion, the only real solution is to break Iraq into three or more countries and hope for the best. This is still likely to result in regional warfare, and Iran will probably gobble them up anyway, but it's really the best option out of a series of terrible options that we've left ourselves. Invading in the first place was an incredibly stupid, stupid thing to do.

Last edited by Sternum (2009-10-26 8:46 am)

Sternum wrote:

resedit wrote:

Why not?

Do you believe Iraqi's are somehow an inferior people not capable of it?

For starters, Iraqis are a made-up construct. The country was cobbled together by the British in the aftermath of World War I during the breaking up of the Ottoman Empire, and its inhabitants are rival tribes of Sunnis, Shiites, and Kurds that have been murdering each other for centuries. Under the authoritarian regimes of the Ottomans, British colonials, and Saddam Hussein, they were forced to live together or face the consequences, but in the current power vacuum, there's nothing holding back the urge for tribal warfare that's lain suppressed for ages.

This doesn't apply to everyone living in the region, but the factions willing to duke it out are also the ones with guns and bombs.

In my opinion, the only real solution is to break Iraq into three or more countries and hope for the best. This is still likely to result in regional warfare, and Iran will probably gobble them up anyway, but it's really the best option out of a series of terrible options that we've left ourselves. Invading in the first place was an incredibly stupid, stupid thing to do.

Polls of Iraqis show though that the average iraqi doesn't have any concern for these tribal lines.

The tribal names are more than likely a pretext for power-hungry vicious warlords to try and mobilize people to fight for them. I think that breaking this down to simply a family affair belies to true nature of the problems there. It's simple, human greed, with an unstable country.

Just like some people here will always believe that the president wants to make the US like Nazi Germany, there are some people there that will never trust the legitimacy of the US-built government, and they will always fight. A US occupying force could probably keep the peace, just like the regime of a brutal dictator was able to keep the peace, but that's not going to eliminate their underlying problems. I don't think the US can really do anything more than whatever the Iraqis want us to do.

resedit wrote:

Why not?

Do you believe Iraqi's are somehow an inferior people not capable of it?

I'm not sure if you can understand this, res, but it's a bit more complicated than that.

And now some Iraqis want to make sure we don't install another one.

resedit wrote:

Bat wrote:

resedit wrote:

So we should bow to terrorism?

The alternative being..?

You were all gung ho about deposing Saddam. Mission Accomplished. Hoping for much another than this as a  longer-term result was likely a fool's errand.

The alternative being we provide the military support until the new Iraqi government is able to stand on their own.

You're playing into the "terrorists'" hands. You think they're disappointed that we're wasting time and treasure in Iraq and breaking our military? You don't think they wanted us to become entangled in an unwinnable conflict? I'm betting they're happy as they could be. America's decline is now all but certain. India and China are the future.