Thursday, April 27, 2006

One Simple Question

If the American military, with all their strength and power and with whatever number they have now of Iraqi military, can’t stop the violence, who could reasonably expect the Iraqi military, no matter their number, ever to be able to do it alone?


Blogger Left of Center said...

When iraq gets a new Saddam it will happen.

April 27, 2006 3:27 AM  
Blogger Granny said...

He beat me to it. The new Saddam, however, will make the old Saddam look like a benefactor.

April 27, 2006 3:32 AM  
Blogger Sheila said...

NO you guys.

When 30 years of someone doing it all for you including thinking wears off.

But, if we were to do a Murtha and trott over to the other side of the Hill and only help them out when overwhelmed,their new found courage would bring the cream to the top.

In the civilian sector, they might have more to defend if they were helping their fellow country men to build a new country.

We need to do a Murtha. The answers are right in the walls of our best military minds.

We need to cut the Bush Back.

April 27, 2006 4:42 AM  
Anonymous Michael Miller said...

The American military, for all its might, serves as a major target of enmity and is massively destablising force.

Presumably, an Iraqi military (if it existed as such) would serve as part of an Iraqi government (if it existed as such) in the interest of ... Okay, we can't expect much of them either unless they're perceived to be working for the Iraqi people.

April 27, 2006 4:46 AM  
Blogger Jeremy said...

Well, I think it takes some time before a new dictator is raised and grabs enough power in Iraq to do anything.

Unfortunately I think the answer to your question is worse than that: they can't.

In other words, when we leave, they'll be just as much chaos, killing, and free reign for the resistance (notice I didn't say "terrorists") as when we were there, if not more.

The simple fact is, there is not a military solution to this issue. Our only hope is that the Iraqis in the "quiet" regions, such as to the south and northeast areas of Iraq, become more of the majority, and the Shiite majority includes the Sunnis and other sects enough in the decision making progress.

I think getting all of the utilities working again and some sort of economy boom would help tremendously.

April 27, 2006 6:57 AM  
Blogger thepoetryman said...

It's a conundrum...
It's a situation of catch 22.

The alternative (let them handle it) is better than US staying and exacerbate the situation even further while leaving ourselves quite vulnerable at home. GW impeachment and removal would be the best first step at calming the world. Imagine what they are thinking? Are we next?

April 27, 2006 8:01 AM  
Blogger Mimus Pauly said...

Our troops just being there are helping to fuel the insurgency. Hate to say it, but there's a lot of people in Iraq (hell, there's a whole lot in the Middle East) right now who believe the only good American is a dead one. That's why we can't win this.

As for the Iraqis' ability to fix what we've broken, I have no way of knowing what they can do. On the one hand, they probably haven't had a fair shake since the days of Saladin. But on the other, their land happens to contain the cradle of civilization -- maybe they could teach the rest of us a thing or two about survival...

April 27, 2006 9:18 AM  
Blogger Frederick said...

Who the hell ever said we were leaving?

April 27, 2006 9:58 AM  
Blogger Time said...

Check my post from yesterday "Who's Responsible"

We are responsible.

April 27, 2006 10:08 AM  
Blogger Carl said...


I hate to disagree with you, but I'd phrase the question as "If the Iraqi army can't keep the peace, how the fuck can we expect the Americans to?"

See, here's the thing: this is going to come down to a negotiated truce, or a total surrender/annihilation of at least one faction.

The army, neither, cannot keep this from happening. The most they can do is vent some of the steam.

April 27, 2006 1:24 PM  
Blogger Kathy said...

Good question, but I have to go along with some of the others who believe our presence there exacerbates the whole situation.

The only way to find out if the Iraqi military can handle it is to pull our troops out.

April 27, 2006 2:44 PM  
Blogger Auntie Roo said...

It's definitely a Catch-22. We fucked it up & we can't fix it. Well, I should add that we could have fixed it if BushCo had given a damn what happened to the Iraqi people.

Can the Iraqis fix it? I tend to doubt it because if anything would unify them it would be to fight against a commmon enemy -us - and that hasn't happened.

I see a lot of frightening possibilities for the future of Iraq. All out civil war, a new Saddam, a splintering of the country with ongoing violence over oil revenues, a copy of Iran...the odds for a unified, peaceful, democratic Iraq look piss poor to me.

But then I'm in a dark mood today.

April 27, 2006 3:20 PM  
Blogger aikane said...

A friend of mine (sort of), a gung-ho Bush/war supporter whose Marine son served two tours of duty in Iraq already (and has the halfway promise he won't be called up again), finally admitted to me last week that he and his son have reached the conclusion that all the good things they thought the military had accomplished in the overthrow of Saddam may have been in vain -- that the country will need another Saddam.

This conclusion came, though, after the son was dropped off at dad's house (not his own) at 3 a.m. from celebrating his 21st birthday, drunk and sobbing about things he normally would hide -- what he has seen and done, etc.... (I won't give the details.)

I asked the guy, as kindly as I could, how the hell he could make excuses for the criminals responsible for his son's condition. And he's considered one of the lucky ones because he survived, at least physically.

April 27, 2006 4:27 PM  
Blogger John Good said...


That sucks about your friend. I kinda wonder how many similar scenes are playing out across the country right now. I'll bet there are many.

April 27, 2006 5:34 PM  
Blogger windspike said...

co-dependency's a bitch, no?

April 27, 2006 7:30 PM  
Blogger sumo said...

It's just so sad to hear things like Aikane said. I know these things are true...and thank all that is good that I don't have sons involved in this thing. I've raised them with the knowledge that they would be responsible of me dropping with a heart attack if they joined. One doesn't forget Viet Nam quickly. I've also said if they didn't want to see me on the evening news camped out in front of the White House...they'd better not look to the military. So far it has worked.

April 28, 2006 6:42 PM  
Blogger Krupo said...

The American military has lots of strength and power, it's not deployed in sufficient numbers in Iraq, though. If the US invaded with double to triple the soldiers, a LOT of this insanity could have been avoided.

Sometimes numbers do matter...

April 29, 2006 12:18 AM  
Blogger Bill said...

Massive violence like that in greater Muslim land can only cease when the Muslim religion is terminated. It's been going on ever since the religion began. There's a start to that end.

Recently the fact that the Bible is a hoax has emerged. The original material used to construct it has been identified proving beyond a reasonable shadow of a doubt that the Bible is bogus. The Muslims get their Almighty God, Allah from the Bible, i.e. the conversation Moses had with the being that lives in the fire that burns but does not consume, (look a lot like hell fire).

Inform yourself at free and without registration.

April 30, 2006 9:21 AM  
Blogger Bill said...

Maybe Saddam ran the place the only way it can be run with any similance of order?

Interesting question. How does the number of dead, crippled for life and imprisioned since Saddam's overthrow compare to before? I don't know but my stomach says multiples more now than before. Sometimes things are best left to die of their own posin, now take the former Soviet Union for example. Note the word, former.

When I look at our REAL history and not the prophaganda taught to the children it's scarey. We have had a multitude of very close calls. The monkey tempts the python until it turns him into lunch. As Robert McMananr, Kennedy's SOD said, "it was luck" that the Cuban missle crisis didn't trigger WW3 and world destruction.

The Roman empire collapsed after being the dominant world power longer than us. What caused the collapse? There are lots of theories. Only the most observant notice that it happened less than 100 years after Rome became a Christian nation. We became a Christian nation, 1956. 2006 marks the fiftyith aniversary of the addition of "under God" to the pledge and the overt funnelling of tax dollars to churches, a clear violation if the first amendment. The church has parlayed that into control of the government. Is time about up for us?

Take your country back from yourself. I'm afraid it will take more than luck for that to happen.

May 01, 2006 7:27 AM  
Blogger SB Gypsy said...

Massive violence like that in greater Muslim land can only cease when the Muslim religion is terminated. It's been going on ever since the religion began. There's a start to that end.

Actually, it's been bathed in violence since the aryans came down out of their mountains and started Judaism. The Moslems are a johnny-come-lately sect.

The Roman empire collapsed after being the dominant world power longer than us. What caused the collapse? There are lots of theories.

Climate Change! (there was a massive volcano that lowered temps worldwide, and allowed the bubonic plague to go pandemic) We play with the climate to our own great menace.

May 02, 2006 1:45 PM  

Post a Comment

<< Home