Working really well isn’t it?

I believe that “strategic Hamlets”, (just like concentration camps) were a product of British, not U.S. imperialism.

By all accounts, they worked very well in colonial Malaya, for the superficial difference between an ethnic Chinese Communist and the indigenous Malay was readily apparent. Not that that was ever really going to get in the way of eventual Independence.

Translate that system into a scenario were there is less ethnic diversity, such as Vietnam or Iraq and the whole concept of “strategic Hamlets” simply serves to alienate more of the population, no matter which side of the cultural divide they fall.

P.S.

Bunker Buster contaminated soil Truck Very angry Iranian with a terminal dose of radiation is not going to do much for the Dow. Or is it?

P.P.S.

Talking of superficialities, am I the only man on the whole face of Earth who finds Condoleesa Rice very attractive?

Unfortunately, 9/11 taught that we don’t really “insure” the saftey of our own citizens.

As to how the society will organize and police itself, I think you will see it organized along very sectarian lines. But that is what you are also seeing with us there. What I personally believe will happen is that the al-Qaeda related groups, with no US targets for legitimacy and therefore a more vivid highlighting of their attack posture against the Shia, will be under much more, and more direct, response from native Iraqis, primarily Shia but also some Sunnis, and they – with Syrians and outsiders will be more pushed back and out.

With respect to the overall society – it will be, at least for some period of time, more repressive and restrictive. At least with respect to “westernization” issues such as women being able to drive and to operate in the workforce – that is going to (and has to a large degree already) hit the skids in many areas, based on the outlook and teachings of local Immans and local politicians/warlords.

Local militia will be very opposed to westernization, but will also be able to do a much better job than we have, IF they are given access to $$ and equipment, to restoring power and water in areas and protecting those restorations. It will be via a series of successive smaller power bases as opposed to a nationalized response and you will likely see Sunni engineers and workers in Sunni areas and Shia in other areas, and more broken down even than that based on the ties of local Immans and “govt” with various subgroups.

So — is that a bad thing? It’s not the ideal thing. But it is a way to start with restoring power, services and structure. It is also, while more drastic to our eyes based on our expectations, not that different than what we saw here after 9/11 or in Louisiana. Armed militia and civil rights crackdowns and embraces of more fundamentalist authority.

What we can do about that is a long term commitment to actually supporting what we are currently fighting in Venezuela – a govt system that treats the countries revenues as being available for betterment of the lives of all Iraqis. There is definitely leanings in that direction from the sectarian leaders. The non-sectarian Chalabis see a more centralized – in their hands only – dictatorial response to those incomes.

Our resistance to that via strong pressures on the oil companies operating in those areas needs to be a part of the plan and no one is talking about it much. But as local groups see that they receive the benefits of their countries oil income in fairly real and substantial ways – insurgent abilities to, and desire to, sabotage lines and pumps is undercut.

The Sunnis are under the most direct threat to their perceptions at least and we need to be talking now to other Sunni powerhouses in the area about how they can address concerns about and protection of Sunni interests as we pull back. OPEC Countries need to be handling a lot of this and none of them want to handle or address it as American pawns and proxies. But the truth of the matter is – you have Iran as a very central component (and one that Bush only wants to even talk to in the context of nucular weapons and there only because of absolute failures by Rice to garner support for any other aventue).

We can exercise tremendous impact in Iraq by diplomacy with Iran – which is NOT currently in a state of chaos, but which we seem to be wanting to push in that direction. Iran is not stupid. They know that their primarily persian heritage means that there is resistance to them in Iraq, even among Shia. THey also know that Sunnis within the ME are nothing but a source of huge trouble if not dealt with in some manner amicably.

The only thing holding the powers that be on those fronts from more actively working with bringing stability to Iraq is that Iran is benefitting by the anti-Americanism and SA and others cannot afford politically to be seen as coming into situation American puppets.

We can’t stay in large part bc our rhetoric cannot match our actions (can we continue to rant about democracy, regime changes, etc. and not have a destablizing affect on Saud.A?) By leaving, we can realign our political, military and moral values and begin a diplomatic approach that will emphasize increases in the physical security and anti-poverty efforts as a baseline. With anti-poverty efforts as the speartip of the approach, those things that we cannot impose well through an occupation presence or militarily, will begin to form.

The next challenge is education and progandizing. We have seen here how our educated nation was able to be propagandized into the war in a flash and a heartbeat. Countering the many years of propaganda in that area, along with lack of education, will not come easily.

But it will come much more readily from attempting business partnerships and economic and educational alliances than from military occupation and threats of invasion and bombings. Our involvement with relief and rehabilitation and aid organizations will begin the process of rebuilding not only Iraq but our relationship with Iraq. To be honest, we won’t be a welcome “public” partner to many organiations and enterprises.

Some of that involvement, due to where we now find ourselves, may HAVE to be covert initially and may not show the immediate impact and results we Americans like to see. It may come from very “Rovian” influences of implementing pro-Western propaganda tied with relief and sometimes only tied very insidiously.

Sanctions that impoverish the many and leave the few still wealthy and operating freely— those have been shown to not work. And not only that, but they countervail the interests of having business and economic partnerships that strengthen alliances over time.

No instant panaceas, and in some cases no public face to the efforts. But long term commitment to improving life quality in the ares, while we also develop alternative energy sources here, and brainstorm on positive economic and business plans for areas like Afghanistan that have a drug based economy and also to covertly and openly promote distributions systems in the ME, not just Iraq, that begin to de-concentrate oil wealth from a couple of families and dessimnate more broadly in the area, again while developing other economic interest and partnerships so that the countries are not subject to their own imminent collapse if the world begins to have a better alternatives approach over the next couple of decades.

Economics and ignorance and cruelty feed terrorism. The “battlefield” is there.

Bc we are so distrusted and our presence is so provocative now, in some places we can only do battle on those fronts under as “enemy combatants” undercover and as, in essence, sleeper cells. Not a rosey “here’s how everyone lives happily ever after” approach, bc there is no question but that there will be repression in the interim – but it faces the reality that there is repression now.

With all that – there will be a need for establishing things like no-fly zones as we did in the Kurdish areas before and there will and will have to be military aspects and involvement to parts of the plans – securing supply lines at times, supporting positive aspects we possible. There will also be a need for the ubiquitous intelligence services – no way around that either. But all of it needs to take place within a plan and framework that the ultimate goals and mission are economic stability, anti-poverty and pro- education efforts.

The ulitmate goal is not the take down of a regime. It is not the uprising of the people, but the raising up of the people. That stabilizes the world. All IMO and typed while I am also trying to follow a conversation involving severed minerals owned by a gazillion people, so FWIW on thought skips, grammar and syntax disasters, etc.

The US can’t be allowed to cut and run. It needs to salvage what can be salvaged. It’s called being responsible for your actions. And yes, since the American people re-elected Bush AFTER the war was started (with about a 3 million votes margin, wasn’t it?), they need to bear this responsibility too.

Don’t talk about how the US can withdraw troops, but about how it can bring in more of them (also from other countries), under a UN mandate. And for goodness’ sake, reinstate the draft. If there were a draft in the US today, there would be riots in the streets…

Again I say, this is manifestly not up to us to decide. If we want to be helpful, how about:

1. An immediate and unconditional withdrawal of all U.S. personnel.

2. A public apology to the citizens of Iraq from the United States government for the damage we’ve done.

3. An offer of substantial reparations to whatever national government the Iraqis set up in our absence, whenever they manage to create such a government.

As Robert Fisk has pointed out several times, are we supposed to believe that there are warehouses filled with police uniforms where “gunmen” can go to play dress-up before they head out on their kidnapping and murder sprees?

What we are seeing are not “gunmen dressed in police uniforms” but policemen who are members of death squads. It’s Negroponte’s dream — the El Salvador Option — come true.

You seriously underestimate your abilities. I, for one, appreciate both of you. ;)

Wish I had your clarity of insight, and your ease of exposition, which I first came to admire in your legal posts, and now am delighted to find here, deep in the EPU’d “green zone.” Makes me feel like one of those disheveled Hyde Park ranters by comparison.

When people speak of the elevated level of discourse on FDl, yours is one of the first names that springs to mind, and not just because we happen to share a viewpoint or two on foreign policy.