I swear, I can’t sort out what the Republicans are talking about when they describe our Middle East wars and who the enemy is, but I’m pretty sure they want eventually to be at war with just about everyone.
In today’s Washington Post, Robin Wright explains that some of the White House necons see us in Cold War II against the menacing Iranians. That would be the same Iranians who are allied with the most influential of the Shia factions that currently control the Iraqi government that we are presumably protecting. But ignore that little disconnect for the moment and the fact that the Iranians are fine helping their Shia friends fight al Qaeda. Whenever the Administration wants to torque up American hostility towards Iran, it feeds their favorite reporter embedded at the New York Times information about how the Iranians are providing weapons and training to Shias who kill Americans, but the stories rarely mention that the US is pursuing military alliances with Sunni tribal leaders whom al Maliki believes did the same thing.
Other Administration officials leaked to a different team of Times reporters the story that the real problem in Iraq is the financial and other support the Saudis are providing to the Sunni insurgents in Iraq. It seems that most of the suicide bombers are “foreigners” with a 40 percent Saudis who oppose the Iran-backed, Shia-dominated Iraq government. Although the Saudis appear to be even more upset than we are about the inevitable Iranian influence in Iraq — and warned us this would be a problem before we overthrew Saddam — some in the Bush Administration seem to believe the Saudis can’t figure out their own strategic interests, and thus are not doing enough to support the Iran-backed Shia-dominated Iraq government that the Saudis believe, with good reason, are trying to displace Sunnis from their own neighborhoods. One wonders what the Saudis must be thinking as they are forced to listen to the geniuses in the Bush White House lecture them on their own interests in their own region.
Meanwhile, the Bush Administration is trying to figure out how to convince Congress to allow the sale of $20 billion in highly sophisticated arms to the Saudis, the same Saudis we think are being so unhelpful. Which side of the WH civil war leaked that story? Could there be a clique that wonders if providing more sophisticated arms to a region that is sliding towards regional war encouraged by our policies is a good idea?
While all this deep thinking is going on, the President is in la la land listening to sages like Bill Kristol, clinging to President General Petraeus’ vanishing credibility [Frank Rich in Times Select] and claiming our principal foe in Iraq is al Qaeda in Iraq, which he says is the same thing as the 9/11 al Qaeda gang. Under this reasoning, fighting one is the same as fighting the other. You have to be a dedicated 28 Percenter to believe that the way to ensure that al Qaeda in Afghanistan doesn’t undermine the Karzai government and al Qaeda in Pakistan does not get it’s hands on Pakistan’s nuclear arsenal is to keep 160,000 US troops bogged down in Iraq fighting al Qaeda knock offs, while Dick Cheney starts wars between Iran and Saudi Arabia.
Except for Paul, none of the Republican candidates for President sees anything wrong with this picture or questions the still conventional wisdom that got us into this mess. But never mind that, Rudy, Mitt, and Fred have this sorted out: all Muslims are suspected Islamofacists, and if we don’t threaten to fight them put them in Gitmo I, II and III, we’ll never get to Armageddon.
Related posts:
- Obama’s New State Secrets Policy is Reaffirmation Of Bush’s Policy
- To COIN or Not To COIN: Afghanistan-Pakistan Policy Needs Public Debate, Consensus
- Taking Out the Intelligence Laundry: McClatchy Avoids Policy Debate in Pro-Escalation Afghanistan Report
- Is Dick Cheney Running Obama’s Energy Policy Team?
- Republican Gubernatorial Candidate Brags That Bush DOJ Wasn’t Corrupt Enough For Him
Spotlight
Support this site!
Subscribe to the newsletter
Advertise on Firedoglake
Send
us your tips
Make us your homepage
About Firedoglake
Advanced search
zed
Oh, Mitch, you quick fingered son-of-a-b****
Scarecrow!!
damn – too late again!!
707
just let downstairs know
And there are plenty in this country and elsewhere, more than willing to assist us in achieving armageddon.
Oh, I thought you meant College Republicans. That would be easy: “uh, we don’t, uh, personally, do war.”
it bears repeating…. neocons = war war and more war – andddddd there’s money to be made selling arms to saudi arabia – mind you where the jihadies came from to fly into the twin towers
Well, there’s one Republican candidate who doesn’t buy this line, but he’s about as likely to get the nomination as I am.
From Juan Cole:
In fact, Pentagon statistics indicate that the US holds in captivity 19,000 Iraqis suspected of insurgent activities, whereas it has only 135 foreign fighters currently in custody. “Al-Qaeda in Iraq” is mostly foreign fighters. Obviously, it just is not that important, though it gets off some bombs, which is not to be taken lightly.
Sometimes I have the feeling that MSM is the equivalent of the Bazooka Bubblegum wrapper. Teeny tiny writing that’s not funny and smells pink.
Is there a solution other than impeachment?
Loo Hoo. @ 12
Bad batteries?
Bill Kristol is a real piece of work.
Re my own 11:
Of course, lots of the 19,000 aren’t insurgents at all, and that’s another very ugly story.
Loo Hoo. @ 12
No. At least none that can be discussed without attracting Secret Service attention, which nobody here would advocate or approve of, because it would be bad, and we don’t believe in that kind of terrible thing.
Did you see my post in the last thread, addressed to you, Loo Hoo?
Thank you. Your post doesn’t make things any clearer for me, but it does reassure me that everyone else is just as confused as I am.
I think that us peons aren’t supposed to know Maliki’s government is allied to Iran, and that Osama bin Laden is a Saudi.
Just a note– Christy is on Air America right now
Sam Seder show
Inside the Beltway they believe the Republicans being in power is the Way Things Are Supposed To Be.
That has taken 25 years to construct as a mythology, through Reagan, Bush I, the right wing conspiracy that peristently treated Bill Clinton as illegitimately elected, and through the war powers imperium of Bush II.
The Reps got things to be that way, in part, because they fought harder.
Dems do not have to be like Reps, and should not try to be, but they need to try as hard.
Book Salon: The Trap: Selling Out to Stay Afloat upstairs.
The ending of Frank Rich’s piece:
On Tuesday — a week after the National Intelligence Estimate warned of the resurgence of bin Laden’s Qaeda in Pakistan — Mr. Bush gave a speech in which he continued to claim that “Al Qaeda in Iraq” makes Iraq the central front in the war on terror. He mentioned Al Qaeda 95 times but Pakistan and Pervez Musharraf not once. Two days later, his own top intelligence officials refused to endorse his premise when appearing before Congress. They are all too familiar with the threats that are building to a shrill pitch this summer.
Should those threats become a reality while America continues to be bogged down in Iraq, this much is certain: It will all be the fault of President Petraeus.
The Military-Industrial Complex has not had an enemy since the end of the Cold War. That killed their meal ticket. We have to find a way to give them their fix, without starting wars we can’t finish.
One of the guests on Washington Week commented that the current partys’ cantidates seem be be living in separate universes regarding most issues but especially this war. Now I see we’ve returned to the “Iraq is responsible for 9/11″. It leaves my 88 year old mother screaming at the television every time she hears Bush says Al Queda in Iraq. I’m affraid she’s going to have a stroke if he keeps it up. So far I’ve taken to hitting the mute button whenever a Bush clip appears on the screen.
PS I’m new here. What’s ZED mean>
Please take good care of your mother; we need her vote. I hope she tells her friends. Thanks for the note.
Pach has a new thread, with a Book Salon and author.
Sorry for the last minute schedule change.
welcome, arwe. “zed” is a proclamation often uttered by the first commenter to a new thread. In a previous version of Wordpress the initial comment would get the number zero. never mind that “zed” actually means the letter “z”.
Yes, Big Mitch, I saw it and thanks. I actually asked the man who called me to run.
Good afternoon firepups.
Great post scarecrow.
Well if the real reasons for continuing the war have to do with oil and giving contracts to the war profiteers, they have to make up something good using the words sunni, shia, and terrorists. Doesn’t have to make sense, does it?
arwe @ 24
Welcome to FDL. Give your Mother a hug from all of us – we feel that same way. I even yell at my computer
welcome Arwe.
This article and several of the commenters are making an extremely silly mistake.
An insurgency is an organised rebellion against a government.
That is not what is going on in Irak and you need to wake up and admit it and stop repeating the
BushCheney Presidency’s lies. America illegaly and brutally invaded Irak. Your soldiers have behaved there in a way that makes them and the word “America” stink in the nostrils of civilised people everywhere. More imprortantly they stink in the nostrils of the Irakis.The attacks against the American invaders and their green zone government quislings headed by Nouri Al Maliki remain at more than 90% of all the attacks in Irak.
That has always been the case and the trend continues to be supported by the pentagon’s data.
Moreover the rate of attacks is at an all time high.
Weapons cache finds are at an all time high too but given how weaponry the resistance have that’s large irrelevant.
The important thing is well over 90% of all attacks are still directed at the occupying forces.
Because your army are increasinly placing the green zone government police and army into combat situations, they are taking a bigger brunt of the violence.
That situation is unsustainable.
Resistance attacks are still concentrated in four provinces where the invaders are most active.
Starting to get your facts right is essential if you want to get your troops out alive.
Organised rebellion against an invader is called resistance.
What your invader army is fighting is a resistance.
And it is long past time that you admitted that fact.
Arwe,
Welcome.
Luckily this isn’t a year and half ago. You’d be asking what *Frist means.
-GSD
* It was a bastardization of first, but became Frist after the former Rep. Senate leader landed in hot water for his stock options.
Great points! At least as important as calling it an OCCUPATION.
Dubhaltach @ 32
They’ve trotted it out over there so it will evoke
all of the ’sordid’ associations when used over here.
dubhaltach=====i’ve been dying to ask this one-
well then, is it also the ‘resistance’ that is murdering iraqi’s and dumping their bodies,sometimes headless, on riverbanks and in public places by the hundreds????????
that’s america’s fault, right?
So what tribescribe? Either you people call it what it is a resistance against an invader or you collude in the cover up and merely delay and make worse the defeat.
The only question now from a military POV is the scale of the massiveness of the defeat.
You already have to supply your major bases in the southern governorates by flying water in.
We documented that on “Guides” and American military bloggers got very upset because they know what that means.
Does anyone know if Reid is leaving a skeleton crew to prevent Little Boots from appointing a new AG?
anne @ 38
I hope so but I have not heard.
in·sur·gent (n-sûrjnt)
ADJECTIVE:
1. Rising in revolt against established authority, especially a government.
2. Rebelling against the leadership of a political party.
re·sis·tance (r-zstns)
NOUN:
3. often Resistance An underground organization engaged in a struggle for national liberation in a country under military or totalitarian occupation.
Dubhaltach @ 37
Defeat? That is a “frame”, a Rove reality that some may study. A few dirty, freaking, blogging hippies believe the “subhuman catastrophe” in Iraq, was the plan all along.
The looting, rejection of a UN coalition, an insufficient troop strength, a military occupation run as a neo-con multinational, theft of oil, disbanding the army, and so on, can only have one result. We need to defeat the neo-cons, and we need to stop punishing the people in the Mideast who have “our” oil. That is victory!
I guess I’m an insurgent.
Am I alone here? I didn’t read the book, but I will go upstairs if no one else is here.
OK kiddo — you are a freedom fighter!
dubhaltach says in part—–”I will add that I find your attempt to whore out those deaths in some attempt to say “oh we’re not as bad as ….” completely despicable.
You’ve just given the perfect example of what I was saying about why your country and your army are increasingly despised.”
not what i was saying at all……….what were you saying, that the individuals doing this are heroes?????? killing their own people???????
i am getting tired of being hated for a war i didn’t have anything to do with…….did you like being hated because your leader was saddam? the people you keep lashing out at are the same people trying to get our troops out of your country, since they went in…….why do you keep lashing out at us? we’re trying everything we know to do……..i am only one voice in a country of millions, yet i use my voice to try to end this war……..i don’t think it’s me that you need to retaliate against…….you are frustrated, far more than me obviously, but do you know how frustrating it is to want to do the right things and have no power to bring that about????????? one voice, that’s all i have, and i use it……..if there is some other way i can help, besides contributing to red crescent, even though i have no money to spare, i do………..i gave my grocery money last time……….so, don’t say i don’t care, or that i was being flippant………vocal tones are lost in email……..i took yours as being snide, and aggressively rude, and wanted to clarify that our soldiers aren’t the only ones doing the killing over there, and to say anything else is a lie.
Here’s what I don’t understand…
All the Republican candidates are standing firmly behind the President and this war to placate the 28% base who still think things are going swimmingly, even though over 70% of Americans think it’s a total disaster, and…
Once chosen in the primary, the Republican candidate is going to have to do a double-triple back flip-flop and start criticizing this horrifying war to win the general election.
I don’t think this pig flies…could some resident troll here explain how your candidate is going to pull this off?
I’m waiting……………………………………………………………………..
I don’t know whether most of the people here have read Thomas Paine’s writings (”Common Sense”, “Rights of Man”, etc.), but I picked up a compendium of his writings in the U.S.History section at Barnes & Noble yesterday and have gotten through the first hundred or so pages.
I was spurred to do this by an extended quote or two that showed up in one of the threads last week, and I am happy that some commenter posted those sections.
Wow. Because one of the earliest uses of the word ‘liberal’ that I have stumbled across was its use to denote an anti-royalist party in Sweden, I have suspected that the Republicans and those who sneer at the L-word actually were espousing absolutism. Read Paine and relive those days when that is precisely what was happening: people, liberals, were in the streets against hereditary kingship.
The traits of the Unitary Executive, its aims, its powers are those of absolute monarchies. We have fought this fight before.
You may be shocked to read Paine and recognize our very own issues. He is smart and pungent, very good at taking down the entrenched powers with reasons and examples. But at least for me there is a clarity gained by reading about our own issues with different labels attached to the adversaries. It stops being about Republicans and Democrats or American Democracy and {insert bogeyman here}: it becomes the same, very old fight for the rights of man versus those who seek to deny each person those rights.
He also seems to have been far ahead of his time, for he advocates universal education, forms of financial assistance at both ends of life, and other governmental programs that the opposition is trying to dismantle — Welcome to the 18th century, America.
Thomas Paine, Citizen of the 21st Century.
From intro: Not one of the Republican candidates for President sees anything wrong with this picture or questions the still conventional wisdom that got us into this mess.
Whoops!
Ron Paul never voted for this mess.
Go read what I wrote dmac.
If you personally have made some sacrifices fine, well done. That’s part of undoing the damage done by your country. But I have to say this – all of the shocked protests turn my stomach. You people are citizens of a relatively free country. You’re responsible for your government does. And it’s you people who boast about how people get the government they deserve. If you think that a government that does this abroad wouldn’t do it at home then you’re deluded and in for a very nasty shock.
You should also get some basic facts right. I am neither Iraki nor a Muslim and have said so repeatedly. Even my name would tell you that much if you’d bothered to check it.
I certainly understand what you are saying dmac. We are easy targets (also known as preaching to the choir, but it gives our friend a feeling of moral superiority to come here and castigate us, the people working to stop the outrages.) if Dubhaltach actually wanted to take his message to the people who need to hear it, he/she would be posting at Free Republic, Town Hall, etc. But they are not so willing to sit back and feel bad about the terrible things being done in our names.
Go ahead and damn me some more as an insensitive killer of children, Dubhaltach, it has been done before by others. You know nothing about those you choose to defame. Is there nothing in your own Country’s background to be ashamed of? Or is that history so ancient that you can cast it aside now?
For TexB…
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v…..Y&NR=1
dmac and nonplussed: Speaking of knowing nothing, have you spent any time in Iraq? On a humanitarian mission or otherwise? Then STFU.
Du has.
He also has a long history on FDL. You don’t, clearly. Please be respectful.
What he says is true:it’s only what we say to eachother every day, sometimes in similar words.
Folks — lets tone down the personal invective — there are legitimate points to be made about how certain descriptions — e.g., “insurgent” — carry meanings that may be loaded for some. Keep the conversation open, without personal attacks. Them’s the rules.
dubhaltach-contrary to what you might think, not all americans assume to know anything……..i have no idea what you are dealing with, i have no idea how you have to live….i just wish you to be truthful, and not aim your hate toward me….i don’t deserve it, and don’t accept that from you…..and my deepest hope is that you haven’t lost all remnants of humanity in the world you are in that it leads you to express only hate……just know that not all of us agree with what is going on, and are doing our best to help you…….so far, ineffective, but we keep trying…….and i hope sometime that might bring you hope, that not all of us are lost in the trappings of western life………i like being able to share what you are going through, but i will never let you direct your hate toward me without me showing you for what it is, hate……and that solves nothing and is not being human anymore…….if that’s what you’ve turned into, i worry about you……..i don’t hate YOU.
[let’s all step back, please — scarecrow]
yawn try again. Well so far nonplussed your efforts to stop it have been ridiculously and laughably ineffective haven’t they?
Why not just admit that what most Americans really don’t like about this war is that you’re no longer able to thump your chests and say “we’re the good guys” the other thing you should admit is that most Americans don’t like the war because it’s perfectly apparent that America has lost they’d have been perfectly prepared to go along with it and the benefits to the American eceonomy if America had won.
Unfortunately the Irakis had other ideas and made huge swathes of the country ungovernorable and are killing more and more American troops.
Edited add and emphasise word “most”
This is “surge” number 4.
I would add that STFU is anything but respectful! And yes I have spent considerable time in the middle east, Madam…
I will take my leave now, knowing nothing.
Dubaltach, why don’t you e mail me at anbrooks at austin.rr.com I would be delighted to carry on this conversation. Perhaps you can tell me what you would have me do to stop this war. I will tell you what I have done, which I will admit has, as you say have indeed, to my great sorrow, “been ridiculously and laughably ineffective”.
PLovering @ 48
Ah, you’re right; I’ll edit.
I just love the way the Republicans refer and accent the word “liberal”. I’m a liberal, who is radically opposed to the GOP.TexB @ 44
;0)
This article and several of the commenters are making an extremely silly mistake.
Insurgent
An insurgency is an organised rebellion against a government.
That is not what is going on in Irak and you need to wake up and admit it and stop repeating the Bush Cheney Presidency’s lies. America illegaly and brutally invaded Irak. Your soldiers have behaved there in a way that makes them and the word “America” stink in the nostrils of civilised people everywhere. More imprortantly they stink in the nostrils of the Irakis.
The attacks against the American invaders and their green zone government quislings headed by Nouri Al Maliki remain at more than 90% of all the attacks in Irak.
That has always been the case and the trend continues to be supported by the pentagon’s data.
Moreover the rate of attacks is at an all time high.
Weapons cache finds are at an all time high too but given how weaponry the resistance have that’s large irrelevant.
The important thing is well over 90% of all attacks are still directed at the occupying forces.
Because your army are increasinly placing the green zone government police and army into combat situations, they are taking a bigger brunt of the violence.
That situation is unsustainable.
Resistance attacks are still concentrated in four provinces where the invaders are most active.
Starting to get your facts right is essential if you want to get your troops out alive.
Organised rebellion against an invader is called resistance.
What your invader army is fighting is a resistance.
And it is long past time that you admitted that fact.
===========================
scarecrow and mommybrain-
i will give my history of posting as evidence that
i don’t personally attack ANYONE……..i legitimately had an issue with it…….this was not gonna slide…..it was incendiary, meant to be incendiary, and meant to be a shit-stirring stick……….and was said in a hateful way……..which isn’t ok in my book.
it oughta not be allowed.
so, hatemongering is ok, here, now? because he’s been there?
i’ve seen some extremely ugly things in america first-hand, does that give me the right to rant my hate against those things here?
i think not, this is a place for dialogue, which i tried to remind dubha of……dialogue, not hate mongering……..
dubhaltach – thanks very much for being here and trying to help us see how we look through other eyes. a painful, but necessary lesson.
i remember how angry people here in blue MA were after sept 11, 2001 (and not just to the people who committed the crime). why should we be surprised to find that people are angry at us when they see what our country had done and is doing?
Well yes, Du, except I don’t think Americans, nor the American occupiers, could be more despised.
Yes, Bush/Cheney created the Bush/Cheney war, absolutely true. Anyone who didn’t know bushco would do this when he first announced his presidency was just not paying attention.
Everyone that I’ve read on here is anti-war. I’ve not read one, not one, pro bush/cheney war ever on fdl. So why in the hell are you coming on here with your bs refusing to acknowledge the fact that the fighting between the Sunni and the Shia and the Kurds, pretty much as pawns for Iran and saudi arabia….. AND bushco playing everyone off of everyone else, isn’t happening? It is happening.
I understand resisting an occupying force, however the civil war (yes, that bushco allowed and fostered) between religious sects IS happening Du. Your denial of that and the fact that it is also fostered by mercenaries and contractors, which is another often not talked about factor in this $enseless war for oil and religiosity… on all sides.
I appreciate Scarecrow’s posting because the LA Times had an article on this very topic two weeks ago and people have long dismissed the Saudi’s roll in this.
Its time to talk about it now. Thank you Scarecrow.
Also, this will probably be my only post on this topic because usually any defense I make after I get attacked on here get deleted.
dmac — I think you misunderstood — I didn’t accuse you of anything; I used your comment, a reply to someone else, to make a point. I also asked that another comment be pulled because it attacked you.
Hatemongering is not okay; personal attacks are not okay.
I’m asking everyone, including you, to just step back.
Selise thank you – not being afraid to use what is after the militarily correct technical term for the situation is a small but vitally important part of starting to extricate yourselves from this God awful mess.
The fact people either can’t or won’t see that is a very big part of why America is now drastically weakened.
I’m confused.
to all, or none…
you know, when probably over a million people are dead (and i’m not even including those before march 2003), over 4 million people are refugees… and with no end in sight.
well, even if i had a problem with how someone described this atrocity (although i don’t)… it would be such a small thing, nothing even worth mentioning…
isn’t what’s happening in iraq and trying to figure out what more we can do about it… the important stuff?
Thanks OKK
:)
Yep, my comment off into thin air …. :-(
Mod note: Refresh whole page to see released comments.
I’m going to move to moderation any further comments that personally attack any other commenter.
Anyone who can’t accept the rule that there are no personal attacks on each other allowed should go somewhere else. Clear?
Myrtle June @ 63
well, there wasn’t any civil war (or whatever you want to call the iraqi internal conflicts) happening before we invaded… so isn’t the invasion and occupation the primary cause of the violence – even the violence that is not conducted by our troops?
OK folks, the mods will remove any more comments that include insults of other commenters.
That goes for everyone.
Scarecrow, I made my comment back around 40something. If you feel I was attacking someone rather than what they’d said, I apologize. Good to see, Thanks.
Dubhaltach @ 37
that’s a good point. i’ve been using the term “insurgent” – probably because i never thought about it… and “insurgent” is the term our government and media use.
but, of course, you’re correct… not only about which term is more accurate – but also about the way the language we use can be harmful or helpful.
thank you for asking me to think about this…
For the record mytrlejune when I accurately and truthfully responded to you by telling you what I as somebody who did a lot of his growing up in Irak and who was just returned from there know would be most Iraki’s response to what you wrote you immediately took that as a personal attack.
You then came over to a site ours which is a site in which Irakis who are living through hell and used language which they as Muslims and Irakis find offensive. One of them replied
But you’re right – brb because I need to find a posting:
Myrtle June
Dubhaltach has been in and out of
IraqIrak for several years. He has much more knowledge of the area than most people in the US, and has the advantage of not getting all his news from the froth-mongering media we’re mostly getting.I’d trust his view over that of Bush and Cheney.
Perhaps the pasting was too long in which case my apologies to moderator and can you please take it out of moderation.
Source is here.
selise @ 70
selise, I believe that’s just what I said. The invasion and attempted occupation of Iraq indeed did allow this civil war to take place. They opened Pandora’s box absolutly. No arguement on that. It has taken on a life of its own just as these things do. bushco enabled the civil war. Denial of the civil war is what I object to.
scarecrow at 63 says-”dmac — I think you misunderstood — I didn’t accuse you of anything; I used your comment, a reply to someone else, to make a point. I also asked that another comment be pulled because it attacked you.
Hatemongering is not okay; personal attacks are not okay.
I’m asking everyone, including you, to just step back.”
oh, and who posted the comment that attacked? i’m a grown-up, if i’m responsible for it, i’ll answer to it…….
the original insurgent/resistance fighters comment was hatemongering, i want dubhaltach to understand that we are doing our best, to open up his anguished mind and imagine other human beings sending him empathy, compassion, MONEY, even when we can’t afford it, and doing everything we can to end this abhorrent war………….his comments were a threat, veiled, but a threat just the same and i found it offensive, considering that we are doing everything we can to end this war……..that we all aren’t monsters……and anytime he tries to say that, i will be commenting….
like i said dubhaltach, i’ve seen plenty of horrific things in america with my own eyes, horror happens even here………but the kind of person you chose to be, how you choose to show things to the world, well, you have the responsiblity of that……..you can alienate people, or you can inform people, it’s your choice…….and when you do it through the eyes of hate, you aren’t winnin’ anything……….
Actually at no point have I or anybody else on Gorilla’s Guides said that. But I will now.
There isn’t a civil war in Irak. Not in the way you mean it.
A civil war is where one part of a country tries to secede or take control from a government in existence and sets up an alternative government which it then defends by military means.
That’s not what’s going on in Irak.
There are several wars going on in Irak. There’s the war against the invaders. There are also several LICs going on in various parts of the country as internal political powers jostle for position once the invaders go.
There are also several extremly vicious ethnic cleansing campaigns going on.
The problem is that the continued presence of the invaders is what’s preventing the internal wars from being settled.
Most of the Iraki on Iraki attacks are between those who support the green zone government and those who reckon they’re quislings.
So no – not a civil war not in the way you mean it.
dmac @ 77 –
i really don’t think the important thing is what dubhaltach thinks of us. isn’t the most important thing, not our feelings, but instead the people who are dying and suffering due to our country’s actions?
i’m grateful for the insights and informed perspective that dubhaltach offers this ignorant american (me). and i really, really hope we don’t piss him off so bad that he gives up on us.
To moderator do you want me to paste in again what Mohammed wrote about America and why America has done this to his country. He uses the term sandn*g**r which may have tripped your filters.
The people in this country are amazingly ineffectual at changing through protest. No one listens to them and most americans are so self absorbed or trying to survive that these horrors are able to happen.
I hate this america and too many people can’t see what this country actually is despite all the good people here.
dmac — I’m still not getting through. I didn’t sanction the comment you found offensive; I removed it; then I asked all to step back, not because you don’t have a right to defend yourself but because stepping back seemed a better course for all then fighting here.
I could be wrong about this, but being able to have a discussion here without personal invective might just be related to our ability to think through how to end larger wars. I ask you and everyone to think about that.
How ’bout them Yankees?
selise says-”i really don’t think the important thing is what dubhaltach thinks of us. isn’t the most important thing, not our feelings, but instead the people who are dying and suffering due to our country’s actions?
i’m grateful for the insights and informed perspective that dubhaltach offers this ignorant american (me). and i really, really hope we don’t piss him off so bad that he gives up on us.”
but what he’s callin’ an american just isn’t true, and if he can’t handle getting to know us, and who we really are, i’m not so sure that i want to know what he’s saying……not everyone is someone of good judgement and is worth knowing, he will show that in his own character……….as we will in ours.
Dubhaltach @ 81
Refresh your browser and the comment with your link to that post is above.
P J Evans @ 75
Oh my word, PJ! Even the slightest hint of suggestion that I “trust” the view of anything bushco is a piece of spin I’m not sure how you accomplished. Please, with all due respect, point out to me how you arrive at that statement from anything I’ve said on here or anywhere on the internet, in rl, in dreamstate…. just anywhere. I honestly would like to know.
I would like to hear what du has to say but its a little hard when he came on here wanting me to hate and blame all Americans, even the ones on here and my own self, because of what bush/cheney have done to our country as well as the world. I disagree with du on that point. That’s really all it is.
Americans are now hated the world over. It’s our military… our corporations.. our dept of state and our “system” which is racist.]
Face it.. it may not be YOU.. but it as who we are as a NATION.
dmac @ 84
well, i disagree with you.
and furthermore, maybe it matters what others think of us and why they think that way? and maybe there are things more important than only listening to people who tell us what we want to hear about ourselves?
scarecrow at 82 says-”
dmac — I’m still not getting through. I didn’t sanction the comment you found offensive; I removed it; then I asked all to step back, not because you don’t have a right to defend yourself but because stepping back seemed a better course for all then fighting here.
I could be wrong about this, but being able to have a discussion here without personal invective might just be related to our ability to think through how to end larger wars. I ask you and everyone to think about that.”
i always think of that, that was my point…….
and i know you removed the comment, i meant that i’m a grown-up and if i caused something, that i would take responsibility for it……that if it was posted, i would ’shoulder’ it.
Scarecrow @ 82
ok, now i’m depressed.
I know this: that we are all fundamentally on the same side of the question here. No one here supports this horrific war. We are all agreed that this war is indefensible, morally wrong, shameful, tragic. We have different degrees of involvement, different degrees of information and awareness. As Americans, we are fighting to throw off a blanket of lies and misinformation and manipulation by our government and our media. We are, as a people, ignorant of what is really going on.
But we should not fight each other here. Because those of us who come here are trying to find the truth, trying to help achieve a solution, and to our sorrow it has not been enough.
dubhaltach at 79 says-”
Actually at no point have I or anybody else on Gorilla’s Guides said that. But I will now.
There isn’t a civil war in Irak. Not in the way you mean it.
A civil war is where one part of a country tries to secede or take control from a government in existence and sets up an alternative government which it then defends by military means.
That’s not what’s going on in Irak.
There are several wars going on in Irak. There’s the war against the invaders. There are also several LICs going on in various parts of the country as internal political powers jostle for position once the invaders go.
There are also several extremly vicious ethnic cleansing campaigns going on.
The problem is that the continued presence of the invaders is what’s preventing the internal wars from being settled.
Most of the Iraki on Iraki attacks are between those who support the green zone government and those who reckon they’re quislings.
So no – not a civil war not in the way you mean it.”
thank you for information that matters, without the hatemongering. that i will embrace.
I’m very sorry dmac but your refusal to see my point and your kneejerk response by calling it hatemongering is a big part of the problem. It’s typical and understandable – but the fact is that armed resistance to an invader is resistance and that had your troops – and they’re your country’s troops not behaved so barbarically there wouldn’t be this problem. And I note that the words of a 16 year old Iraki living in the hell that your country created and used the term that your troops use to describe him are still being censored here.
Scarecrow @ 83
I have to agree with you, thank you for saying what I have been thinking, now I’ll shut up and find a nice rock to hide under.
Christy has a new thread, on the other side of Book Salon. Everyone hang in there, together.
selise at 89 says-”well, i disagree with you.
and furthermore, maybe it matters what others think of us and why they think that way? and maybe there are things more important than only listening to people who tell us what we want to hear about ourselves?”
i consider that, as an automatic kinda thing…….was brought up that way, global, before there was a word for it, so, yes, i think that way………but hate never does good……never…….and character will define the meaning…….there was a lack of character in the comments………you have no idea how hard it was for me to stick my neck out and comment……..no idea…….it mattered………so i did……..
dialogue will solve it, hatemongering will prevent it………
i’m not falling into a pity trap……i want facts, i want real……..i don’t want, nor will i pay attention to, someone’s slanted view due to what they have suffered………that is not facts………dubhaltach has a road to choose, providing facts, or providing hate………it’s his to choose. there are all kinds of human beings, and just because they have suffered doesn’t make them just or factual……i want facts……..
and when i detect a lack of compassion, it makes someone suspect to me………
dubhal says-”I’m very sorry dmac but your refusal to see my point and your kneejerk response by calling it hatemongering is a big part of the problem. It’s typical and understandable – but the fact is that armed resistance to an invader is resistance and that had your troops – and they’re your country’s troops not behaved so barbarically there wouldn’t be this problem. And I note that the words of a 16 year old Iraki living in the hell that your country created and used the term that your troops use to describe him are still being censored here.”
we must have been married in another life………..
it is hatemongering, read your own words, hate never wins…….so, change your tactic……….i’ve never been called typical, nor understandable………and i didn’t keep a 16 yr old’s comments from reaching me..
Dubhaltach, I want to thank you for your comments here. What you and, last week, Maryam, have said I have found very galvanizing. I will speak only for myself in saying that I appreciate feeling spurred to more action.
To hell with this I am wasting my time it is perfectly clear that there are none so deaf and none so blind as nice little cosy liberals sitting in comfort and afraid to hear to listen to what the people who are suffering what your country is doing to them.
Oh and for the record – a serving soldier can by no stretch of the imagination be called “anti-war.” There are things I’m against such murder, torture, deliberate starvation of civilians, deliberate denial of water to civilians, deliberate denial of medicines to civilians, deliberate bombardment of hospitals, deliberate bombardment of civilian homes.
I’m anti all those and if that makes me an American hating hate monger then that is a label I wear with pride.
God forbid that your feelings be hurt.
*poof*
and dubhaltach says=”I’m very sorry dmac but your refusal to see my point and your kneejerk response by calling it hatemongering is a big part of the problem. “
i see your point about insurgency/resistance, although i don’t know that i would want to embrace that……….resistance has a history of not working out……….so don’t know that that’s a disclaimer i would want to have………..but the rest was hatemongering………
you could find a better way to relay your message, all i’m sayin’……..
dmac @ 97
no it’s not.
and i really wish you’d stop calling it that. i for one really want to know what dubhaltach has to say.
please, i beg you, let him have his say without derailing the conversation. it’s not about how we feel. it’s about what’s happening in iraq.
shit. that did not end well.
Dubhaltach @ 74
I have not read your post as yet. I will though. I want to get this in before they close this one.
I appreciate your thoughts on this string. My replies on the previous threads were not allowed to go through as your post was posted just a comments closed and some others deleted.
No matter, I think we’re on a better path toward communication now with the understanding that we are on the side of peace. I’ve been very much aware of the horrors of what goes on in Iraq and have been for sometime. I’m not sure you understand the sense of hopelessness to end it a large segment of the population has had for years over this. If you are, then fine. I honestly want you to know, I can’t be more horrified, it just isn’t possible.
I hear you. I understand your anger with this country’s crazy government. We have to move forward to end this war. We all agree on that.
No, it didn’t. Selise, I also appreciated your comments.
Detachment is a hard-won stance.
none of the Democrats, except longshot Mike Gravel, really have a different paradigm for Mid east meddling and American Imperial hegemony.
being anti-Bush is not some magic palliative that makes you free of the blood that is on our hands collectively as a country.
Remember Kerry running against Bush promising to increase our military footprint and get the job done right?
And of course they are all on record as advocates for “all options on the table” against Iran, Dick Cheney’s very same phrase!
only by stepping outside of the corrupt two party duopoly will you be able to credibly claim to be opposing the imperial war machine that is simply extending the work of Bush I, Bill Clinton, and the Idiot King.
It’s painfully true that too many Democrats are participating in this “imperial war machine,” as you put it. (Too many=any).
Change is going to happen, I firmly believe this. But it will be slow. Slower than many folks in U.S. want, and too slow for those who have every right to despise what this country has become.
I don’t believe that enough Americans yet understand what we have become: a country content to invade and occupy other countries. Military bases (in what, 137 countries?)–we just don’t think about what that signifies. An ‘embassy’ the size of the Vatican…unquestioned.
arwe @ 24
Nothing. Nothing at all.
Laura – thanks for the thoughtful comment in reply.
there is a great MLK quote- I don’t have it exactly, but something like ‘the arc of history is long, but it bends towards justice’ …
reminds me of what you were saying.
there’s an article that had me a bit worried, linked from the Huffington Post:
http://seattletimes.nwsource.c…..ary28.html
I think that’s a complete misreading of the Robin Wright article, which I think reflects much more the views of precisely the anti-neocons in the administration, specifically Gates and somewhat less specifically Gates and Rice, State and Gates’ DoD. The remaining neocons in the administration grouped around Cheney, it seems to me, don’t want an extended cold war with Iran; they want a short and hot one.
TexB @ 40
Given the definitions above it would appear that “resistance” would be a subset of an “insurgency”. In other words use of the word INSURGENT (a noun by the way) would not necessarily be opposed to those Insurgents being involved in a resistance movement, especially where the government involved is viewed as an imposed one.
But I don’t think there is a convenient word for a “member of the resistance”…”Resistant?”
But admittedly the term insurgent could include others that have different goals than merely expelling occupiers and their puppet government. Insurgents could be people involved in attacks against the government because it is Shiite-dominated, or because it has ambitions that differ from that of the “insurgents” independent of whether it was imposed by the occupiers. This could be because they INCLUDE Sunnis or Kurds, or they want to establish Salafism, or return to Baathism.
The idea that once the United States military leaves that the “insurgency” will dissolve and all will be the land of milk and honey is a very naive one. There are deep sectarian and political rifts in Iraq, and there is a vacuum of a political system that can translate that into non-violent expression and negotiation. The US military presence exacerbates those divisions, certainly. But the antagonisms will continue.
Those involved in the “resistance” will turn to other enemies.
Another part of Bush’s plan to give all that military equipment to the Saudis is another 30 billion in “aid” to Israel.