/* */

PDA

View Full Version : Mission Gone Bad



MustafaMc
08-05-2007, 07:05 PM
I noticed this article on IslamiCity. The USA has created a horrible mess in Iraq. What can be done to correct the situation there?

MISSION GONE BAD
8/2/2007 - Political Opinion - Article Ref: TM0708-3334
Number of comments: 4
By: Robert C. Koehler
Tribune Media Services* -




"The best strategic minds in both parties have argued for months that the answer is essentially to muddle our way out, cut our losses carefully and try to salvage what we can from a mission gone bad."

This isn't pretty. Not when you think about the glory we reveled in four years ago. A superpower swooped into Iraq, routed a dictator, toppled a statue. Our Prez did the equivalent of a dance in the end zone aboard the USS Abraham Lincoln. ****, we're good.

And now? All that glory is something at the back of the refrigerator. "A mission gone bad." Hold your nose and see what you can salvage. Here's Time magazine in its July 30 cover story, holding its nose, detailing the ignominy:" U.S. agricultural inspectors insist that, before it re-enters the U.S., Army equipment be free of any microscopic disease that ...'can wipe out flocks of chickens and stuff like that.'"

Bawk-k-k! Bawk-k-k!

This is what the backside of disaster looks like. Time calls it phased withdrawal, but you have permission to call it retreat. Suddenly America's best strategic minds are thinking about this. We have to get our troops out, plus all those civilians, including America-friendly Iraqis (yeah, sure). And then there's the equipment: tanks, trucks, helicopters, Humvees, the contents of 10 ammo dumps. But war also employs "downtime gear": vending machines, furniture, mobile latrines, computers, paperclips. The Pentagon will salvage as much of this stuff as it can, the magazine informs us (presumably sanitizing it first).

The Time article is itself a part of the phased withdrawal, of course -as the invasion's mainstream cheerleaders finally begin confronting the mess we're in, in all its morning-after glory. The first thing they need to salvage is some dignity: their own, the president's, the nation's. This could be done by coming clean, facing up to the immensity of our mistake, vowing never to make it again. But this is retreat, not surrender. The strategy for now is to learn as little as we can, to abandon Iraq to the demons we unleashed but keep the lie of our reasonableness and good intentions intact.

The lie is woven into Time's reportage in many ways, but perhaps most blatantly with its depiction of two opposing "camps" here at home that are equally rash. Camp A wants to "pull out as quickly as possible." Camp B says we must "remain in Iraq until a democracy emerges from the chaos of the Middle East -a project they openly acknowledge is the work of a generation."

One side represents rational urgency, the other psychotic denial; but Time delivers us "balance," fatuously opining that "neither approach makes much sense," then proceeding to acknowledge the necessity of phased withdrawal, which means, in effect, "pull out as quickly as possible" (but don't forget the latrines and paperclips).

However, the effect of not saying overtly what one is saying in actuality (shhh, don't tell anybody) is to avoid letting responsibility land anywhere -on the neo-con cabal that invaded Iraq on trumped-up intelligence, the war-profiteering sector of the economy or, ahem, the criminally gullible mainstream media that pushed the war on the American public. Instead of responsibility, what the magazine serves up is good old-fashioned know-nothingism. Iraq is a mission gone bad.

I would put it a little differently. Pre-emptively bombing the be-jesus out of a non-hostile, essentially defenseless country, brutally and incompetently occupying it for an indefinite period of time, torturing many of its citizens and setting off a civil war is not a mission gone bad. It's a war crime.

In contrast to Time's journalism lite, The Nation recently ran a harrowing investigative piece by Chris Hedges and Laila Al-Arian called "The Other War: Iraq Vets Bear Witness." Based on interviews with 50 Iraq vets who generated thousands of pages of transcripts, it contains detailed accounts of the reality of our mission from the point of view of those who carried it out, and are emotionally if not physically scarred for life because of it.

Their words are almost too much to bear. Over and over again, these vets talked about American contempt for the lives and dignity of ordinary Iraqis, including, for God's sake, the children. This quote is typical:

"This unit sets up this traffic control point, and this 18-year-old kid is on top of an armored Humvee with a .50-caliber machine gun. This car speeds at him pretty quick and he makes a split-second decision that that's a suicide bomber, and he presses the butterfly trigger and puts 200 rounds in less than a minute into this vehicle. It killed the mother, a father and two kids. The boy was aged 4 and the daughter was aged 3."

So it goes in Iraq. Scared American kids with guns run roughshod over the locals -the "hajis" -because that's their job. Their mission was conceived in arrogance and racism. It was doomed to fail and it deserved to fail. The great accounting must begin.
Reply

Login/Register to hide ads. Scroll down for more posts
MustafaMc
08-07-2007, 01:26 AM
We have multiple humanitarian crises in the Muslim world. In my opinion the most critical and urgent is the situation in Iraq. It is obvious that the presence of the US military is not leading to the development of a stable and functional government. What solution is there to this manmade catastrophe?

My opinion is that the Muslim world should come together to the aid of Iraq. The Sunnis, Shias and Kurds should put aside their grievences and differences to work for the good of their brothers and sisters in Iraq. Until a stable Iraqi government is established, there should be a coalition of Iran, Turkey, Syria, and other Arab countries get together with the USA to form a transitional security force. As soon as this coalition force from Muslim countries is in place the US military should evacuate as soon as possible.

The reconstruction by American companies is not effectively reestablishing the infrastructure of this country. The US should work by proxy to finance the rebuilding of the country that they have destroyed. The Muslim coalition force would provide security as companies from Iraq and the adjoining countries worked to rebuild the country's infrastructure - power grid, water supply, sanitation, roads, bridges, etc. After a certain level of stability is achieved, then a sovereign (not puppet) Iraqi government would be established to provide all normal functions and services including national security.

We are sitting on a keg of gunpowder with a lit fuse that is getting close to a critical point of no return. The continued fighting among Muslims may escalate and spread to neighboring countries that will lead to further destabilization of the Middle East. Whether we like it or not the oil in the Middle East is the life blood for civilization as we know it today. If the oil supply is seriously disrupted by widespread conflict, we may enter a global Dark Age that is hard to imagine.

My stated opinions are meant to be a seed for further discussions on how we can move forward for the good of the Iraqi people.
Reply

Keltoi
08-07-2007, 03:16 AM
The idea of a Muslim security force might sound like a good alternative, but read carefully what you just stated. The Sunni, Shia, and Kurds should come together for the benefit of the Iraqi people. How is a Muslim force going to help matters when it is primarily a Muslim civil war? Why would a Muslim security force, which does not have the experience or the capability to deal with a widespread insurgent bloodbath, have more luck than anyone else?

In my opinion, there is no fix for this problem. If Iraqis want to butcher each other, which regardless of what the article states is not the a product of the United States, then let them have it. Sure, Al-Qaeda will put out propoganda tapes claiming victory and an American defeat, and many more thousands of Iraqis will die, but they are dying anyway. The majority of U.S. troops should deploy to Afghanistan, and leave only a small quick strike force to aid whatever is left of the Iraqi security forces. Having U.S. soldiers standing around at checkpoints and walking around streets just waiting for an IED is lunacy. If the Iraqis want peace they will have to make it themselves, nobody can do it for them.
Reply

Joe98
08-07-2007, 04:43 AM
format_quote Originally Posted by MustafaMc
My opinion is that the Muslim world should come together to the aid of Iraq.

The Sunnis, Shias and Kurds should put aside their grievences and differences to work for the good of their brothers and sisters in Iraq.

George Bush holds the same opinion. It is the Iraqis who disagree with this opinion.




format_quote Originally Posted by MustafaMc
The reconstruction by American companies is not effectively re-establishing the infrastructure of this country.
The problem is that Iraqis are attacking the trucks carrying the stores and equipment.



format_quote Originally Posted by MustafaMc
My stated opinions are meant to be a seed for further discussions on how we can move forward for the good of the Iraqi people.

Unfortunately the Iraqi people disagree.

-
Reply

Welcome, Guest!
Hey there! Looks like you're enjoying the discussion, but you're not signed up for an account.

When you create an account, you can participate in the discussions and share your thoughts. You also get notifications, here and via email, whenever new posts are made. And you can like posts and make new friends.
Sign Up
Cognescenti
08-07-2007, 05:15 AM
The problem with political comity in Iraq is the Shia hold the cards. The Shia have Aces and Jacks and the Sunni have a pair of 4's with the river card to be shown. Despite this the Sunni want to split the pot. Not to mention the fact that there were decades of brutal oppression of the Iraqi Shia (long before the US was in Iraq) and they are not in a forgiving mode. Both sides are so headstrong and bound by revenge and honor that will destroy much of the country and several hundred thousand people if left to their own devices. If the Sunni and Shia go at it, the Kurds will just sit out and enjoy the popcorn.

With all due repsect, I don't think a combined Muslim force could maintain security at the Macy's parade. They would need 3 years of meetings in Dubai at a nice hotel just to decide on a mission statement and a new logo for the force.

The Kurds would not permit the Turks. The Sunni would not permit the Iranians and the Shia would not permit a Sunni force from Egypt (for eg.) The Saudis would be 100% verboten because of their tribal ties with some of the Iraqi Sunni.

Really naughty of the US to invent all of this nasty hatred among Muslim sects, eh?
Reply

wilberhum
08-07-2007, 04:33 PM
If you could have a combined Muslim force , there wouldn't be any problem establishing peace. But sadly, there isn't.
Reply

MustafaMc
08-09-2007, 02:12 AM
format_quote Originally Posted by Keltoi
In my opinion, there is no fix for this problem. If Iraqis want to butcher each other, which regardless of what the article states is not the a product of the United States, then let them have it.
So there is "no fix for the problem" and you see it as a simple matter of leaving the Iraqis alone to butcher each other until they have had enough of killing to establish some kind of a government. Well, have you ever thought that the crisis has the very real probability of escalating and spreading to neighboring oil-rich countries. Have you thought about what a whole scale war in this area would mean for the world?
Reply

Darkseid
08-09-2007, 03:15 AM
The best way to solve this problem is from a proposal made by Allah and here is how it goes.

1) First, all forces from the United States of America must immidiently withdraw from Iraq.

2) The United Nations will hold a submit (meeting) to discuss a workable program.

3) Turkey must withdraw land of the Kurds, Zazas, Arabs (the province of Hatay), Thracians, Armenians, and Lazis.

4) Iran must withdraw land not formally partaining to Persian people or it must establish a federalized community, but still withdraw land pertaining to Azeris, Afghans (Pashtos) , Balochis, Turkmen, Kurds, and Arabs.

5) Syria must also give off land of the Kurds and Assyrians.

6) Kurdistan shall be made out of this and so shall a shiite state of Iraq known as shown on the map below.



This land will unite with the Southwestern Arab area of Iran known as Arabistan.



The Kurds will establish a federation with the Laz, Zaza, Iraqi Turkmen, Armenians, Azeri, and Talysh creating Subaria or Subar. The federation will work in much of the same extent as Switzerland insuring regional autonomy and only economic and militaristic cooperation.

Subaria and Arabistan along with the Sunni area of Iraq which will probably join Arabistan or become a part of Jordan shall form a confederal union of interest that shall be named as the Iraqi Alliance.

All these requirements must be met or a devastating nuclear war will persist though not directly from this hostile front that shall ravage the Earth and accumulate to more than a billion deaths. Heed my warning for it shall not be too long until such becomes a reality.

However, since you are probably curious as to what I had just said allow me to specify it more clearly.

When the United States pulls out of Iraq and it will, Iran is going to pour into Southern Iraq tempting to take Kuwait which shall trigure a regional war between the shiites and sunnis of the Middle-East or more honestly a Persian-Arab war. Israel will take into interest in assisting the Arabs so that Iran does not have a chance at annihilating Israel as its president had once announced.

Hamas will certainly take consideration in assisting Iran since it certainly wouldn't want to help out the Israelis and the Fatah faction which cooperating with the Saudis, Lebonese, and Jordanians.

This will certainly be abrupt regional war, but it will go further when Egypt sides with the Sunni forces and must confront the hostile Libyans and Sudanese that so do hate the Egyptians for them not accepting the Arabic ethnicity. Chad will reluctantly get involved with both of her enemies in the defense of Egypt. This association of friend and foe will excapade throughout Northern Africa until nearly every Northern, Easter, and Western African country is involved in one matter or another. Meanwhile, U.S. has its hands full trying to get at Bin Ladin when it can't gain any access into Pakistan and must continue seeking admitance until she finally gives up and isolates herself from the rest of the world in order to take care of her own problems which involves infrastructure, economic corruption, education, and unemployment. Nevertheless, the taliban eventually takes control of both Afghanistan and Pakistan. This alarming threat pressing India to take charge and insured into a two sided confrontation from both sides when Bangladesh joins forces with Pakistan.

But this is only a small view of the expected turn of events. There is another side to this that I have yet to tell. While the Persian-Arab conflict pursues, Turkish forces invade from the North in Kurdish region to take care of rebel forces (and hopefully conquer the region as an extension to Turkish domain. And yet a terrible sight is beholded onto the Turks as they are in a gasp of shock when it is revealed to them that the Greeks and Armenians have started to ship supplies to the Kurds in defense of an invasion. The Turks respond by declaring all-out war against the Greeks and Armenians and even so much as to get the Azeris and Albanians involved against each of their notorious nemesis. NATO as a false alliance is shattered apart from this event as Western Nations allign them selves in emergency matter with the Greeks against the Turkish forces. And as nothing could get more bewildering, more chaotic, more strange and unpredictable; suddenly Turkey and Iran join forces and along with them Russia and Syria join them for support. Croatia and Belorus also join the fight as they seek to help fellow comrad or berid of a particular ethnic tribe (in Croatia case they just want to get rid of Serbia altogether).

Things even become more tragic as North Korea begins to invade Korea and China take a part in this nightmore insuring the ever so gruesome fate of Korean Democracy. Japan becomes a big provider for Korea, but can't take into any part of the war due to its sizable restriction placed unto them by the Americans. Eventually they cut off of this agreement, knowwing the Americans are too busy with their own problems to notice and join the fight on the Southern Korean's behalf. Fortunate to them, Chinese, Pakistanian, Iranian, Azeri, and Russian forces are torn apart to take care increasing unrest permiting in their own lands as the Uyghurs, Tibetans, Lalysh, Balochis, Chechens, Mongolians, Yakutians, and other minority class people take this opportunity to strike hard against their oppressor for an opportunity to find freedom.

Even countries in South America and in the Pacific Ocean join the massive world war and soon enough weapons of mass destruction are used under countless instances that takes away nearly a fifth of the world population. And as all seems so grim, so certain towards armageddon, the United States finally takes action as just like that the war ends and peace renews it self.

But peace shall not stay for too long as the world will eventually partake again in another travesty soon follow as the prophesized maniacle ******* comes into power to drive the world to chaos once again in the year of 2013.

But this event shall end with a maricle of new faith in god and new prosperity for all man in the year of 2020.
Reply

August
08-09-2007, 07:19 AM
There aren't any really good solutions. If we leave, Iraq will collapse and even more will die than are already dying, as well as destroying the U.S.'s already meager ability to fight a counter-insurgency war and what's left of our credibility. The only way to accomplish anything by staying is if we're there for decades. Any kind of gradual disengagement will really be no different than an immediate pullout. Look at what happened in Vietnam. It took Nixon five years to get us out, and the N. Vietnames conquored the south 2 years later.

The biggest mistake we made during the occupation was making it about democracy first. You have to have public order for democracy to work, and we needed to reestablish order first. No wonder the Iraqis are upset, remember the looting? And how we did nothing to stop it? We've really messed this up, and done it in such a way that we really don't have a way to fix it. Going into the future, we either need to be much wiser about the military interventions we make, or we need to be really cynical and go back to the old "dictators who sell us oil are great" plan.
Reply

Keltoi
08-09-2007, 02:27 PM
format_quote Originally Posted by MustafaMc
So there is "no fix for the problem" and you see it as a simple matter of leaving the Iraqis alone to butcher each other until they have had enough of killing to establish some kind of a government. Well, have you ever thought that the crisis has the very real probability of escalating and spreading to neighboring oil-rich countries. Have you thought about what a whole scale war in this area would mean for the world?
I should have said there is no American fix for the problem. Most of the Iraqis capable of actual unity leadership in Iraq are long dead, most by Saddam, but many during the violence we have now. The U.S. can't make the Iraqis keep their eye on the ball. The number of people that voted in those elections is a sign that the average Iraqi does indeed want a voice in their government, but they also need leadership. Only Iraqis can decide what government they want and who will lead them. Only Iraqis can solve Iraqi problems.

I always think of the American Revolution in this situation. Granted, there was no active Iraqi resistance against Saddam...at least not above ground, but Saddam was the poster boy for tyranny. It is a little known fact that in the American southern colonies there was widespread factional violence, not unlike what we are seeing now in Iraq. There was terrorism, torture, murder, etc. Statistically, more Americans died after the Revolution than died in it. It ended only when the weak and disorganized American government forced them to end it, through more violence sadly, but it ended.

Iraqis are going to have to settle this problem themselves. Americans cannot do it for them. The plan seems to be to wait it out and hope the Iraqi government can get its act together. I don't think the U.S. military is helping much with this goal, besides the much needed training the Iraqi security forces need. In my opinion, the U.S. should redeploy out of Iraq, except for a small force to train and give air support to the new Iraqi national army.
Reply

Hey there! Looks like you're enjoying the discussion, but you're not signed up for an account.

When you create an account, you can participate in the discussions and share your thoughts. You also get notifications, here and via email, whenever new posts are made. And you can like posts and make new friends.
Sign Up

Similar Threads

  1. Replies: 5
    Last Post: 05-17-2012, 11:50 AM
  2. Replies: 5
    Last Post: 04-12-2007, 10:24 PM
  3. Replies: 12
    Last Post: 10-22-2006, 12:35 AM
  4. Replies: 3
    Last Post: 07-08-2006, 11:30 AM
  5. Replies: 1
    Last Post: 03-13-2006, 12:17 AM
British Wholesales - Certified Wholesale Linen & Towels | Holiday in the Maldives

IslamicBoard

Experience a richer experience on our mobile app!