Iraq cabinet backs US troops deal

[nocturnal]

I assume you are referring to Iran? It doesn't take 100,000 U.S. troops to serve as a buffer against Iran. One aircraft carrier is enough to give Iran pause. The battle of ideals will be decided by the success or failure of Iraqi democracy.

You mean by Iraqi subservience not Iraqi democracy. Look at the hundreds of thousands of people who took to the streets of Iraq today, even with a 150,000 occupiers in the country, has the overwhelming will for their expulsion been heeded by the suppsoedly sovereign and democratic government?

A military presence does serve as a very real and tangible buffer against Iran from the american perspective, this is something we don't even need to discuss, the people in the Pentagon responsible for the handling of miltary operations themsevles have upheld this theory consistently. It cannot be dispelled by a few quixotic citizens who still believe that there is even a residual degree of benevolence in the upper echelons of american power.

 

[Keltoi]

You mean by Iraqi subservience not Iraqi democracy. Look at the hundreds of thousands of people who took to the streets of Iraq today, even with a 150,000 occupiers in the country, has the overwhelming will for their expulsion been heeded by the suppsoedly sovereign and democratic government?

The fact that Iraqis come out in large numbers to express their political beliefs IS a victory for democracy. Much more productive than violence, which only destabilizes their own country and economy. As for what the Iraqi government decides in regards to U.S. troop committment, they aren't stupid. They understand that the longer the U.S. is involved in, picking up the tab for infrastructure projects and the like, the more money they can horde from their oil wealth. Iraq will need a strong economy to go with their new government system. Plus, it helps knowing 100,000 U.S. troops are their to provide security and deterrent to the insurgency. 2010 will come soon enough, and the Iraqi government needs to be prepared for that.

A military presence does serve as a very real and tangible buffer against Iran from the american perspective, this is something we don't even need to discuss, the people in the Pentagon responsible for the handling of miltary operations themsevles have upheld this theory consistently. It cannot be dispelled by a few quixotic citizens who still believe that there is even a residual degree of benevolence in the upper echelons of american power.

Benevolence? Who is talking about benevolence? A successful democracy in Iraq is important for the U.S. not because we have some moral belief that democracy is better for the Iraqi people, but because a democracy in the region is good for American foreign policy objectives. It just so happens that American interests and the interests of the Iraqi people overlap here. Iraqis want, for the most part, a stable and economically viable democracy. It won't look like Jeffersonian government, but it will be a major improvement for Iraqis if this government is successful.

 

[nocturnal]

This pact has nothing to do with the Iraqi government discerning what is in the interests of Iraq, it is all to do with their political preservations and american strategic foreign policy objectives. That's what overlaps here. The fact that these people were allowed to demonstrate is not a symbol of Iraqi democracy, rather, the reason it happened is because al Maliki, cannot afford to engage the Mahdi Army in a confrontation. He simply can't neutralize them, it's impossible. Even if he attempts, he will be percieved as a killer as well as a pariah in the Shia community which he is already considered.

His plan, is to let the protest ride out and press MPs in parliament to ratify this treacherous pact which effectively is selling off Iraqi sovereignty. You talk about the Iraq government not being stupid, Obama's accession is impending, he has identified the fact that Iraq is hording billions in oil revenues and relying on american expenditure, and will likely seek to terminate that practice. That puts an end to your arguement of the Iraqi economic miracle apparently under US tutelage.

Iraq can resolve it's own affairs, it will do so. If a lawless nation like Somalia was in 6 months of the rule of the Islamic Courts Union able to accomplish such a plethora of achievements from commerce to security in a country totally lacking in basic infrastructure and institutions that are deemed requisite in the west, then Iraq can determine it's own fate. This is a microcosm of what im trying to say here, we in the Muslim world, are being prevented from coalescing around our ideology, our deen, our doctrine which is Islam, by those in the west who are using divisive measures and propaganda coupled with servile agents to avert the unification of all factions and political forces in any Muslim country because it represents a threat to their interests.

 

[Grace Seeker]

Iraq can resolve it's own affairs, it will do so. If a lawless nation like Somalia was in 6 months of the rule of the Islamic Courts Union able to accomplish such a plethora of achievements from commerce to security in a country totally lacking in basic infrastructure and institutions that are deemed requisite in the west, then Iraq can determine it's own fate.

I agree that Iraq can and will determine the nation it wants to be for itself. And while I might argue that because the US let a bull loose in the china shop that it has had some responsibility in cleaning up the mess, I think it is good that an accord has been reached to get that bull (donkey or elephant) out and let the shopowner take care of his own interests and not ours.

I would take exception to the picture you painted of Somolia however. Somolia is hardly a country with its act together. The reason the Gulf of Aden has become known today as "Pirate Alley", is specifically because of the Somolia leadership is either unwilling or unable to rid themeselves of those who operate from the ungoverned land bases that these pirates have established for themselves in Somolia. The pirates and the warlords are secure, the citizenry of Somolia is not.

 

[nocturnal]

My point on Somalia is not the current American backed TFG (transitional federal government) which lacks any legitimacy at all in the eyes of the Somali popluace. Think back to when the Islamic Courts Union was in power for 6 months, between June 2006 and the end of that year when the American's, because of Somali non-compliance, overthrew a regime that brought in 6 months, what the warlords of that anarchic nation did not achieve in 17 years since the overthrow of the Siad Barre autocracy that they themsevles supplanted.

In that transient period, they brought stability, security (piracy was unheard of), commerce, education was instituted regardless of gender, an perhpahs the must staggering accomplishment, they transcended the notion of clan affiliation, which is so acutely ingrained in the collective Somali national psyche. And because they rejected acquiescence with American demands, they were declared terrorist harbourers by the Bush administration, who went on to arm the ethiopian army and launch another overt american front in it's "war on terror".