Democrats & Liberals: Archives

Forging blindly ahead with no direction or purpose has thus far proven to be a very effective strategy. I see no reason to enlighten the public as to the progress.

Minds left to their own wanderings and pursuit of the truth has caused a boom in discussion groups. Who knows, maybe a good idea will come out of it.

Iraq, aka ‘Throesville.’
It seems likely a constitution will be completed by 8/15. This should happen despite the recent assassination of two participating Sunnis, the withdrawal of an additional four, and the threatened withdrawal of all the Sunni participants due to their concerns about security. Again, it seems security concerns could be addressed- a dedicated team of US troops for each person, a small mansion in the Green Zone, and other generou$ inducements.

The real test comes on 10/15, when the country votes in a referendum on the Constitution. If three provinces have over 2/3 rejecting it, the constitution goes back for re-drafting.

If the situation in October is the same as it is now, what will be the criteria for a province voting its approval? Is there a threshhold number of voters required to participate, in order for the approval to be legitimate?

Given the continued mayhem, what would low turnout mean for the referendum?

Andre, you say that Rumsfeld has “highlighted progress as well as problems in Iraq.” By your own admission, he hasn’t said there are no problems. Neither has he said that it’s one big rosy scenario.

So what’s your complaint? It sounds like what you really want is to hear Rumsfeld wallow in defeatism and negativity instead of constructively try to address the very problems he acknowledges.

Futher, your sarcastic dismissal of the very possibility of taking any constructive measures whastoever makes it look like you’re actually rooting for gloom and doom instead of offering thoughtful alternatives.

A Chrismas present to Iraqis—who said any such thing, and why this contempt for even trying to do something postive on behalf of the Iraqis? What do you propose instead? Sarcasm?

If only the Iraqis would stop dying and vote? What a cruel dismissal of the fact that so many have actually risked dying in order to vote. And why this glib refusal to acknowledge that Americans are actually putting their lives on the line to stop those who are killing them?

Do you have any constructive suggestions about what to do? You sure haven’t mentioned any—or done anything really except pour out ridicule on Rumsfeld, the efforts of our military and the aspirations of the Iraqis.

I respect anyone’s view that the war in Iraq was wrong, that it was a mistake, that it has been mismanaged. That case can be and has been honorably made. But there should be a point where we can all get past that and discuss solutions to problems that exist NOW.

Meanwhile, in one of the most predictable developments of the whole sorry mess, Iran and Iraq continue to strengthen their ties. This is a completely foreseeable consequence of overthrowing Saddam Hussein.

Once I hoped the Iraqi Shias would convince the Iranians to become less of a theocracy, & more of a secular democracy. Unfortunately, it appears the opposite will happen.

Not surprisingly, a Shia dominated government in Iraq will not be looked at favorably by Saudi Arabia’s Wahabbi Sunnis, or the Syrian government; but then again, a democracy wouldn’t exactly make them jump for joy, either.

It all amounts to the worst foreign policy mistake since Vietnam. I’ve said this before, but we’ll declare victory and draw down the troops substantially by next summer/fall. It won’t really matter what the situation in Iraq is actually like; we have to draw down, due to manpower shortages, and the prospects of a midterm election looming. It will be like the end of 1984, with “victory, victory, glorious victory” being declared before the midterms, even as Messopotamia continues to earn its name.

So! October will be extremely interesting. Roberts will be confirmed early in the month, Iraq will supposedly hold its election mid-month, and best guess is that Fitzgerald will release his findings at the end of the month.

Wonder if Bush still retains the attorney he hired in, what was that, the summer of 2003? Wonder if Bush & his attorney have discussed phrases like ‘unindicted co-conspirator’?

PHx8, the article you link to says that Iraq and Iran have issued joint statements about working against terrorists, and have discussed a cross-border oil pipeline. Now, we should be under illusions about Iran’s sincerety in fighting terrorism, but it was never part of the plan for Iraq to totally isolate itself from its neighbors and making even symbolic diplomatic gestures with them. In fact, I suspec that’s exactly what the so-called neo-cons WANT to see happening.

Iraq can and must maintain diplomatic relations with all if its neighbors. Assuming this is a bad thing doesn’t make sense, as it might turn out that associating with a democratic neighbor will influence these states for the better.

You write “Once I hoped the Iraqi Shias would convince the Iranians to become less of a theocracy, & more of a secular democracy. Unfortunately, it appears the opposite will happen.”

I can’t follow your logic there. I’ve heard nothing that suggests that Iraqi Shias are making Iran more of a theocracy, less secular or less democratic. I don’t see how Iran could be any more of an undemocratic theocracy than it already is.

Ah yes, “Constructive Alternatives” and “Constructive Solutions” are Republican Double-Talk for “Its not our Fault”. Heh.

Don’t you listen to Bush? We are fighting in Iraq so Al Queda won’t come to the US. Our Troops are bravely doing their part as walking flypaper to lure the Terrorists to Iraq to kill them.

Sadly, not enough people are rushing to Enlist for this great duty. We need to convince our Conservative Brothers and Sisters to do their patriotic obligation. RISE, Young Republicans!!! You’re Party NEEDS YOU!!!

Kindly post your name and email below for referal to the nearest Recruiting Officer…

You guys need to read your history books and remember how long it took the US to establish our democracy, how many people died establishing our democracy, and while you are at it check out that famous civil war (that was a Republican war that was for you Aldous)
and wether or not we survived it.

The Republicans of Lincoln’s Age are sadly not the Republicans of today. I doubt Lincoln would ever imagine his party being the party for segregation, the wealthy and pointless war.

It’s too bad Bush43 doesn’t read. If he did, then some day in the future we or our posterity could read the memos about what really went on. I think they took out the cameras after the whole watergate thing so we can’t go to the replay. ;^0

Aldous,
Any results yet from Operation Yellow Elephant?

Scott,
In the American revolution, it was the Americans doing most of the fighting for their freedom, not some foreign power. Oh, wait, you’re right. It’s still the Americans doing most of the fighting.

Scott,
Are you saying the American Revolution is similar to our invasion of Iraq?

But it is interesting to consider. The American Revolution was fought from 1776-83. This is from wikipedia:

“Casualty figures for the Patriots have varied over the years; a recent scholarly estimate lists 6,824 killed and 8,445 wounded in action. The number of Patriot troop deaths from disease and other non-combat causes is estimated at about 18,500.”

In two years we’ve suffered @1,800 killed and well over 10,000 wounded.

Remember, we’re only talking about American casualties. The Revolutionary War total number of casualties for all participants pales compared to the total in Iraq in just two years.

As for civil wars, those are usually the bloodiest; those, and religious wars.

Phx8, I thought your numbers looked dubious so I checked.

You said 6,824 killed in action, 8,445 wounded and 18500 dead of other causes on the American side in the revolution. A Google search shows 1,200 Germans killed in action and 6,354 dead of other causes. And there’s apparently no reliable information about British casualites, so for the sake of argument let’s just say that not a single British soldier was killed in the American Revolution.

Again, assuming no British casulties at all, and not even adding the wounded on either side, we’re already over 42,000 dead.

I don’t think that number of dead in Iraq pale in comparsion at all. You’ve got 1800 Americans, and between 4,895 and 6,370 Iraqi military deaths

If you factor in the highest number of Iraq civilian deaths on the rather suspect site iraqibodycount.net, you’re adding 25881 more deaths.

So there’s been about 33,000 deaths in Iraq compared to about 42,000 in the American Revolution (that is, if all the British escaped without a scratch).

Sanger,
You’re correct, in that the numbers quoted from Wikipedia list just American casualties, not German mercenaries, for an apples-to-apples comparison to US deaths in Iraq. Disease caused more than twice as many deaths than actual combat. As you probably noticed in the wikipedia article, a smallpox epidemic during the time of the American Revolution caused @130,000 deaths.

Assume a similar casualty rate for the British and their allies…

You’re forgetting one crucial number, the number of Iraqi soldiers killed in the initial invasion. 25,000 would be a conservative number.

But to address your earlier post. Actually, I think we’re in agreement, check what I wrote.

“Iraq can and must maintain diplomatic relations with all if its neighbors.”

Great point. Yes, I agree. Iraq exists in a geographic & diplomatic context, among others. The context is nearly ignored in most media. That is where the idea of a united, Shia dominated Iraq can be such a problem.

The good news is Ayatollah al-Sistani is the leader of the Shias, and he is a man of religion, not politics. But unlike the other Iraqi ayatollahs, who are completely unwilling to address worldly concerns, al-Sistani is at least willing to address them; and al-Sistani seems to favor, or at least be willing to tolerate, a somewhat secular government.

It’s ironic how things work out. Saddam Hussein wiped out the politically active religious Shia leaders. The few remaining leaders, such as al-Sistani, survived precisely because they separate state & religion.

Unfortunately, the younger generation of emerging religious leaders, such as al-Sadr, seem all too willing to mix religion & politics.

We’re too far down the road for partition to happen. The best hope for a peaceful resolution and a secular Iraqi government rests with men like al-Sistani. The best hope for an outcome favorable to us depends upon the successful establishment of an Iraqi government. But given what I seeing, I don’t like the odds, not at all.

But the Shias are being provoked in the extreme by Sunni suicide bombings & assassinations. Personally, I have no doubt the terrorists receive tacit support from several Sunni governments.

Iran is not a significant terrorist threat (unless you’re an Israeli).

At some point the situation in Saudi Arabia will have to be addressed.

I have no doubt that there will be an Iraqi constitution finished on time. I’m also certain that - just like the elections - it will not have Sunni support, so give up any expectations that the ratifying the constitution will cause a drop in the daily insurgent attacks.

Oh, and expect the constitution to be a version of Sharia Law, requiring the requisite Islamic morals police to enforce it.

Sanger,

If you follow the news, Donald Rumsfeld left out alot of the information in his report that Congress requested due to the need for secrecy. Maybe he thought Congress might leak progress reports and other information detailing the training of Iraqi troops to the insurgents.
Nice try with the guilt trip. I notice how peace loving Bush supporters have become now that reality has set in.The tune is now,”We need to move on.”“Our troops are dying for a just and noble cause.”“Let’s be constructive.”
“Iraqi’s risked their lives to vote.”
All this warm and fuzziness is nice but a little late in the game.
Bush lied to get the U.S. to attack Iraq. You people supported it. They mismanaged this illegal attack and the results are alot of people dying. You people supported it.
Don’t try to take the high road now.
You want a “solution” Sanger and Scott Osborn, stop supporting it and speak out against it.