The new forums will be named Coin Return (based on the most recent vote)! You can check on the status and timeline of the transition to the new forums here.
The Guiding Principles and New Rules document is now in effect.
Dubya's Glorious Desert Adventure (Iraq Thread)
Harrier
The Star Spangled ManRegistered User regular
The Star Spangled ManRegistered User regular
In the interest of having the space to discuss it thoroughly, I am starting a thread devoted to our great leader's well conducted and entirely successfu military campaign in Iraq.
The most recent development has been the attempt by the Iraqi government, spearheaded by Prime Minister Nuri al-Maliki, to expel so called 'criminal elements' from the southern city of Basra, which is also Iraq's largest port. I say 'attempt' because it was more or less a complete failure. The 'Iraqi Army,' which is really a collection of militias held together by rubber bands, performed pathetically against the Mahdi Army of Moqtada al-Sadr, and couldn't make any progress at all unless they had either the Americans or the British providing air support. Also, US Special Forces were apparently fighting alongside the Iraqi Army, which is all well and good but still wasn't enough. Things only ended when members of the Iraqi Parliament traveled to Iran to broker a ceasefire with al-Sadr, which may or may not have happened with al-Maliki even being aware of it.
The Basra offensive was meant to demonstrate the competence of the Iraqi Army and the independent strength of al-Maliki's government. But nearly everyone agrees that it has had the opposite effect: al-Maliki's political capital is vastly diminished, and al-Sadr is stronger and more popular than ever. And oh look- they're holding elections in Iraq this October!
tl;dr we added another fuckup to our long tally of fuckups in Iraq, and this one's going to stick for a while
For news on Iraq, most of the American news sources these days are worthless. They either ignore developments in Iraq or they just shit out Bush's spin. I've been going to Reuters for news, and the English version of Al Jazeera as well.
The most recent development has been the attempt by the Iraqi government, spearheaded by Prime Minister Nuri al-Maliki, to expel so called 'criminal elements' from the southern city of Basra, which is also Iraq's largest port. I say 'attempt' because it was more or less a complete failure. The 'Iraqi Army,' which is really a collection of militias held together by rubber bands, performed pathetically against the Mahdi Army of Moqtada al-Sadr, and couldn't make any progress at all unless they had either the Americans or the British providing air support. Also, US Special Forces were apparently fighting alongside the Iraqi Army, which is all well and good but still wasn't enough. Things only ended when members of the Iraqi Parliament traveled to Iran to broker a ceasefire with al-Sadr, which may or may not have happened with al-Maliki even being aware of it.
The Basra offensive was meant to demonstrate the competence of the Iraqi Army and the independent strength of al-Maliki's government. But nearly everyone agrees that it has had the opposite effect: al-Maliki's political capital is vastly diminished, and al-Sadr is stronger and more popular than ever. And oh look- they're holding elections in Iraq this October!
tl;dr we added another fuckup to our long tally of fuckups in Iraq, and this one's going to stick for a while
For news on Iraq, most of the American news sources these days are worthless. They either ignore developments in Iraq or they just shit out Bush's spin. I've been going to Reuters for news, and the English version of Al Jazeera as well.
I don't wanna kill anybody. I don't like bullies. I don't care where they're from.
Harrier on
0
Posts
1. We still haven't found Osama Bin Laden. You know, the guy responsible for all the shit that happened on 9/11. Why are we giving up on Afghanistan when our mission there isn't finished?
2. What does Iraq have to do with terrorism? There were no discernable links between Sadam's govt and Al Qaeda, to which their still isn't. The only reason Al Qaeda even came to Iraq was because we were there.
3. Just wait for the UN to finish their investigations, and allow them to throw down sanctions, etc. Going in without UN approval was our biggest mistake. The whole fucking reason none of the other nations wanted to go in without the UN is because this is exactly what would happen. A country in a civil war, with no direction, and no way out.
4. Commiting to small of an occupying force.
o_O
Ive read Sunday morning cartoon strips that are more factually accurate than Al Jazeera.
Copy & paste this intellectual dog shit from Democratic Underground?
What an excellent refutation.
You are joking, right? Al Jazeera English is an excellent news organization. No infotainment, very extensive and informative coverage in a regions of the world that don't normally get such treatment. Really the only "problem" with Al Jazeera is that they are not in anyway Anglo-Centric like the more traditional news organizations are, and as a result, sometimes give a "foreign" perspective on domestic stuff in Canada, the UK, and the States. But it's hard to be their coverage in the Middle East.
I guess what I want to know is, are you saying that because you actually watched Al-Jazeera or visited their website and did your own research to verify the accuracy in their reporting, or because you heard it on your favourite right-wing racist propaganda outlet and therefore it must be true?
Seriously Al Jazeera English HAS to be upstanding because they know they are going in with people perceiving them to be the 'terrorist news channel' and other nonsense. Funnily enough Fox News at it's best doesn't even get close to the kind of integrity I've seen on AJE on a daily basis.
And there is a link to 'Fuck Bush' t-shirt, his original post is trolling flame bait material. How can you take it seriously?
What part is trolling flame bait, the op telling it like it basically is or the links he used to back them up.
They tried to flex their power with a knockout blow and sorely underestimated the opposition they'd face, and apparently thought a fucking block by block city fight would be:
A) quick
We're not dealing with street gangs here. And probably the worst part is there was a cease-fire. It appears our side (being the US/Iraqi government, albeit without notifying the US part of that) broke it.
Spin aside, it was a retarded op. It was even dumber to not alert the allied forces you were going to do it (losing their support in the first strike), and if the cease fire was renegotiated by people other than the head of state, you're pretty admitting he's on his way out the second they hold elections again.
No matter how it's spun in the media here, it appears nobody learned the first lessons of going into Iraq, and decided to make them all Again, on a smaller scale.
Can someone explain how this would be a bad move in the "war on terror"? I mean, I can see how it would be a bad move for Iraq, since Sadr would probably impose shariah law, not to mention indiscriminantly kill Sunni resistance. But Shi'ites like al-Qaeda about as much as we do, and Sadr would probably aggressively kill Salafist terrorists inside Iraq.
Wouldn't that just be Saddam Redux?
Seems kind of...pointless if that's the outcome.
Actually, maybe a little worse, that would look good.
A Shi'ite dictator would at least be consistent with the will of the majority of Shi'ite religious nuts in that country. Not that I want to spread democracy to Iraq or anything.
Oh great, so it would be WORSE than Saddam, that's uplifting.
Ironically, the Shi'ite crazies seem far less crazy than the Salafi and the Al Quaeda.
But the good thing about all these Muslim crazies is that they crazily hate each other. I tried to explain this to a Republican guy whose door I knocked on while I was canvassing for Chobama. If we want to effectively fight terrorists, we should at least know enough about the various Muslim groups to use a divide-and-conquer strategy (referring to McCain not knowing that Iran does not supply al-Qaeda with weapons).
I need to study more on the region, just to understand the basics.
Anyway, I'm not sure if al-Sadr is ever going to be 'prime minister,' because I don't think a government he headed would look so much like the current government. I don't necessarily think he'd be a tyrant on the scale that Saddam was, either, if only because his rise to power will have been so different: Saddam got where he was through political backroom wrangling, his usefulness to the US as anti-Communist and anti-Iranian, and a helpful military coup. Sadr's come up from the people, as a nationalist and a revolutionary resisting occupation by a distant power. Plus, he's devoutly religious. I'm not sure what kind of leader that kind of background turns out, but it won't be like Saddam.
But I do think that, one way or the other, al-Sadr will eventually rule Iraq.
And for all intents and purposes, Al-Sadr already does rule Iraq. He made Maliki scurry away like a schoolboy.
Stop with the calling people "Terrorist" because they refuse to be puppets, give these leaders the voice in governing the country they deserve (because they have the support of the people), and honor ceasefires when they are brokered. Half the problem is excluding these people. Look at Afghanistan, where the Taliban still have the support of >30% of the country or something stupid. Pretty sure you'd see a great step down in the shooting if they were recognised as a legitimate political voice in the country and didn't think they had to fight to get some level of power in the place.
Also, has anybody else noticed some parallels between the run-up to Iraq, and (Han) China's recent attitude and actions around Tibet? For two examples, the government's putting out (probably) fake intel the the Dalai Lama (or, as the translation of what they call it says "the Dalai clique") is supporting terrorism (they see the Tibetan riots as terrorism -- an opinion at which Israel laughs before saying "we wish") and, in an act of rising nationalism, Chinese citizens are banning French products.
Unfortunately, the Times site seems to be down at the moment, so I'll have to link those stories (one on the "evidence" and one on the nationalist fervor in China, which is causing many to criticize the government for its lack of action [in a way that sound frighteningly like arguments against affirmative action], both printed yesterday) later.
Of all the ways that China could have chosen to follow in the footsteps of the US...
They probably won't do it in fear of fucking up the Olympics. After the games on the other hand.....
Because violence in Sunni areas has been consistently going down, and all Sadr has shown he can aggressively do with regards to Sunnis is to indiscriminately kill civilians. It would just throw the Sunnis who've been agreeing to fight Al Qaeda right around into their arms.
And the Iraqis don't have magical kung-fu powers like all those Tibetan monks.
Two years ago, Iraq was in a low grade civil war between Sunni insurgents and Shi'ite militias.
Today, the Sunni are largely silenced, and we're in another war between rival Shi'ite factions: the Islamic Supreme Council of Iraq (ISCI), who makeup the current Government, and the Sadrists.
Bad news: we backed the wrong horse. Those Sadr guys? They're the ones with popular support.
Who backs the ISCI?
-Iran does. (Most of their leadership spent their exile years in Iran, and their party was set up with Iranian funding)
-We do. (Probably because they are more secular, and we like our leaders to dress well and speak English)
So now we're propping up the unpopular, Iranian backed Government, who are expected to loose in upcoming provincial elections, while they attack the Sadrist support base in Basra for their own political ends.
Remember how the surge was supposed to create a window for Iraqi politicians to reconcile? After last month, you can forget that.
Side issue: many analysts think Osama is dead. Nobody can say it without proof, but if he is dead there will be no proof, because we'll never find the body. The name you should be reading about now is Jalaluddin Haqqani.
To be fair, both factions are getting some support from Iran. But yeah, Iraq is pretty fucked from a stability point of view.