Well, Phase One Was Good TV

[Graham]

We had the short and effective war to replace our daytime TV for a few weeks. Doesn't mean every Iraqi now lines up in orderly fashion to cast votes in a shiny happy new democracy, while we in the US and rest of the west turn back to the cooking channel. We're left occupying a country - previously held together by the "glue of tyranny" - but fractured along ethnic lines with artificial borders created by previous empires (the British back in the day), deep resentment between ethnic groups (the majority Shias and previously ruling Sunnis...what's going to happen there?) and neighbours worried about ethnic gains (Turkey and the Kurds). Familiar? Can anyone say Yugoslavia following Tito?

I hope not. But cracks are showing and a leading Shia figure (shipped back and endorsed by the coalition) has already been assasinated. Iraqs neighbours are no doubt warily eyeing everything and will of course be doing their own lobbying and politicking; esp Turkey, Syria, Saudia Arabia.

A couple of today's commentaries for anyone interested past the end of the spectacle of modern war and rhetoric from White House and Downing St sound bites:

http://argument.independent.co.uk/commentators/story.jsp?story=396016
http://argument.independent.co.uk/leading_articles/story.jsp?story=396020
http://www.theherald.co.uk/news/archive/11-4-19103-0-52-59.html

[IrishHand]

We desperately need to rethink out Middle Eastern policy, if only for the sake of our servicemen. We already have way too many inhospitable, undesirable bases in the Middle East. We need to take care of the threats posed by Fiji, the Bermudas and maybe a couple of European countries (Ireland? Denmark would be great!) so I can have someplace nicer than Qatar to visit for 6 months.

[adios]

Is the point here that the "glue of tyranny" is preferable? As I've predicted that anti-war, anti-Bush factions would find plenty to criticize in post war Iraq. You are anti-war, anti-Bush aren't you?

[Graham]

Tom,

Strange response.
I'll answer these.


"Is the point here that the "glue of tyranny" is preferable?"

Nope. Didn't say that. Not sure why you even considered that.


"As I've predicted that anti-war, anti-Bush factions would find plenty to criticize in post war Iraq."

I don't think I criticized anything in post-war Iraq yet. I'm glad the military campaign didn't lead to the drawn out, messy and bloody campaign it might have, certainly not yet and not likely to be now. Maybe you didn't like the tone of my post, which did take a poke at those who've seen the military action and believe the job's mostly done, that we just send the clerks in after mopping up.

I'm very concerned by what comes out of this in the wider sense. There is the potential for this to become messy, protracted and a lot more difficult than many may think - that's my point.
Related - and supremely important, imo - is the view of the rest of the arab world and how the coalition enterprise in Iraq is viewed by them as it takes its path. That's what's going to really count in the long term.


" You are anti-war, anti-Bush aren't you?"

Don't care for his his damn-you, heavy handed approach to foreign policy; I don't believe it's really productive in the long term for anyone. My feelings on this war pretty much mirror those of Clarkmeister (from what I've read here on these forums).

G

[Graham]

I agree, I think the threat from Bermuda shoule be tackled asap. The despots here have just proclaimed a section of parking at the airport for sole use by govt ministers. First car parks; but where will it end..?!

I guarantee a warm welcome from the populace if these car parks were to be liberated for all the bermudian people. Strong security presence is required on the beaches and in the bars too, to avoid excessive celebration and looting following liberation.

[andyfox]

"I've predicted that anti-war, anti-Bush factions would find plenty to criticize in post war Iraq."

Yeah, so? We live in a democracy; rarely does 100% of the populace agree on an issue. We also live in a partisan political environment; of course those in the opposite political party will find things to criticize. Certainly there was some criticism of the previous president by his political opponents. Some of it was deserved (as you know, I was not a Clinton fan), but until Bush is impeached for sexual pecadillos, it comes across as a bit sanctimonious for those on the right to bemoan the fact that there will be criticism of foreign policy.

[adios]

"Nope. Didn't say that. Not sure why you even considered that""

You wrote originally:

"We had the short and effective war to replace our daytime TV for a few weeks. Doesn't mean every Iraqi now lines up in orderly fashion to cast votes in a shiny happy new democracy, while we in the US and rest of the west turn back to the cooking channel."

This seems to have a sarcastic tone to it but perhaps I read it wrong. Pardon the heavy handedness but I don't observe that many people that post about the war to be blase and neutral on what goes on. It seems to me that their is a true either or here i.e. you're opposed to the Bush policy or agree with it. I haven't read too many that are opposed to the Bush policies discuss the outcome of the war in a positive manner.

"I don't think I criticized anything in post-war Iraq yet. I'm glad the military campaign didn't lead to the drawn out, messy and bloody campaign it might have, certainly not yet and not likely to be now. Maybe you didn't like the tone of my post, which did take a poke at those who've seen the military action and believe the job's mostly done, that we just send the clerks in after mopping up."

Ok fair enough and I see now that you're referring to another post which I believe had "mopping up" in it's title. I beieve the reference in that post was for the hostilities ending only. I certainly think the most difficult task lies ahead and I believe I've stated as such more than once as have several others. I think the US government is certain to make some mistakes in this period. I also think it's easy to play armchair quarterback so to speak and sit back and criticize while not offering anything constructive. Not that what I post is any big deal but I posted an analsysis of what the economic solution in Iraq will entail. But what I see are many that didn't agree with Bush policies are waiting in the wings to tear him down. It's kind of like an I told you type thing. Before Andy gets all bent out of shape about it again. I have no problem with it, I just think it's silly when something that may shape the course of history in the Middle East is subjegated to petty partisan politics.

"I'm very concerned by what comes out of this in the wider sense. There is the potential for this to become messy, protracted and a lot more difficult than many may think - that's my point.
Related - and supremely important, imo - is the view of the rest of the arab world and how the coalition enterprise in Iraq is viewed by them as it takes its path. That's what's going to really count in the long term."

Ok your point wasn't clear to me anyway. Do you have any thoughts as far as a political or economic solutions or policy?

"Don't care for his his damn-you, heavy handed approach to foreign policy; I don't believe it's really productive in the long term for anyone. My feelings on this war pretty much mirror those of Clarkmeister (from what I've read here on these forums)."

First of all I don't consider my question a damn-you, heavy handed approach. I don't understand why you see it that way. I don't see many people discussing the nuances of Bush's policy in Iraq nor are their many fence straddlers. Perhaps you misunderstood the tone of my question. As far as Clarkmeister is concerned I believe he has posted that he was opposed to military action and regretted voting for Bush. Is it any deeper than that? Could be wrong about his position as I don't keep track of everyone's position.

[adios]

Aren't we touchy Andy. I NEVER stated that they shouldn't criticize. My point is that the transition will be very difficult. I will say this again for at least the fifth time:

The USA will make plenty of mistakes during this process.

Since this is the case people will have plenty of opportunites to criticize Bush. I don't understand why that statement makes you seemingly defensive as it is merely a statement of fact. I probably will not agree with every aspect of the Bush post war policy. I can't help it if you misunderstand what I wrote or that I point out that many people will take every opportunity to do it. They'll have a lot of opportunities in them coming months. It's a fact.

[Graham]

Tom,

My original post never mentioned Bush or criticised his policies.
It also did not reference a previous post - if it used the same words ('mopping up'), that is purely coincidental.
Yes (raises hands), I am guilty of a sarcastic tone. That maybe was a mistake, since the posters here, mostly well informed, many much better than me, are not the ones I'm poking at, but the much more common mass of less informed (and frankly, less interested) public now that the major part of the military campaign is over.

I'm ambivalent about the success of this endeavour the coalition emarked upon. Sure, it'll get rid of Saddam and noone's weeping for him. But we need to remember that the US and it's allies are viewed with distrust by the majority in the middle east. Exploitative imperialism is what they've seen from us historically. The '91 gulf war left US troops stationed in Saudi Arabia, fuelling the likes of bin Laden. Are we going to do the same thing and fuel further resentment. If we follow through on words such as "Iraq for the Iraqis", and don't loiter, install military bases, meddle in internal affairs - because we feel we have a right to - then it might work out ok. OTOH, if it is seen that the US/UK work to install a puppet administration and leverages contracts for the western corporations, then Mubarak may have been right when he said a hundred bin Ladens would be created. True self-determination of govt by the Iraqi people might not lead to the kind of administration the Bush/Blair alliance would like to see. I just hope the meddling is kept down. 'Our' man Chalabi is not - from what I've read - exactly the leader most Iraqis would like to see in the interim, though I guess we do have to go with someone for now.

It really sticks in the craw of most Arabs to see another Arab country invaded and defeated by the US/UK (whether or not they despise Saddam or not). But we might get away with it if we're not self-serving about the process.

G

[ACPlayer]

I haven't read too many that are opposed to the Bush policies discuss the outcome of the war in a positive manner.

The Iraqi people are yet to see the benefits of this war in a tangible way.

The American people are yet to see the benefits of the way in a tangible way.

The only benefit so far is that we have proven that we can invade a country militarily and that our bombs work.

I look forward to seeing the benefits unfold. Specifically to see if and how the Palestinian question is settled.

[andyfox]

I thought it was you that was being "touchy," Tom. I didn't read it as saying that we would make plenty of mistakes, rather as saying that there will be criticism from the anti-war crowd no matter what Bush does. If this was poor reading on my part, please accept my apology.