two Iraq questions

[Boris]

1. Several days ago 4 U.S. civilian security guards were killed in Fallujah. Who were they working for? No details have been reported in the news and I am curious why civilians were working in such a dangerous area.

2. Bush is sticking to his guns on turning over power to an Iraqi authority by June 30. I think this will be a huge mistake and the decision is being guided by domestic politics rather than sound foreign policy. Unless the Iraqi authority is a US puppet state the country will be thrown into chaos. As distastful as it sounds, the US needs to instill a strict authoritarian dictatorship until radical muslim terrorist groups are sufficiently weakened. There is really no other choice in the near term. All successfull dictatorships ruled with an iron fist to keep the peace. Typically, the strict martial law was necessary both to keep the regime in power and to prevent civil war. In the interest of being humane. the US ruling council must adopt the same strategy until dissident factions are sufficiently weakened. IMO, the governing council is being way too permissive in allowing public dissent. This attitude promotes lawlessness and gives muslim clerics the idea that they can gain power by promoting anti-US sentiment. The US is not feared by the Iraqis right now and that should change if law and order are going to be restored.

[nicky g]

The security guardds worked for a firm called Blackwater Resources, which I beleive does a lot of work on behalf of the US military. I heard a report that they were travelling with a convoy delivering food. To whom or what or if that's accurate, I don't know.

The idea that what Iraq needs is yet another Western-backed dictatorship is too depressing for me to bear.

[Boris]

[ QUOTE ]
The idea that what Iraq needs is yet another Western-backed dictatorship is too depressing for me to bear.

[/ QUOTE ]

Well I'm not sure what other alternatives are out there. I think it's pretty obvious the country descend into civil war and chaos if the US were to leave tomorrow.

[nicky g]

I'm not criticising. I just find it depressing; too depressing to think about.

Hopefully threre will be no civil war; I would think there probably won't be. Neverthless, it's clearly a distinct possibility. Remember before the war when the anti-war people were told all their fears were groundless or scaremongering? ANd when after the war, they were laughed at for all their dire predictions not instantly materialising? I would suggest they don't look so stupid now.

[ThaSaltCracka]

[ QUOTE ]
1. Several days ago 4 U.S. civilian security guards were killed in Fallujah. Who were they working for? No details have been reported in the news and I am curious why civilians were working in such a dangerous area.

[/ QUOTE ]
I too find this interesting. Also, supposedly dog tags were found on one of the bodies. The security guards were compiled of mostly ex Navy Seals. It is indeed strange why they were there.

[Ray Zee]

any country full of different factions of religious fanatics will go into choas as soon as we leave. the fight for power will consume the country until another cruel ruler takes hold. then it starts all over again. those countries are and wont be democratic. and will be ruled by tyrannts.

[jdl22]

I agree with Ray in regard to Iraq. Iraq should really be three distinct countries. It being united only made sense to outsiders trying to use the resources and location to their benefit.

Too bad we don't just break it up.

Same could be said for Afghanistan IMO.

[ACPlayer]

1. More and more work is being contracted by the military to private companies. Here are some of the (cynical) reasons:
-- The companies dont have to conform to the requirement of Military code of Conduct and justice during ops.
-- The body bags are not of the army so the deaths dont count against military losses
-- The Armed Forces committtees dont have oversight over contractors.

2. In order to rule Iraq properly the govt should have done what it does with other despotic regimes: declare saddam a friend and done business with him. Having gone down this idiotic path chances are that now or in the future (unless Iraq is the 53rd state forever) there will be a Islamic government in Iraq -- whether the dictatorship is directly US or a Shah of Iran type dictatorship. Democracy has no chance in an environment where people have limited prospects for financial self-improvement.

[nicky g]

I sympathise with the idea that Iraq should really be at least two and probably three different countries, at least if the nation state is going to be your model for a country. The Kurds - all Kurds, Turkey's as well as Iraq - certainly deserve their own nation; the Iraqis and Turks, and to a lesser extent the Syrains and Iranians, have treated them horrendously. But in practice it would now be extremely difficult to do and could start a few wars of its own. Kirkuk for example, which the Kurds regard as a Turkish city, was highly arabized by Saddam and has large Arab and Turkmen populations who would take extremely unkindly to waking up in a Kurdish state; plus no sensbel central Iraqi government would willingly wave goodbye tot its oil potential. There are large Kurdish populations in the rest of Iraq and the tensions sparked in Kurdistan could see massive ethnic violence and tit for tat ethnic cleansing across the country. (Although this could happen anyway.) Furthermore the Turks would almost certainly invade such a state. That doesn't make the idea wrong but it's far from an easy fix. As with most things, the situation is more or less entirey the fault of the British.
(Obviously that's a joke. But the more I read about how the British government behaved in the Middle East in the late 19th and early 20th centuries, the more disgusted I am.)

I eagerly await Gamblor's post telling me why I this makes me a hypocrite about Israel.

[ACPlayer]

As with most things, the situation is more or less entirey the fault of the British.

Unfortunately you may not be too far off the mark.

See:

Iraq boundaries drawn by the british after deposing the ottomans.

Kashmir conflict left unresolved.

Palestine conflict left unresolved.

The last two could be attributed to the bad shape that the empire was as a result of WW2.