Iraq is the USA's "West Bank"

but it's bigger than California. Any "western" presence in Iraq is a target.

There are not enough storm troopers on earth to enforce Israeli-style Gestapo tactics to manage Iraq.

Agree?

Disagree?




Couple of notes:
1. I do not personally believe the US military are storm troopers.
2. I do not care to debate Israeli tactics on their West Bank.


edit to correct spelling.

And I wonder how many Iraqi children are growing very hardened hearts right now as they daily watch the debacles unfold. I wonder when they will strap on the suicide bombs?

Today's bombing, and the overall increase in them, is evidence to the fact.

I will not debate Israeli tactics either, but I would point out the amount of terrorism in Israel today. It forces one to ask: How successful has Israel been in stemming terrorism? I believe the U.S. occupation of Iraq will do as little to stem terrorism and bring security to the region.

they positively breed it and seed hatred in future generations as well, making the problem worse for decades to come.

It's madness. Greed and powerlust are making "American" even more an object of scorn, contempt and hatred.

I remember just a few years ago when I could travel and not feel like a pariah.

We haven't committed to staying there forever; on the contrary, we've committed to setting up a government and then leaving. I don't know exactly what form this new government will take. Many on this board would like us to leave immediately, and let them sort it out, which I don't know if that's the best solution. ON the other hand a cynical long term occupation for the benefit of Haliburton, would be disasterous for the United States as we all know.

Bryant
Check it out --> http://politicalcomment.blogspot.com

the Iraqi's will "sort it out" and I pity the people who are naive or greedy enough to have collaborated with the whole mess..

Let me say this up front--I don't like George W. Bush, and I think his invasion of Iraq proves more and more to be a terible mistake. I intend to vote against him in the next election.

All that aside--I do hope that rebuilding efforts in Iraq are eventually successful. Mostly for the Iraqi people, who, God knows, have suffered enough. I hope they end up with a successful secular democracy which gives its people freedom of speech, freedom of worship, and all the other freedoms we enjoy in the west.

I admit it will be easier to defeat President Bush in 2004 if the situation in Iraq continues terribly--but still, there are things more important than politics.

Bryant

Just maybe if we hadn't already tried to steal the oil and made it a priority over getting the lights back on and such there could have been some hope but there is no way we are going to allow an anti-western candidate to run and win.

They don't want us there.

They will continue to fight us using guerilla warfare tactics which we will not win.

They will tear down everything in sight to speed our departure. There will be no successful re-building of Iraq until the conquering invaders are gone.

is not permanently committed to occupation of the West Bank either.

In fact Israel is signatory to treaties that clearly commit Israel to leaving someday and prohibit construction of permanent settlements etc.

The PNAC agenda in Iraq mandates a long-term military presence.

Iraqis. We aren't leaving until a pro-western government can be set up there, and that will likely take many years. With that kind of time frame, can one really say we are committed to leaving? We would certainly prefer to leave -- it's expensive, and there is political fallout from our presence -- but preference is not commitment. The fact that the Saudi bases were basically abandoned, and moved to Iraq also argues against any movementin the near future. We're going to be there for a long time.

like we had in Germany and Western Europe during the Cold War.

they believe the next war will be the dying days of the petrochemical age and this is the first key geopolitical region.

They left Saudi Arabia to try and help the Saudi government, who are suffering much internal strife over ties to the US.

Even if a pro-Western government were established, it will a) take years to get in place, b) be horribly unpopular in the country, and c) will require the presence of our military to keep it in power.

This is a 30- to 40-year commitment.


The Bushco/Halliburton/PNAC plan is for us to be there for a very long time.

That enough qualifiers for ya'?

:evilgrin:

the worldwide panArab terror/freedom networks.

It is boom times for terror thanks to Bushco.




(Is it bad form to reply to your own post? If so, sorry.)

The patience of the Arabs and ultimately, the arrogance of the Europeans which lead them to overextend and blunder into trap after trap leading up to their eviction in the early 13th century, of I recall corractly.

This repeating history is some bad-tasting shit. I much prefer the Old (democratic) Republic when it felt like we were making history rather than reliving some of the worst parts of it.

So sad for all involved...the servicemen dragged off to this unjust cruel and foolish war, all of the Imperial Subjects of Amerika and us, the Free Americans, and all the fraud and theft and Constitution-shredding that we are enduring...

It's an effing Greek tragedy!

this is the Crusades and this is tragedy!

a tragically ironic lesson is that kingdoms fell while the knights were trying to conquer the "holy land"

many of the Muslim lands occupied by the crusaders had cowardly leaders that operated on the principle of "kiss any arm you cannot break", collaborating with the invader and leaving all of the fighting to leaders like Zenghi, Nuruddin & Salahuddin.

The US-client dynasties in the Gulf & Egypt are much like the amirs of the crusader-occupied coast, except on a larger scale.. the bourgeois nationalist divisions between the Arabs(among themselves in addition)/Persians/Turks making it easy for the US to manipulate and play off against each other, as the Fatamid/Abbasid wars and petty atabeg rivalries made the crusaders' job easier than it should've been.

Saw this coming for a while and was warning anybody who would listen... but you know, gotta support the troops, no time to think of the consequences of our idiotic actions.

by getting them the hell out of there.

I used to think that we had to stay (never should have been there in the first place, but once we were there we needed to "finish the job of reconstruction) in order to prevent anarchy, chaos and a widespread bloodbath.

But now, I think we will get anarchy and a bloodbath anyway. Every passing day finds us more and more stuck, more and more entrenched, and more and more screwed.

No way will Halliburton let Bush abandon all that oil and no way will the PNAC boys let Bush abandon those juicy sites for airfields. But if I were pres, we'd begin withdrawing tomorrow.




BTW, killbotfactory, I know you didn't mean "support the troops" to mean what the RW idiots mean.

all rolled into one agonizing, worst-is-yet-to-come, package.

made another good analogy:

This is Afghanistan and we're the USSR.



Think about that in the context of the end of empire.

"Eye-for-an-eye warfare will not bring security to our country, which anyone watching the current situation in Israel and Palestine understands far too clearly. There are times when military action is appropriate, but we have long passed that point. It is time to stop slouching towards our own personal Bethlehem. It is time we stand upright and proud, once again, and reject the Beast we have become as a country following at Bush's heels. If we do not stand now, then we risk repeating the mistakes being played out in Israel and Palestine as I write this letter, except this time it will be played out on a global scale. In that nightmare scenario, we will be the Israelis, and the rest of the world will be our occupied territories, filled full of potential suicide bombing Palestinians."

http://www.democraticunderground.com/articles/02/04/19_doctrine1.html

for your prescience.

The talking heads still parrot the "it's temporary" mantra, like anyone with a brain believes we'd leave anytime soon.

We MUST get Bushco out of power and get someone with a sane global agenda into power.

This was one of the main reasons many of us on DU were against the invasion to begin with.

Foreigners have tried to invade and occupy the M.E. literally for 4,000 years.

NONE, not one succeed beyond a few years, maybe a decade and a half at most.

With the SmirkCo PNAC hubris, we are treated to another Vietnam, only this time in the M.E.

It is and will continue to be an unmitigated disaster.

some of the talking heads are close to right.

We only need to dominate militarily while oil still has commercial value--another 40 years or so.

Is there any example in history of a successful 40-year imperialistic occupation and exploitation of a region in the ME?