Regarding the War in Iraq

[Yerda]

Many liberals in the US (like the UK) have been agitating for the removal of US troops from Iraq and ending the occupation.

How would you respond if a Baathist-Islamist unholy alliance gained control of the country following the withdrawal?

 

[Terrywoodenpic]

That is quite possible.
Though the Baathists will not want to play second fiddle to anyone.

It is a bit like asking what the Iraqis will think if the right wing Christian Republicans get in next time.

It is none of their business...Nor is it ours as to who gets in there.

Sovereign countries should be Just that.

 

[Yerda]

It is none of their business...Nor is it ours as to who gets in there.

Sovereign countries should be Just that.

Would it be our business if the were to start murdering people [opponents, Kurds, secularists] as Baathists and Islamists often do?

 

[des]

I don't think we would necessarily have to withdraw for this to happen. It might happen anyway, with very bloody consequences. The groups could decide to unite to get the US out. Then take over the country in a sort of united, perhaps even semi-elected government that would be much more extreme than anything Sadaam Husein could have dreamed up.

In fact, they have already starting killing Kurds and there have been a few major attacks in the once peaceful Kurdish area. I think our presence won't much change things one way or another. I think though that it will get worse before it gets better. I'm not sure if we can really stop this, unless we intend to stay there forever.

--des

 

[Yerda]

I'm not at all sure...

 

[Mathematician]

If the Baaths returned to power, I don't see how the consequences would be any worse than they are now. The Baathist Party is a radical, secular group. They would have no reason to pursue ethnic cleansing.

I believe most of the horror scenarios are created to provide the American people with some sort of purpose, because we know everything else is gone. No one is calling for our troops to leave Iraq and do nothing with the region. The liberal elements of America (and I'll assume the UK) see promise in sitting down and talking with every enemy in the region we can to negotiate a peace deal, instead of blowing them off. My choice for candidate, Mike Gravel, also advocates handing over every reconstruction contract to Iraqi businesses, closing our bases in Iraq, and creating an alliance of Middle Eastern nations to stabilize Iraq if the government permits it.

 

[Terrywoodenpic]

Would it be our business if the were to start murdering people [opponents, Kurds, secularists] as Baathists and Islamists often do?

One can quite justly consider that Sadam and the secular Baathists were the plug keeping order between the other warring factions. how ever he over stepped the mark.

We have now pulled the plug and the genii has come out the bottle.
There is no way we can put it back.

Killing and suffering will continue until another super warlord emerges to take charge.
That is the way it has always been in the middle east, it is the way it will continue.

 

[doppelganger]

Many liberals in the US (like the UK) have been agitating for the removal of US troops from Iraq and ending the occupation.

How would you respond if a Baathist-Islamist unholy alliance gained control of the country following the withdrawal?

There is an implied causal connection between these two sentences. How long would U.S. troops have to stay to prevent some "unholy alliance" (Baathist, Islamist or otherwise) from taking over "Iraq"?

 

[Mathematician]

It's worth noting that the more radical groups like Al-Qaeda stand no chance of actually holding power. How exactly would a fringe terrorist organization defeat groups larger than itself and better equipped? :sarcastic

 

[ayani]

Would it be our business if the were to start murdering people [opponents, Kurds, secularists] as Baathists and Islamists often do?

but people are already doing this! right while American forces are supposedly trying to keep peace and order!

opponents, religious and ethnic minorities, and those on the wrong side of religious politics *are* being murdered in the street, kidnapped, raped, pulled from cars and shot, etc.

and all while we are there trying to have control and peace and security.

 

[des]

Yeah, my point exactly. I think it is mostly a scare tactic to keep doing what we are doing. "We can't leave", they say, "there will be bloodshed like you wouldn't believe."
Except of course that there is already bloodshed like you wouldn't believe. I don't know if it would get worse or better or stay the same. Another boogie man argument is something like "They'll follow us here". This is such a stupid argument-- because it seems to me that this whole thing all started as they followed us here. It sort of sounds like time travel.

--des

but people are already doing this! right while American forces are supposedly trying to keep peace and order!

opponents, religious and ethnic minorities, and those on the wrong side of religious politics *are* being murdered in the street, kidnapped, raped, pulled from cars and shot, etc.

and all while we are there trying to have control and peace and security.

 

[Mathematician]

As if our politicians would actually care about foreign bloodshed. We've ignored the plights in Africa for how long?

They care because of something more expensive than lives: oil.

 

[Yerda]

There is an implied causal connection between these two sentences.

Yes, that was my point. No-one has answered the question however.

It's perhaps not an important question, and is really only an examination of my own values, but I'm starting to feel that it would amount to abandonment of democrats, trade unionists, feminists and so on.

How long would U.S. troops have to stay to prevent some "unholy alliance" (Baathist, Islamist or otherwise) from taking over "Iraq"?

I don't know.

 

[Terrywoodenpic]

no progress will be made until we leave.

It is our values that are seen as the problem not a solution.

 

[des]

Well you certainly hit on things exactly! In Darfur we have a terrible genocide that the US is basically too busy and has lost all its moral leadership to do something about.


--des

As if our politicians would actually care about foreign bloodshed. We've ignored the plights in Africa for how long?

They care because of something more expensive than lives: oil.