| Welcome to Campfire Soapbox. We hope you enjoy your visit. You're currently viewing our forum as a guest. This means you are limited to certain areas of the board and there are some features you can't use. If you join our community, you'll be able to access member-only sections, and use many member-only features such as customizing your profile, sending personal messages, and voting in polls. Registration is simple, fast, and completely free. Join our community! If you're already a member please log in to your account to access all of our features: |
| A Central Pillar Of Iraq Policy Crumbling; Are they dancing in the streets yet? | |
|---|---|
| Tweet Topic Started: Oct 9 2005, 01:36 PM (113 Views) | |
| 5thwheeler | Oct 9 2005, 01:36 PM Post #1 |
|
Get the message?
|
THE WORLD A Central Pillar of Iraq Policy Crumbling Bush's administration has insisted that political progress would quell the insurgency. But the reverse may be true, U.S. analysts say. By Tyler Marshall and Louise Roug, Times Staff Writers WASHINGTON — Senior U.S. officials have begun to question a key presumption of American strategy in Iraq: that establishing democracy there can erode and ultimately eradicate the insurgency gripping the country. The expectation that political progress would bring stability has been fundamental to the Bush administration's approach to rebuilding Iraq, as well as a central theme of White House rhetoric to convince the American public that its policy in Iraq remains on course. But within the last two months, U.S. analysts with access to classified intelligence have started to challenge this precept, noting a "significant and disturbing disconnect" between apparent advances on the political front and efforts to reduce insurgent attacks. Now, with Saturday's constitutional referendum appearing more likely to divide than unify the country, some within the administration have concluded that the quest for democracy in Iraq, at least in its current form, could actually strengthen the insurgency. The commander of U.S. forces in Iraq, Army Gen. George W. Casey, has acknowledged that such a scenario is possible, while officials elsewhere in the administration, all of whom declined to be identified because of the sensitivity of the subject, say they share similar concerns about the referendum. Iraq's Sunni Muslim Arabs, who are believed to form the core of the insurgency, are bitterly opposed to a constitution drafted mainly by the country's majority Shiite Muslims and ethnic Kurds. Yet from all indications, the Sunnis will fail to muster enough votes to defeat it. "It could make people on the fence a little more angry or [make them] come off the fence," said a senior U.S. official who requested anonymity. A growing number of experts outside the administration and in Iraq agree with such assessments. "If the constitution passes in a non-amicable way, the violence will increase," said Ali Dabagh, a member of Iraq's transitional National Assembly who is believed to be close to Prime Minister Ibrahim Jafari. The White House has consistently linked the building of democracy in Iraq and the broader Middle East with the defeat of the insurgency. President Bush repeated that assertion Thursday in a policy address to the National Endowment for Democracy in Washington. "If the peoples of [the Middle East] are permitted to choose their own destiny and advance by their own energy and by their participation as free men and women," he declared, "then the extremists will be marginalized and the flow of violent radicalism to the rest of the world will slow and eventually end." Vice President Dick Cheney has put it more succinctly. "I think … we will, in fact, succeed in getting democracy established in Iraq, and I think when we do, that will be the end of the insurgency," he told CNN in June. Those comments echoed an assertion put forward earlier by the Pentagon: U.S. forces could not defeat the insurgency through military might alone; success required redeploying troops to protect the nascent democratic process. That process, commanders said, together with military force, would eventually smother rebel violence. Despite what Bush on Thursday called "incredible political progress" in Iraq since Saddam Hussein's fall 2 1/2 years ago, the Iraqi insurgency has grown in strength and sophistication. From about 5,000 Hussein loyalists using leftover Iraqi army equipment, it has mushroomed into a disparate yet potent force of up to 20,000 equipped with explosives capable of knocking out even heavily armored military vehicles. "The surface political process has stumbled forward, but the insurgency came up and kind of stayed that way," said a U.S. government analyst with access to classified intelligence. Several analysts, who spoke on condition of anonymity while discussing intelligence, indicated that initial evidence of the disconnect began to surface in the spring — after Iraq's first national elections on Jan. 30 — and it has gradually become clearer since. Doubts about such a central pillar of Iraq policy come at an awkward time for the White House: Polls show eroding public confidence in Bush as a leader and in his management of the war. In recent days, Bush, Cheney and Secretary of State Condoleezza Rice have tried to shore up public support for staying in Iraq. But Middle East experts say they have found little correlation between Iraq's emerging democracy and the rebellion's strength. "The democratic process as it has worked so far has certainly done nothing to undermine the insurgency," said Nathan Brown, who researches Middle East political reform at the Carnegie Endowment for International Peace in Washington. Robert Malley, co-author of a September report by the International Crisis Group, a nonprofit organization that deals with conflict resolution, concluded that approval of the draft constitution could make things worse. Malley called the administration's Iraq policy "a case study of pinning too much hope on an electoral process without doing so much of the other work." Success in Iraq "is not about democracy or non-democracy; it's about reaching consensus on a political pact that all parties agree to," said Malley, a former advisor to President Clinton on Arab-Israeli affairs. "If they don't agree, the political process won't help." The U.S. ambassador to Iraq, Zalmay Khalilzad, is reportedly trying to broker eleventh-hour changes in the draft to ease Sunni concerns, but even if he succeeds, the effect of such concessions would not be immediately clear, analysts said. A Western diplomat in Baghdad, who spoke on condition of anonymity, said a government that is unable to provide for basic needs such as security, electricity, potable water and jobs commands little loyalty. Brian Jenkins, a terrorism specialist at the Rand Corp. think tank in Santa Monica, said that a cursory look at history shows "there is no guarantee that political progress diminishes political violence." He cited Colombia, Sri Lanka, the Philippines and Northern Ireland, noting that insurgencies have lasted for decades in those functioning democracies with educated populations. He said those militant movements were driven by various factors, including the political goals of aggrieved groups, profitable criminal activities and a lack of economic opportunities. Jenkins and others believe that Iraq's insurgency has already developed several motivating strands that would probably sustain it for years. With the divisive constitutional referendum only a week away, the first trial of the deposed Hussein scheduled to begin this month and the prospect that the December election will produce a Shiite-dominated parliament, upcoming events may only further distance Sunni Arabs from Iraq's emerging democratic state, analysts say. Sunnis, largely excluded from this summer's crucial negotiations on the constitution, see the document as rigged against their interests. They fear, for example, that blunt language outlawing Hussein's Sunni-dominated Baath Party could be used to block them from jobs in the public sector. The draft also appears to open the door to a loosely federated system that could deprive Sunni Arab regions of the benefits of the country's huge oil reserves. Some Iraqis accuse the Bush administration of sacrificing a unifying political process in favor of speed and arbitrary deadlines needed to sustain American public support for the war and justify the politically important reduction in U.S. troop levels in Iraq. "We're short of time — it's the fault of the Americans," Kurdish politician Mahmoud Othman said. "They are always insisting on short deadlines. It's as if they're [making] hamburgers and fast food." Othman added: "If we'd had more time, it would have been possible to get Sunni participation. When Oct. 15 comes, many won't even have seen the constitution." |
|
History 101: When a popular myth is believed to be factual, teach the myth. Its not possible to underestimate the intelligence of the voting populous. Hummm, after seeing the results of the 06 election, I may have to modify my perception of the voting populous and refer to them as "Late Bloomers".
| |
![]() |
|
| Sea Hound | Oct 9 2005, 01:49 PM Post #2 |
|
Member
|
There is an article about the war of 1812, which I cannot now find, which tell about the American forces entering Canada from Detroit,and being shocked that the Canadians did not view them as liberators(from the British). Seems that even then, Americans were labouring under the false assumption that everyone the world over wants to be just like them. Americans do not seem able to realize that most people in the world are perfectly happy being themselves. This is why whether Bush is doing it on his own or has guidence from above, sooner or later the Americans will pull out and Iraqu will go back to being what is has been for thousands of years. |
![]() |
|
| Sea Hound | Oct 9 2005, 01:55 PM Post #3 |
|
Member
|
Bush on a mission: Quote from the Guardian. George Bush has claimed he was on a mission from God when he launched the invasions of Afghanistan and Iraq, according to a senior Palestinian politician in an interview to be broadcast by the BBC later this month. Mr Bush revealed the extent of his religious fervour when he met a Palestinian delegation during the Israeli-Palestinian summit at the Egpytian resort of Sharm el-Sheikh, four months after the US-led invasion of Iraq in 2003. One of the delegates, Nabil Shaath, who was Palestinian foreign minister at the time, said: "President Bush said to all of us: 'I am driven with a mission from God'. God would tell me, 'George go and fight these terrorists in Afghanistan'. And I did. And then God would tell me 'George, go and end the tyranny in Iraq'. And I did." Mr Bush went on: "And now, again, I feel God's words coming to me, 'Go get the Palestinians their state and get the Israelis their security, and get peace in the Middle East'. And, by God, I'm gonna do it." Mr Bush, who became a born-again Christian at 40, is one of the most overtly religious leaders to occupy the White House, a fact which brings him much support in middle America |
![]() |
|
| 5thwheeler | Oct 9 2005, 03:14 PM Post #4 |
|
Get the message?
|
![]() Yeah, I believe Bush thinks he is talking to God! I hear he is back on the bottle, I hope not! |
|
History 101: When a popular myth is believed to be factual, teach the myth. Its not possible to underestimate the intelligence of the voting populous. Hummm, after seeing the results of the 06 election, I may have to modify my perception of the voting populous and refer to them as "Late Bloomers".
| |
![]() |
|
| cmoehle | Oct 9 2005, 03:21 PM Post #5 |
|
Chris - San Antonio TX
|
That story has been denied and refuted. Only the Blues Bros are on a mission from God!
|
|
Politics is the art of achieving the maximum amount of freedom for individuals that is consistent with the maintenance of social order. --Barry Goldwater | |
![]() |
|
| 5thwheeler | Oct 9 2005, 03:51 PM Post #6 |
|
Get the message?
|
Yeah right, like the great duper/doper is going to fess up. When you claim to talk to God you get sent to one of two places, the first is occupied by the Pope, and with all the social service cuts, the other place is throwing its occupants out on the streets.I can see the peace signs now! "Hey hey, who did God say to invade today" I kid the president, but he is still the second best president of the 21st century. |
|
History 101: When a popular myth is believed to be factual, teach the myth. Its not possible to underestimate the intelligence of the voting populous. Hummm, after seeing the results of the 06 election, I may have to modify my perception of the voting populous and refer to them as "Late Bloomers".
| |
![]() |
|
| cruiser | Oct 9 2005, 04:03 PM Post #7 |
![]()
Member
|
5TH, Where did you hear that he was back on the bottle. If I were him and screwed up so many things I would drink like a fish! |
|
Men never do evil so completely and cheerfully as when they do it from a religious conviction. Blaise Pascal (1623 - 1662) | |
![]() |
|
| cmoehle | Oct 9 2005, 04:16 PM Post #8 |
|
Chris - San Antonio TX
|
"Yeah right, like the great duper/doper is going to fess up. " And the single source of this rumor is reliable? |
|
Politics is the art of achieving the maximum amount of freedom for individuals that is consistent with the maintenance of social order. --Barry Goldwater | |
![]() |
|
| 5thwheeler | Oct 9 2005, 04:16 PM Post #9 |
|
Get the message?
|
A guest on Bill Mahr's show mentioned that Bush was drinking again. Considering the source, and in all fairness, I have to give GW the benefit of the doubt on this one. Would it surprise me if it were true?... not in the least, the job of President can drive a sane person to drink, could you imagine what its doing to GWB. |
|
History 101: When a popular myth is believed to be factual, teach the myth. Its not possible to underestimate the intelligence of the voting populous. Hummm, after seeing the results of the 06 election, I may have to modify my perception of the voting populous and refer to them as "Late Bloomers".
| |
![]() |
|
| tomdrobin | Oct 10 2005, 10:45 PM Post #10 |
|
Member
|
5th It's pretty obvious you don't like GW. But, instead of relishing in every setback in Iraq, you should be hoping for a good out come. What would you do? Not 2 years ago, but right now. Pull out? Let the country turn to civil way? Assist the Shite's in surpressing the Sunni? No doubt they could solve their own problems, but it would be bloody. IMO there is more in play here than some disinfranchised Sunni's. There are major stakes in this game, and more players than just us and the Iraq people. |
![]() |
|
| 5thwheeler | Oct 11 2005, 11:41 AM Post #11 |
|
Get the message?
|
Well tomdrobin, you asked a few good questions and made some statements of your own, ill do my best to answer your questions as I see them. Lets start with "It's pretty obvious you don't like GW." I don't dislike GW, I just don't believe he is qualified to be President of the United States. What I don't like is being deceived by a person of trust! I don't like taking our nation to war and putting our youth in harms way over trumped up lies. I can understand how none of that would bother you, hell, it didn't bother most of the electorate. "But, instead of relishing in every setback in Iraq, you should be hoping for a good out come." Relishing in every setback is your interpretation and not my intent. I'm sorry if hearing the truth bothers you so, but burying ones head in the sand leaves me with a gritty taste in my mouth. As for hoping for a good out come, I sure hope GW didn't invade Iraq "hoping" for a good outcome. That would be like taking your roster to a Cock fight and hoping it comes out unscathed. "What would you do? Not 2 years ago, but right now. Pull out?" You answered that question for me. Did you happen to read my posts under Catch-22, and this one in particular "Bush says our troops will remain in Iraq as long as there are attacks by the Sunni insurgence, and the Sunni's know they must continue the attacks in order to keep US troops in Iraq and the Shiites at bay" So lets see if I have this right, our troops will remain in Iraq as long as there are insurgence, and in order to stay alive, the Sunni's must continue they're insurgency. Sounds like a vicious circle to me, and circles have no outcome good or otherwise. Building an internal security force sounds good, but I for one would not feel very secure under the guns of a security force controlled by my sworn enemy. Would you? "Let the country turn to civil way? Assist the Shiite's in surpressing the Sunni? No doubt they could solve their own problems, but it would be bloody." The rest of the world doesn't give a damn about the place, why should we? If the real reason we invaded Iraq was over oil, as I truly believe it was and one I would not have a problem with, then lets move on and build the Trans-Afghanistan pipe line from the Caspian Sea Regine to the warm water ports already in Iraq. I would secure them with the most up to date security equipment available, and leave the rest of Iraq to sort itself out. |
|
History 101: When a popular myth is believed to be factual, teach the myth. Its not possible to underestimate the intelligence of the voting populous. Hummm, after seeing the results of the 06 election, I may have to modify my perception of the voting populous and refer to them as "Late Bloomers".
| |
![]() |
|
| MDPD6320 | Oct 12 2005, 10:08 PM Post #12 |
![]()
Frank - Gainesville, Florida
|
I don't place any stock in what the NY Times prints. They have an agenda of their own and are not reporters of whole fact, only that portion that fits their purpose. |
|
" The government big enough to give you everything you want it is big enough to take everything you have." "Extremism in the pursuit of liberty is no vice, and moderation in the pursuit of justice is no virtue" All that is necessary for the triumph of evil is that good men do nothing. | |
![]() |
|
| 5thwheeler | Oct 13 2005, 01:14 PM Post #13 |
|
Get the message?
|
Not even the sports scores? What about the comic strips? What about Fox waddle, the last bastian for truth, justice and the American way.
|
|
History 101: When a popular myth is believed to be factual, teach the myth. Its not possible to underestimate the intelligence of the voting populous. Hummm, after seeing the results of the 06 election, I may have to modify my perception of the voting populous and refer to them as "Late Bloomers".
| |
![]() |
|
| « Previous Topic · Soapbox · Next Topic » |







Yeah right, like the great duper/doper is going to fess up. When you claim to talk to God you get sent to one of two places, the first is occupied by the Pope, and with all the social service cuts, the other place is throwing its occupants out on the streets.


10:38 AM Jul 13