The Long Ignominious Slide to Defeat in Iraq

[NNN0LHI]

http://independent.org/tii/news/040406Eland.html

The worst nightmare for the American occupation has occurred. Portions of the Iraqi Shiite majority have risen in revolt. Full-scale civil war may be just around the corner.

The armed uprising by Shiite militias in four Iraqi cities, including the Baghdad metropolitan area, was well coordinated and deadly. The rebellion cost the lives of eight American soldiers and countless Iraqis. The revolt consisted of followers of militant cleric Moktada al-Sadr, who has militias numbering in the tens of thousands across Iraq, Although the American occupation had forbidden the bearing of arms, the militants brandished many weapons, including rocket propelled grenade launchers. They took over the streets, occupied police stations and attacked American forces.

Ironically, one of the motivating forces behind the bloodshed was censorship by the United States, a country that prides itself on the freedom of speech enshrined in the First Amendment to the U.S. Constitution. Last week, U.S. occupation authorities closed down Al Hawza, Sadr’s newspaper, charging that it had incited violence in Iraq. Yet the paper did not advocate attacks on Americans. As the U.S. authorities put it, the paper was guilty of “false reporting.” That type of justification is eerily reminiscent of rhetoric from the Communist Soviet Union. The closing of Al Hawza, symbolic for many Shittes, ignited street protests that mushroomed and became more volatile by the day, culminating in the uprising.

Sadr, always hostile to the U.S. occupation, apparently now believes that peaceful Shiite demonstrations should be replaced by armed insurrection. He urged his followers on, stating that, “there is no use for demonstrations, as your enemy loves to terrify and suppress opinions, and despises people. Terrorize your enemy, as we cannot remain silent over his violations.”

more

[louis-t]

1. And when civil war forces us out of Iraq...

the * cabal will blame? The media, the Spanish, the French, Clinton, Hillary, all those who didn't join their war, the Dems, Janet Reno, Clinton, Clarke, Clinton...

[Jacobin]

2. How weird that newspeople describe what is happening and then

call it a "civil war". It is an insurgency on several fronts, all of which are pointed at tossing us out of Iraq.

After which, more than likely, there will be some type of civil war.
But that is not happening at the moment.

[DemoTex]

4. "Civil war" is a misnomer.

What is happening in Iraq is a "revolutionary war" aimed at getting the US out. Then comes the "civil war." But by whatever name it is called, it is going to be bad.

[elperromagico]

6. And here you have the root of my central objection to the Iraq war,

namely, that in deposing Saddam Hussein and ridding ourselves of his "threat," we would open Iraq up to civil war - making it all the more easy for an extremist government to take power - and create for the United States a real threat similar in nature to the threat posed by the Taliban regime in Afghanistan.

For just one moment, forget the WMD that have yet to be found. Forget the nuclear weapons program that never existed. Forget the predator drones that couldn't make it across the street, let alone across the ocean. Forget all the other lies we were told to justify this war, and just think about the long-term consequences. Iraq, or at least Iraq as the British "designed" it after WWI, has never been a stable country. Even a dictator like Hussein couldn't hold it all together. Did we honestly think a democratic government, imposed by brute force, could do the trick?

But nobody listens to me. After all, as Boosh has noted, who cares what I think?

[Jacobin]

9. So true.

We traded a secular military dictator with sadistic tendencies for what will undoubtedly be a radical shiite ayatollah who will be quite friendly to fundamentalists who want to blow us up.

Hell, its why we enabled him for 35 years. He did us good, geopolitically.

[elperromagico]

3. And Joe Blow's reaction is:

"Those ungrateful bastards! We liberated 'em!"

Most Americans don't realize what it is to have foreign troops in their homeland, or what it is to face terrorism on a daily basis. If they did, perhaps they'd stop supporting people like Bush.

[FlemingsGhost]

5. Our defeat will be stunning.

"Nightmare," indeed.

[Joanne98]

7. Lovers of free speech. What country are they talking about.

We need the papers of the UK to "get it". Free speech and Democracy died when Bush walked into the WH. Don't they know that yet? They could help us more if they took off their rose colored glasses.

[leftofthedial]

8. as long as they are attacking the invaders and occupiers

instead of each other,

it is not a civil war.


Civil war is inevitable, but first they will attack us.