Its the same old crap...all over again.

Lestat

Norm Smith Medallist
Joined
Oct 16, 2002
Posts
7,356
Likes
41
Location
Melbourne
AFL Club
Collingwood
Other Teams
Arsenal
Thread starter #1
It's a case of deja vu all over again in Iraq
November 12, 2004

Page Tools
Email to a friend Printer format
It'll be quite a while - if ever - before we should believe the happy talk from the Bush team, writes Thomas L. Friedman.

I got a brief glimpse of Donald Rumsfeld's news conference on Monday, as the battle for Fallujah began. I couldn't help but rub my eyes for a moment and wonder aloud whether I had been transported back in time 20 months, to when the war for Iraq started.

Watching CNN, I saw the same Rummy joking with the Pentagon press corps, the same scratchy reports from the front by "embedded reporters", the same footage of US generals who briefed the soldiers preparing for battle about how they were liberating Iraq.

There was only one difference that no one seemed to want to mention. It wasn't 20 months ago. It was now. And Iraq has still not been fully liberated. In fact, as the fight for Fallujah shows, it hasn't even been fully occupied.

Taking in this scene, I had very mixed feelings: a fervent hope that victory in Fallujah will start to tip Iraq in the right direction, and utter scorn at the fact that the US is now, once again, fighting a full-scale war in Iraq, without an ounce of self-reflection by an Administration that long ago declared "mission accomplished".

Advertisement
AdvertisementBut don't worry, Rummy has it all under control. He hasn't made any mistakes. Everything is going as planned. The plan was always to fight running street battles in Fallujah 20 months after Saddam's fall.

So lay off. Shut up. Watch Fox. Wave a flag. Don't ask how we got into this fix. Shut up.

Alas, I'm part of that dwindling minority who believe that a decent outcome in Iraq is both hugely important and still possible. But the "deja vu all over again" battle for Fallujah only reminds me that I still have the same questions I had before the Iraq war started.

Free advice: until you have answers to the following six questions, don't believe any happy talk coming from the Bush team on Iraq.

Question 1. Have the US and its allies really finished the war in Iraq? And by that I mean, is it safe for Iraqis and reconstruction workers to drive even from Baghdad airport into town, and for Iraqi politicians to hold campaign rallies and have a national dialogue about their country's future?

Question 2. Do the US and its allies have enough soldiers in Iraq to really provide a minimum level of security? Up to now President Bush has applied what I call the Rumsfeld Doctrine in Iraq: Just enough troops to protect ourselves, but not Iraqis, and just enough troops to be blamed for everything that goes wrong in Iraq, but not enough to make things go right. I may not know much about troop levels, but I know chaos when I see it, and my guess is that the US is still at least two divisions short in Iraq.

Question 3. Can Iraqis agree on constitutional power-sharing? Is there a political entity called Iraq? Or is there just a bunch of disparate tribes and ethnic and religious communities? Is Iraq the way Iraq is because Saddam was the way Saddam was, or was Saddam the way Saddam was because Iraqis are the way they are - congenitally divided? We still don't know the answer to this fundamental question because there has not been enough security for Iraqis to have a real dialogue.

Question 4. If Iraqis are able to make the leap from the despotism of Saddam Hussein to free elections and representative government, can the US and its allies live with whomever they elect - which will be mostly politicians from Islamist parties? It took Europe several hundred years to work out the culture, habits and institutions of constitutional politics. What you are seeing in Iraq today are the necessary first steps. If Iraqis elect Islamist politicians, so be it. But is the US President ready for that group shot?

Question 5. Can the US and its allies make a serious effort to achieve a psychological breakthrough with Iraqis and the wider Arab world? US diplomacy in this regard has been pathetic. "It is sad to say this, but after 18 months the US still hasn't convinced Iraqis that it means well," says Yitzhak Nakash, the Brandeis University expert on Iraq. "'We have never been able to persuade Iraqis that we aren't there for the oil. There still isn't a basis for mutual trust."

Question 6. Can the Bush team mend fences with Iran, and forge an understanding with Saudi Arabia and Syria to control the flow of Sunni militants into Iraq, so the situation there can be stabilised and the jihadists killed in Fallujah are not replaced by a new bunch?

This time, let no one claim victory, or defeat, in Iraq until we have the answers to these six questions.

Thomas L. Friedman is the foreign affairs columnist of The New York Times.

http://www.theage.com.au/news/Opini...r-again-in-Iraq/2004/11/11/1100131127745.html
 

(Log in to remove this ad.)

Mead

Norm Smith Medallist
Joined
Mar 2, 2002
Posts
6,795
Likes
1,080
Location
Perth
AFL Club
West Coast
Other Teams
Eagles
#2
Good article

Originally I was in favour of the invasion of iraq, and still believe it was basically the right decision (albeit made for the wrong reasons), but you have to face facts.

Regardless of one's political orientation, the fact remains that the US conduct of the war in iraq has been absolutely downright farcical- if there's been a mistake possible, they've made it.

Personally, I think the most significant problem was that their arrogance and inability to appreciate what they were getting into meant they didn't commit enough troops to start with- they've been forced to pick up the slack with national guardsmen, who simply aren't competent.

On top of that, their rules of engagement seem to be a fair bit more gung ho than the western norm, which again is counter productive- if marine unit X goes into Fallujah and kills 5 insurgents, chances are the preceeding bombardment, nervous trigger happy grunts, and high calibre machine guns will knock off 3 iraqi civilians to go with that- and if those 3 civilians have a couple of brothers each with a vengeful temperament and access to an kalashnikov, they're back where they started.

If the international community would like to put up their hand to commit troops to Iraq, now would be a rather good time because frankly i don't think the United States has the ability or the will to successfully conclude operations in Iraq.
 

Mr Q

Brownlow Medallist
Joined
May 27, 2002
Posts
10,984
Likes
29
Location
Wombling Free
AFL Club
West Coast
Other Teams
East Perth
#3
Mead said:
If the international community would like to put up their hand to commit troops to Iraq, now would be a rather good time because frankly i don't think the United States has the ability or the will to successfully conclude operations in Iraq.
Perhaps, but the international community on the whole said 20 odd months back that they didn't want to go into Iraq - and on the whole it seemed that that was the case regardless of what the US said to encourage them (re WMDs, Al Qaeda alliances, whatever). I can't see any of the reasons being valid now, so the international community has just as little interest in going in now as before.

On the other hand, the US is unlikely to bend its somewhat stiff neck, admit it was wrong and ask for the necessary assistance. Nations like France and Germany are unlikely to get involved except under a UN mandate, and the US is not going to hand control to the UN even if its the best thing to do as its too big a loss of face.


--- Aaaaaagh it would be nice to post just ONE thing without having to hit refresh 20 times ---
 

Dry Rot

My hat is better than yours
Joined
Feb 21, 2002
Posts
36,407
Likes
8,348
Location
Dead Snow of Norway
AFL Club
Western Bulldogs
#5
butterflykiss said:
Its going to be facinating to see how the US gets itself out of this mess and dosent create more problems in the Middle East by invading Iran.
Yes, I can't see a way out.

Mind you, it wouldn't surprise me if they invaded Iran.

And if they do, you'd have to have a go against Taiwan if you were the Chinese.
 
Joined
Jun 4, 2002
Posts
13,342
Likes
5,187
Location
Location!
AFL Club
Geelong
Other Teams
pivotonians
Admin #6
Mead said:
If the international community would like to put up their hand to commit troops to Iraq, now would be a rather good time because frankly i don't think the United States has the ability or the will to successfully conclude operations in Iraq.
The International community would go in at any time, but they won't if it's simply to be an extension of the US military. Unless the US gives up command, (which they won't) then don't bother asking the International community.
 

GuruJane

Brownlow Medallist
Joined
Feb 18, 2003
Posts
15,540
Likes
1,695
Location
home of the mighty sa
AFL Club
Hawthorn
Other Teams
Hawthorn, Tottenham
#7
Jim Boy said:
The International community would go in at any time, but they won't if it's simply to be an extension of the US military. Unless the US gives up command, (which they won't) then don't bother asking the International community.
The international community could only go in in numbers under the umbrella of Nato or the UN.

If the latter they would only be peace-keeping forces and we saw what happened in Bosnia.

Nato is not an option given the French attitude.

So it's the US and Brits and the new Iraqi govt who have to solve this one.

IMO I think its all going to depend on how the reconstituted Iraqi armed forces perform. Will they be able to secure Fallujah permanently, for instance, or will the "Freedom" fighters just infiltrate back?
 

BlueMark

Club Legend
Joined
Feb 22, 2003
Posts
2,233
Likes
12
Location
MELB
AFL Club
Carlton
Other Teams
Carlton
#8
Given it was the US and Brits that created this mess, why should NATO or the UN bail them out? Particularly given the USs deliberate snubbing of the UN.

Re Iraqi forces ( note that it was the Kurds who carried the fighting on behalf of the Iraqis in Fallujah) securing Fallujah? Not likely given the level of infiltartion of the Iraqi security services by the insurgents.

Next up Mosul.
 
Top Bottom