FOR THE PRO-WAR PEOPLE...Here is a little eye opener

[ou812]

THIS IS WHAT I HAVE BEEN TRYING TO TELL YOU PEOPLE ALL ALONG!

No Way Out

Every likely outcome of this war is a disaster

By George Monbiot. Published in the Guardian 1st April 2003

So far, the liberators have succeeded only in freeing the souls of the Iraqis from their bodies. Saddam Hussein's troops have proved less inclined to surrender than they had anticipated, and the civilians less prepared to revolt. But while no one can now ignore the immediate problems this illegal war has met, we are beginning too to understand what should have been obvious all along: that, however this conflict is resolved, the outcome will be a disaster.

It seems to me that there are three possible results of the war with Iraq. The first, which is now beginning to look unlikely, is that Saddam Hussein is swiftly dispatched, his generals and ministers abandon their posts and the people who had been cowed by his militias and his secret police rise up and greet the invaders with their long-awaited blessing of flowers and rice. The troops are welcomed into Baghdad, and start preparing for what the US administration claims will be a transfer of power to a democratic government.

For a few weeks, this will look like victory. Then several things are likely to happen. The first is that, elated by its reception in Baghdad, the American government decides, as Donald Rumsfeld hinted again last week, to visit its perpetual war upon another nation: Syria, Iran, Yemen, Somalia, North Korea or anywhere else whose conquest may be calculated to enhance the stature of the president and the scope of his empire. It is almost as if Bush and his advisers are determined to meet the nemesis which their hubris invites.

Our next discovery is likely to be, as John Gray pointed out some months ago, that the choice of regimes in the Middle East is not a choice between secular dictatorship and secular democracy, but between secular dictatorship and Islamic democracy. What the people of the Middle East want and what the US government says they want appear to be rather different things, and the tension between the two objectives will be a source of instability and conflict until western governments permit those people to make their own choices unmolested. That is unlikely to happen until the oil runs out. The Iraqis may celebrate their independence by embracing a long-suppressed fundamentalism, and the United States may respond by seeking to crush it.

The coalition might also soon discover why Saddam Hussein became such an abhorrent dictator. Iraq is a colonial artefact, forced together by the British from three Ottoman provinces, whose people have wildly different religious and ethnic loyalties. It is arguable that this absurd construction can be sustained only by brute force. A US-backed administration seeking to keep this nation of warring factions intact may rapidly encounter Saddam's problem, and, in so doing, rediscover his solution. Perhaps we should not be surprised to see that George Bush's government was, until recently, planning merely to replace the two most senior officials in each of Saddam's ministries, leaving the rest of his government undisturbed.

The alternative would be to permit Iraq to fall apart. While fragmentation may, in the long run, be the only viable future for its people, it is impossible, in the short term, to see how this could happen without bloodshed, as every faction seeks to carve out its domain. Whether the US tries to oversee this partition or flees from it as the British did from India, its victory in these circumstances is likely to sour very quickly.

The second possible outcome of this war is that the US kills Saddam and destroys the bulk of his army, but has to govern Iraq as a hostile occupying force. Saddam Hussein, whose psychological warfare appears to be rather more advanced than that of the Americans, may have ensured that this is now the most likely result. The coalition forces cannot win without taking Baghdad, and Saddam is seeking to ensure that they cannot take Baghdad without killing thousands of civilians. His soldiers will shelter in homes, schools and hospitals. In trying to destroy them, the American and British troops may blow away the last possibility of winning the hearts and minds of the residents. Saddam's deployment of suicide bombers has already obliged the coalition forces to deal brutally with innocent civilians.

The comparisons with Palestine will not be lost on the Iraqis, or on anyone in the Middle East. The United States, like Israel, will discover that occupation is bloody and, ultimately, unsustainable. Its troops will be harassed by snipers and suicide bombers, and its response to them will alienate even the people who were grateful for the overthrow of Saddam. We can expect the US, in these circumstances, hurriedly to proclaim victory, install a feeble and doomed Iraqi government, and pull out before the whole place crashes down around it. What happens after that, to Iraq and the rest of the Middle East, is anyone's guess, but I think we can anticipate that it won't be pleasant.

The third possibility is that the coalition forces fail swiftly to kill or capture Saddam Hussein or to win a decisive victory in Iraq. While still unlikely, this is now an outcome which cannot be entirely dismissed. Saddam may be too smart to wait in his bunker for a bomb big enough to reach him, but might, like King Alfred, slip into the civilian population, occasionally throwing off his disguise and appearing among his troops, to keep the flame of liberation burning.

If this happens, then the US will have transformed him from the hated oppressor into the romantic, almost mythological hero of Arab and Muslim resistance, the Salah al-Din of his dreams. He will be seen as the man who could do to the United States what the mujahideen of Afghanistan did to the Soviet Union: drawing it so far into an unwinnable war that its economy and its popular support collapse. The longer he survives, the more the population - not just of Iraq, but of all Muslim countries - will turn towards him, and the less likely a western victory becomes. The US will almost certainly then have engineered the improbable chimaera it claims to be chasing: the marriage of Saddam's well-armed secular brutality and Al Qaeda's global insurrection. Even if, having held out for many weeks or months, Saddam Hussein is found and killed, his spirit may continue to inspire a revolt throughout the Muslim world, against the Americans, the British and, of course, Israel. Pakistan's unpopular leader, Pervez Musharraf, would then find himself in serious trouble. If, as seems likely in these circumstances, he is overthrown in an Islamic revolt, then a fundamentalist regime, deeply hostile to the West, would possess real nuclear weapons, primed and ready to fire.

I hope I've missed something here, and will be proved spectacularly wrong, but it seems to me that the American and British governments have dragged us into a mess from which we might not emerge for many years. They have unlocked the spirit of war, and it could be unwilling to return to its casket until it has traversed the world.

[underwater]

Iraq is a colonial artefact, forced together by the British from three Ottoman provinces, whose people have wildly different religious and ethnic loyalties. It is arguable that this absurd construction can be sustained only by brute force. A US-backed administration seeking to keep this nation of warring factions intact may rapidly encounter Saddam's problem, and, in so doing, rediscover his solution. Perhaps we should not be surprised to see that George Bush's government was, until recently, planning merely to replace the two most senior officials in each of Saddam's ministries, leaving the rest of his government undisturbed.

the system will be comprised of a national government based up on federalist system.....each region can have their own representation to rule on a local level, much like our states vs. gov.....in turn they will give up powers to a completely democratic national government that will rule on foreign policy, fiscal policy, military, ect......that is going to be the key to creating choas among the various factions of the country

on a seperate note...

is anyone else so sick of people trying to predict the massive failure that this is going to be....i am noticing that everyone who was screaming that a war would not work is now turning their attention to how the aftermath is going to be a massive failure...

[underwater]

We can expect the US, in these circumstances, hurriedly to proclaim victory, install a feeble and doomed Iraqi government, and pull out before the whole place crashes down around it. What happens after that, to Iraq and the rest of the Middle East, is anyone's guess, but I think we can anticipate that it won't be pleasant.

doom and gloom.....this guy needs to take the dildo out of his ass

[underwater]

If this happens, then the US will have transformed him from the hated oppressor into the romantic, almost mythological hero of Arab and Muslim resistance, the Salah al-Din of his dreams.

notice that his longest paragraph is devoted to saddam becoming a mythological hero?

i highly doubt this to happen once he is gone....he has raped, murdered, and robbed the iraqi people for 25 years.....i can't picture anything being worse then him..... and i definitely can't picture the iraqi people to miss him....the truth is going to come out once his regime is finished....right now the civilians are to afraid to speak up...

[dnice35]

Originally posted by underwater

We can expect the US, in these circumstances, hurriedly to proclaim victory, install a feeble and doomed Iraqi government, and pull out before the whole place crashes down around it. What happens after that, to Iraq and the rest of the Middle East, is anyone's guess, but I think we can anticipate that it won't be pleasant.

doom and gloom.....this guy needs to take the dildo out of his ass

[underwater]

But while no one can now ignore the immediate problems this illegal war has met, we are beginning too to understand what should have been obvious all along: that, however this conflict is resolved, the outcome will be a disaster.

#1 this war was not illegal #1

#2

[siceone]

Nice Editorial too bad it's all opinion

[kramadas]

Originally posted by underwater

Iraq is a colonial artefact, forced together by the British from three Ottoman provinces, whose people have wildly different religious and ethnic loyalties. It is arguable that this absurd construction can be sustained only by brute force. A US-backed administration seeking to keep this nation of warring factions intact may rapidly encounter Saddam's problem, and, in so doing, rediscover his solution. Perhaps we should not be surprised to see that George Bush's government was, until recently, planning merely to replace the two most senior officials in each of Saddam's ministries, leaving the rest of his government undisturbed.

the system will be comprised of a national government based up on federalist system.....each region can have their own representation to rule on a local level, much like our states vs. gov.....in turn they will give up powers to a completely democratic national government that will rule on foreign policy, fiscal policy, military, ect......that is going to be the key to creating choas among the various factions of the country

on a seperate note...

is anyone else so sick of people trying to predict the massive failure that this is going to be....i am noticing that everyone who was screaming that a war would not work is now turning their attention to how the aftermath is going to be a massive failure...

how a war would not work = the aftermath being a massive failure...how do you think those two are different?

regarding your first statement - thats all well and good for the US...you forget though, there is not the very real threat of islamic fundamentalism over here...comparing the two is like comparing apples and oranges...

that was a great editorial piece....btw, how is Afghanistan doing with its new "democratic" govt? Those warlords still killing each other?

[mr mahs]

Originally posted by raver_mania

how a war would not work = the aftermath being a massive failure...how do you think those two are different?

regarding your first statement - thats all well and good for the US...you forget though, there is not the very real threat of islamic fundamentalism over here...comparing the two is like comparing apples and oranges...

that was a great editorial piece....btw, how is Afghanistan doing with its new "democratic" govt? Those warlords still killing each other?

1- I really wish people would look past the war for now and really see the original plan set out before anything from the US. People say that the war in Iraq will create more hatred for the U.S then good, I disagree. The truth is that there isn't a quick fix for changing the anti- American perception in the arab world but a "Beacon of Democracy" will def help. I was watching an Italian talk show the other night that was debating the war in Iraq. One politicain said something that showed he grasped the entire picture. He stated that the removal of the regime and the introduction of democracy will only benefit the people of Iraq. He explained that in a prodominately democratic environment societies prosper and terrorism is minmal ie United states and Kuwait.

Iraq is the first step that will illustrate to the region that democracy works and the free loving world will not except terroristic regimes fueling the anti-american flame.. My geuss Syria then Iran if the people of Iran which have already turned their back on the Extremist gov't rise up before hand.

And for people that say we have terrrorism...forget about Timothy McVeigh he was a quack with distorted views...

[jesseh49]

Originally posted by siceone

Nice Editorial too bad it's all opinion

I totally agree

People need to learn you can't just cut and paste some article off the internet. This is not a valid argument. What are the authors sources? What are his credentials? Even though this was published in the Guardian, was it written for them? Did they pick it up from another source? And I may be sticking my foot right in my mouth if I am wrong. But the authors last name sounds French.

[cintron]

Originally posted by siceone

Nice Editorial too bad it's all opinion

bingo.

[kramadas]

Originally posted by mr mahs

1- I really wish people would look past the war for now and really see the original plan set out before anything from the US. People say that the war in Iraq will create more hatred for the U.S then good, I disagree. The truth is that there isn't a quick fix for changing the anti- American perception in the arab world but a "Beacon of Democracy" will def help. I was watching an Italian talk show the other night that was debating the war in Iraq. One politicain said something that showed he grasped the entire picture. He stated that the removal of the regime and the introduction of democracy will only benefit the people of Iraq. He explained that in a prodominately democratic environment societies prosper and terrorism is minmal ie United states and Kuwait.

Iraq is the first step that will illustrate to the region that democracy works and the free loving world will not except terroristic regimes fueling the anti-american flame.. My geuss Syria then Iran if the people of Iran which have already turned their back on the Extremist gov't rise up before hand.

And for people that say we have terrrorism...forget about Timothy McVeigh he was a quack with distorted views...

Let me ask you - is Afghanistan doing better now that it is "democratic"? What about the rebuilding effort - is it going as planned?

[mr mahs]

Originally posted by raver_mania

Let me ask you - is Afghanistan doing better now that it is "democratic"? What about the rebuilding effort - is it going as planned?

Raver,

The rebuilding effort doesn't take overnight to accomplish. Hamid Karzai praises the improvements his nation makes day by day..

Why do people jump to an example that has just begun?? Did Japan become the Economic Superpower it was in the 80's overnight? No the point being everything takes time. The war in Iraq is alot easier because the revenues from the Iraqi people's oil fields will make easier for that country to be rebuilt....

[underwater]

Originally posted by raver_mania

regarding your first statement - thats all well and good for the US...you forget though, there is not the very real threat of islamic fundamentalism over here...comparing the two is like comparing apples and oranges...

i am not comparing our system to their system....i am stating that the kurds are proposing that they will give up certain powers as long as they can keep a their government in tack to rule on a local level....i don't see what is so complex in that simple arrangement.....local powers rule on a local lever (different factions of iraq) and then a federal government represents the country as a whole....i am pretty sure many of iraqs different groups have been in talks regarding a stucture like this...

[siceone]

I got a serious question do you have any Idea how long it took to build our democracy ? the abuses of gov't power back that make todays pale incomparison give it some time it's been a year and a half jesus..

[pumavisor808]

You can't rebuild a country in just over a year???

[siceone]

Originally posted by pumavisor808

You can't rebuild a country in just over a year???

tell me you're being sarcastic

[pumavisor808]

yes sarcasim was intended.

[bigpoppanils]

Originally posted by underwater

the system will be comprised of a national government based up on federalist system.....each region can have their own representation to rule on a local level, much like our states vs. gov.....in turn they will give up powers to a completely democratic national government that will rule on foreign policy, fiscal policy, military, ect......that is going to be the key to creating choas among the various factions of the country

thats all well and good.....except the US is allowing many members of the Baath party (Saddam's backers) to continue working because those people supposedly have governing expereince

i think you may be forgetting that the Sunnis and the Shietes (sp) have been murdering each other for centuries....not to mention the Kurds, who are hated by everyone.

the US government almost failed in its intimacy without the centuries of bad blood between its parties. what chance does the Iraqi government have?

[siceone]

It wouldn't be the senior leadership of the baath party.. Not EVERYONE in the party is bad

[siceone]

Originally posted by bigpoppanils

thats all well and good.....except the US is allowing many members of the Baath party (Saddam's backers) to continue working because those people supposedly have governing expereince

i think you may be forgetting that the Sunnis and the Shietes (sp) have been murdering each other for centuries....not to mention the Kurds, who are hated by everyone.

the US government almost failed in its intimacy without the centuries of bad blood between its parties. what chance does the Iraqi government have?

yeah what chance does a new form of Gov't have to survive after a war of independence HMMM

[Preid]

where 2 start...well i think u need to get past the fact that Bush made the wrong decision to go into this "senseless" war, it's here and it's happening. I think this needed to happen, and excuse me if I have the mind set of a caveman, but "get them b4 they get us". I saw an image of Sadaam's "child army" 8,000 strong full of children from 8 to 15 years old willing to die for something they have been brainwashed to hate....SICK!! This man among others like him need to die. I have an uncle over there fighting for the safety of u fucking ungtreatfull anti-war bastards. Answer this, Who will u run to when they are ready to stick a pipe bomb up ur kids ass just because ur an American? Exactly.

[dnice35]

Originally posted by Preid

where 2 start...well i think u need to get past the fact that Bush made the wrong decision to go into this "senseless" war, it's here and it's happening. I think this needed to happen, and excuse me if I have the mind set of a caveman, but "get them b4 they get us". I saw an image of Sadaam's "child army" 8,000 strong full of children from 8 to 15 years old willing to die for something they have been brainwashed to hate....SICK!! This man among others like him need to die. I have an uncle over there fighting for the safety of u fucking ungtreatfull anti-war bastards. Answer this, Who will u run to when they are ready to stick a pipe bomb up ur kids ass just because ur an American? Exactly.

I got a hard on reading this.......

[mr mahs]

Originally posted by Preid

where 2 start...well i think u need to get past the fact that Bush made the wrong decision to go into this "senseless" war, it's here and it's happening. I think this needed to happen, and excuse me if I have the mind set of a caveman, but "get them b4 they get us". I saw an image of Sadaam's "child army" 8,000 strong full of children from 8 to 15 years old willing to die for something they have been brainwashed to hate....SICK!! This man among others like him need to die. I have an uncle over there fighting for the safety of u fucking ungtreatfull anti-war bastards. Answer this, Who will u run to when they are ready to stick a pipe bomb up ur kids ass just because ur an American? Exactly.

The majority of protesters are wanna be hippies who only protest to protest. The tree huggers offer no solution just...

"AARHHH WAR IS BAD" when asked for a solution they state the gov't should figure it out.....

[kramadas]

Originally posted by mr mahs

The majority of protesters are wanna be hippies who only protest to protest. The tree huggers offer no solution just...

"AARHHH WAR IS BAD" when asked for a solution they state the gov't should figure it out.....

eh, not really...solutions are offered but you tend to forget, because they don't agree with the right's pro-war mentality.