Active TopicsActive Topics  Display List of Forum MembersMemberlist  CalendarCalendar  Search The ForumSearch  HelpHelp
  RegisterRegister  LoginLogin  Old ForumOld Forum  Twitter  Facebook
Advertisement:
         

Current Events
 IslamiCity Forum - Islamic Discussion Forum : Politics : Current Events
Message Icon Topic: Only Iraqis can save Iraq? Post Reply Post New Topic
Author Message
Cassandra
 
Senior Member
Senior Member
Avatar

Joined: 30 May 2006
Location: Spain
Online Status: Offline
Posts: 295
Quote Cassandra Replybullet Topic: Only Iraqis can save Iraq?
    Posted: 30 June 2007 at 6:24pm

.This makes frighteningly good sense to me.  And most things posted on Yahoo connected with current events don't.  What are your opinions? (Admittedly, it is an election year.)

Analysis: Only Iraqis can win the war

By ROBERT BURNS, AP Military Writer

WASHINGTON - The harder President Bush has pushed to win in Iraq, the closer he has come to losing.

The question no longer is whether the U.S. military can fully stabilize Iraq. It cannot.

That was a possibility four years ago, immediately after Saddam Hussein's government fell. Before the insurgency took hold. Before U.S. occupation authorities lost any chance to avoid the sectarian strife of today's Iraq.

Now only the Iraqis can save Iraq.

They need the U.S. military's help, no doubt. But the Bush administration has made no secret of the fact that the U.S. troop buildup in Baghdad is simply buying time for the Iraqis to sort out their differences, create a government of national unity and show they can defend themselves.

So it is not whether the U.S. can win the war. (?) It is whether the Iraqis can, which is in great doubt.

With limited sign of progress in Baghdad, U.S. officials are asking themselves how long it makes sense to tolerate an escalating rate of U.S. casualties at least 3,576 dead since the war began in March 2003 while the Iraqis debate and delay.

In a speech Thursday, Bush struck a notably optimistic tone about his strategy and gave no indication he was ready to give up or change approach. Yet he lowered the bar on expectations and cited Israel as a model for defining success in Iraq: a functioning democracy that nonetheless absorbs terrorist attacks.(!: Cassie)

Among the questions central to the debate in Washington over winding up the conflict without widening it are:

_How much worse might things get if U.S. troops left and the sectarian killing escalated?

_Would Turkey, Iran or other neighboring states intervene militarily?

_Would the al-Qaida terrorist organization inside Iraq secure a lasting haven from which it could launch attacks across the region? "Lighting the Middle East on fire," is how one Pentagon insider sees that outcome.

While there is no clear way out, there remains a reasonable basis for hope of escaping a collapse of the war effort.

It still is possible that the troop buildup, under way since January, will reduce sectarian violence in Baghdad enough to create the maneuvering room that Iraqi leaders need to make critical political progress.

According to Frederick Kagan, an American Enterprise Institute analyst who recently visited Baghdad and is a leading supporter of the current strategy, the truly decisive phase of the current campaign will begin in late July or early August. He predicts that phase will bring much lower levels of violence by year's end.

The trends so far, however, are not encouraging and the political tides are not favorable, either in Washington or Baghdad.

Just this past week a leading Republican voice on foreign affairs, Sen. Richard Lugar of Indiana, broke ranks with Bush. Lugar said he had reached the conclusion that sticking with the current strategy will not serve U.S. security interests.

(and just what are these?  C)

He also said it is almost impossible to establish a stable government in Baghdad in a reasonable time.

Other prominent Republicans, such as Sen. John Warner of Virginia, have indicated their patience is running out.

Time, indeed, seems to be working against Bush in the political arena and on the battlefield.

The longer that U.S. forces fight, the more creative and deadly the insurgents become, the farther U.S. public support erodes and the more remote seem the chances that when troops finally leave, the outcome will look like victory.

The risk is that it may resemble defeat.

One more worry is the wear and tear on the Army and Marine Corps. The services were straining to keep up a staggering pace of troop rotations even before Bush decided to send thousands more into and around Baghdad and before the Pentagon decided that rotations would be extended from 12 months already viewed by many as too long to 15 months.

That is why, if Bush concludes in the months ahead that his strategy for securing Baghdad is not working fast enough, he may feel compelled to find a different approach, perhaps reducing the U.S. combat role without abandoning Iraq. He has hinted at such a transition possibly coming next year.

That could explain why Bush and other administration officials recently have cited South Korea as a possible model for the long-term U.S. military role in Iraq. The idea would be to work out an agreement with the Iraqi government to keep at least a tripwire U.S. force there to train with Iraqi troops and to act as a deterrent.

(Please tell me this isn't the way it sounds to me: C)

The point is that instead of completely abandoning Iraq, as the U.S. did in Vietnam in the 1970s, the U.S. would maintain a presence large enough to protect its broader interests in the Persian Gulf region.

___

IP IP Logged
usama
 
Groupie
Groupie
Avatar

Joined: 07 October 2005
Location: United States
Online Status: Offline
Posts: 49
Quote usama Replybullet Posted: 01 July 2007 at 7:17am

Just get out.

Americans are so trapped in their mindset of imperial intervention that they violate all ethical standards, all principles, all morals, and still try to rationalize their way back: "After sodomizing prisoners, in Gitmo and spending billions on permanent military bases and arming South African mercs in the streets of Baghdad, we need patience and perseverence".

No. You, America, need to get out permanently. You cannot rationalize the evil you have cast into Iraq and the entire region.

I recall the words of an elder Iraqi who was quoted in a documentary in 2003, he was referring to the ouster of Saddam and the occupation by America.

He said: "the student has left and the master has come in his place."

Allah (SWT) speaks about world powers like America in the Holy Quran (in translation):

 

2:9 Fain would they deceive Allah and those who believe, but they only deceive themselves, and realise (it) not!


2:10 In their hearts is a disease; and Allah has increased their disease: And grievous is the penalty they (incur), because they are false (to themselves).


2:11 When it is said to them: "Make not mischief on the earth," they say: "Why, we only Want to make peace!"


2:12 Of a surety, they are the ones who make mischief, but they realise (it) not.


2:13 When it is said to them: "Believe as the others believe:" They say: "Shall we believe as the fools believe?" Nay, of a surety they are the fools, but they do not know.


2:14 When they meet those who believe, they say: "We believe;" but when they are alone with their evil ones, they say: "We are really with you: We (were) only jesting."


2:15 Allah will throw back their mockery on them, and give them rope in their trespasses; so they will wander like blind ones (To and fro).


2:16 These are they who have bartered Guidance for error: But their traffic is profitless, and they have lost true direction,


2:17 Their similitude is that of a man who kindled a fire; when it lighted all around him, Allah took away their light and left them in utter darkness. So they could not see.


2:18 Deaf, dumb, and blind, they will not return (to the path).

 

100:6 Lo! man is an ingrate unto his Lord


100:7 And lo! he is a witness unto that;


100:8 And lo! in the love of wealth he is violent.


100:9 Knoweth he not that, when the contents of the graves are poured forth


100:10 And the secrets of the breasts are made known.


100:11 On that day will their Lord be perfectly informed concerning them.

Let there arise from amongst you a group inviting to all that is good, enjoining what is right, forbidding what is wrong, and they are the successful ones. Al Imran:104
IP IP Logged
Israfil
 
Senior Member
Senior  Member
Avatar

Joined: 08 September 2003
Online Status: Offline
Posts: 3984
Quote Israfil Replybullet Posted: 01 July 2007 at 9:19am

Honestly Cassandra I disagree.

A politician has to prove (which most of them can't since they are not from that region) that Iraq would be efficient without "foreign" help. Since Saddam is gone the bulldog is not there anymore, however, if the U.S is playing mediator and then suddenly leaves that does not create a solution in a gap. As your article mentions : So it is not whether the U.S. can win the war. (?) It is whether the Iraqis can, which is in great doubt."

I agree here. People like Usama (hey, aren't you still in a cave somewhere? lol j/k) believe that leaving Iraq automatically will lead to some stability since the "occupation" force is not there. Wrong. You still have to face warring factions who use might over intellect to gain power. Because Iraq is on a spinning axis if the U.S left it would totally disrupt any potential progress.

IP IP Logged
Sign*Reader
 
Senior Member
Senior  Member
Avatar

Joined: 02 November 2005
Online Status: Offline
Posts: 3352
Quote Sign*Reader Replybullet Posted: 06 July 2007 at 5:41pm
Originally posted by C

In a speech Thursday, Bush struck a notably optimistic tone about his strategy and gave no indication he was ready to give up or change approach. Yet he lowered the bar on expectations and cited Israel as a model for defining success in Iraq: a functioning democracy that nonetheless absorbs terrorist attacks.(!: Cassie)


Pepe Escobar has  tried to correlate the Israeli model of the POTUS, it is so poignant:
http://www.atimes.com/atimes/Middle_East/IG06Ak03.html

Originally posted by C

Just this past week a leading Republican voice on foreign affairs, Sen. Richard Lugar of Indiana, broke ranks with Bush. Lugar said he had reached the conclusion that sticking with the current strategy will not serve U.S. security interests.


(and just what are these?  C)

The black Gold /the Texas tea as the Beverly Hillbillies called it are the security interest! He is thinking like the mortgage  banker,  he is saying in other words that US owns what is under the Iraqi soil.

If by an act of God the black gold all of a sudden disappears from under the region's sand I bet my bottom dollar that there will be no security or interest to talk about dust and oasis!

Originally posted by C

(Please tell me this isn't the way it sounds to me: C)

The point is that instead of completely abandoning Iraq, as the U.S. did in Vietnam in the 1970s, the U.S. would maintain a presence large enough to protect its broader interests in the Persian Gulf region.

If there was any exportable oil like the gulf in Vietnam, the war strategy would have been different from the get go. After all that war and destruction,  Vietnamese are back offering their labor and services to the Americans, what gives?

Just think about the OIL LAW being shoved down the Iraqis and you will have the answer that this Anglo American corporate greed wantsl destroy the region cuz the parties are not  walking away from the biggest oilfield in the whole wide world. It is pathetically sad but you know the oil & energy corporations don't have soul they will rob anybody they think they can and get away with it.

Do you remember what Enron did to Californians and then to the company itself and what was the end it all?

I think the American public is just too naive and irresponsible when I see huge gas guzzlers on the roads. Where do they think the oil is gonna come from?  They can't tell the oil companies what to do if they need the gas available at the pump! The US doesn't have a energy policy to fix this dependence like say Brazil has done!  




Edited by Sign*Reader
Kismet Domino: Faith/Courage/Liberty/Abundance/Selfishness/Immorality/Apathy/Bondage or extinction.
IP IP Logged
Post Reply Post New Topic
Printable version Printable version

Forum Jump
You cannot post new topics in this forum
You cannot reply to topics in this forum
You cannot delete your posts in this forum
You cannot edit your posts in this forum
You cannot create polls in this forum
You cannot vote in polls in this forum

Disclaimer:
The opinions expressed herein contain positions and viewpoints that are not necessarily those of IslamiCity. This forum is offered to stimulate dialogue and discussion in our continuing mission of being an educational organization.
If there is any issue with any of the postings please email to icforum at islamicity.com or if you are a forum's member you can use the report button.

Note: The 99 names of Allah avatars are courtesy of www.arthafez.com

Advertisement:



Sponsored by:
Islamicity Membership Program:
IslamiCity Donation Program  http://www.islamicity.com/Donate
IslamiCity Arabic eLearning http://www.islamiCity.com/ArabAcademy
Complete Domain & Hosting Solutions www.icDomain.com
Home for Muslim Tunes www.icTunes.com
Islamic Video Collections www.islamiTV.com
IslamiCity Marriage Site www.icMarriage.com