Politics: J'accuse!

[Greedy,Greedy,Greedy]

Originally posted by Secret_Agent_Man
And the Grand Ayatollah Ali Sistani, whose ass we are being forced to thoroughly kiss, came out with a statement comdemning the assassination of Sheik Yassin (Hamas) and calling him a martyr to the struggle, etc.

Well, everyone says that democratization is a long term process, and people don't love you just 'cause you did them a favor.

Democratization is not enough, however. I guess the answer is that folks in the Middle East are less likely to "like us" until their countries/societies modernize, Westernize, and become more prosperous -- which we _think_ is likely to happen faster with an open, democratic society where certain basic freedoms are enshrined in law. Also -- the opportunity for political participation is likely to reduce, long-term, participation in terrorist/violent organizations to advance one's political agenda.

S_A_M

The problem is, in the 70s particularly but also the 80s our policies basically threw away fifty years of modernization when we decided to dig in in support of conservative regimes in Iran and Saudi and to treat the Westernized left as our enemies. Net result: Westernized left discredited throughout the Middle East as Radical Islam comes to the fore, and so anyone opposed to the established regimes gravitates toward Radical Islam as the force capable of overthrowing the dictators.

Basically, until an entire middle class and intelligensia grow up with some vested commitment to Democracy and capitalism, our goals are toast. It's work that will take a generation and cost lots of lives, not something that will happen in a couple of years.

[Say_hello_for_me]

Originally posted by Tyrone_Slothrop
Recognizing that Fallujah is about the worst place in Iraq for an American to be, that doesn't suggest there's been a lot of progress in the last 8 month.

One of the worst, but you are saying (with this quote) exactly what I was saying. The "leave them be while they pick us off one by one" attitude doesn't work anywhere, and its clearly not working in Fallujah.

Originally posted by Tyrone_Slothrop

At the risk of losing, is that not the sort of thing the Gestapo would do? How do you hold a leader accountable for something like this? Once something like this has happened, there really isn't a good response, it seems to me. Coming down on the whole area is a good way to radicalize more insurgents.

I won't dodge the debate merely because you used the word Gestapo. When you read about hundreds of males doing this, what exactly is the objection to rounding up all of (say, 10000) males in the neighborhood until things get sorted out? Searching every house 3 times a day until people understand that the war ended a year ago (or whatever day an American soldier is forced to shoot them)? S'all good here. Maybe I'm going overboard with the round-up, and the "G" word doesn't really phase me. But somebody better start doing some consistently heavy-handed activities in these neighborhoods until the day the last American soldier is pulled out, or we'll be reading the same story again in another 8 months.

A family member was recently given a choice of Afghanistan or Iraq (don't ask how people get to choose sometimes). To the last person, our entire family said Afghanistan. Poll: what would your families say if given the choice for a son or brother?


As for the Somalia stuff, I trust your sources, but not their conclusions. You don't need to give a warlord a reason to fight. You just need to pick a side and start fighting. Last I checked, those clowns are still fighting.

As for Bubba, it seems sorta funny blaming the military in the beginning and then recounting a meeting where he says "I'm not gonna listen to Les Aspin anymore". Ditto the "shooting thousands doesn't work..., but shooting anyone with a gun on sight does". And wasn't part of the point of Black Hawk Down the fact that the rescue forces were U.S. troops under U.N. command, once the rangers et al. got jammed? Did you read that the U.N. wasn't there for 6 more months, cuz if so, I do have to read the book you read.

Hello

[Diane_Keaton]

Loss of innocent Western civilian lives cheered by Muslims. What a shocker!

Surely, though, each and every one of these celebrators/mutilators of already-dead bodies are Islamists. Therefore, no need to worry!!


picture picture
picture

Edited to replaces pictures with links; I think a lot of people would want a choice about whether to look at these. If you disagree, let me know, but when I saw them they made my stomach turn. -- T.S.

[Tyrone Slothrop]

Originally posted by Say_hello_for_me
One of the worst, but you are saying (with this quote) exactly what I was saying. The "leave them be while they pick us off one by one" attitude doesn't work anywhere, and its clearly not working in Fallujah.

I don't know whether we'd be better off in Fallujah if we had a lot more boots on the ground, but it might help.

I won't dodge the debate merely because you used the word Gestapo. When you read about hundreds of males doing this, what exactly is the objection to rounding up all of (say, 10000) males in the neighborhood until things get sorted out?

Unclear to me that it's going to do any good, and it might make things worse.

A family member was recently given a choice of Afghanistan or Iraq (don't ask how people get to choose sometimes). To the last person, our entire family said Afghanistan. Poll: what would your families say if given the choice for a son or brother?

Probably Afghanistan.

As for the Somalia stuff, I trust your sources, but not their conclusions. You don't need to give a warlord a reason to fight. You just need to pick a side and start fighting. Last I checked, those clowns are still fighting.

I'm not sure what you mean. That country is such a wreck that I'm not sure that we or anyone else could set it straight.

As for Bubba, it seems sorta funny blaming the military in the beginning and then recounting a meeting where he says "I'm not gonna listen to Les Aspin anymore".

Wasn't Aspin acting as the voice of the military in the White House?

Ditto the "shooting thousands doesn't work..., but shooting anyone with a gun on sight does".

Shooting thousands wasn't the plan, but when things turned south that day, that's what happened. The plan was in and out with the helicopters, but we didn't figure on Somalis learning from Al Qaeda how to shoot down our helicopters with RPGs.

And wasn't part of the point of Black Hawk Down the fact that the rescue forces were U.S. troops under U.N. command, once the rangers et al. got jammed? Did you read that the U.N. wasn't there for 6 more months, cuz if so, I do have to read the book you read.

There were some U.S. forces there, and some U.N. forces. The rescue forces were both, as I recall. The U.S. forces didn't have armor. The Pakistanis (or Bangladeshis? It's been a little while since I read the book) had some. I don't think the U.S. troops were under UN command. I have the book, but not in front of me. I think the distinction Clarke was drawing was about when we would get out and turn things over to the UN.

[Diane_Keaton]

Edited to replaces pictures with links; I think a lot of people would want a choice about whether to look at these. If you disagree, let me know, but when I saw them they made my stomach turn. -- T.S. [/QUOTE]

I definitely don't mind you edited the post - I respect your judgment if you think the pictures were inappropriate to post. They are of course shocking and an outrage but I didn't think they were gory or stomach-turning in the classic sense b/c you can't see blood, gore, or even a clear view of the bodies. But J'reporte.

[Greedy,Greedy,Greedy]

Originally posted by Say_hello_for_me
A family member was recently given a choice of Afghanistan or Iraq (don't ask how people get to choose sometimes). To the last person, our entire family said Afghanistan. Poll: what would your families say if given the choice for a son or brother?

I have had family members go to both Afghanistan and Iraq, in each case after the initial "hot" round was over. It would depend entirely on the place they were going to.

Many of the soldiers deployed to Iraq right now are actually in Qatar all or most of the time. However, there seems to be some build-up going on in Kirkuk as well as Baghdad, and I'd worry mostly about those two cities. Outside of those cities, yes, it's dangerous, but parts of Afghanistan may well be worse.

In Afghanistan, my understanding is the area around Herat is boiling over, and likely to turn into a constantly feuding lawless area, and that the southern areas that were the core of the Taliban's support have never settled down. But Kabul and the immediately surrounding areas are supposed to be well on their way back. However, if Uzbeckistan continues to heat up, then the north eastern borders of Afghanistan are going to get hot as well.

Talk about a rock and a hard place.

[Say_hello_for_me]

Originally posted by Greedy,Greedy,Greedy

Talk about a rock and a hard place.

The family was firmly behind Afghanistan., as its truly the type of place and people nobody could feel bad about helping OTOH, Iraq is going to make Democrats out of some very conservative members of my family.

Question (to all): If you were the new Marine commander in the Fallujah area, what response would you have to today's events, if any? (Assume 1000 armed men under your command, with 2-4000 more available on a non-emergency basis at 2 days notice)?

Y'all know where I stand on this one. That neighborhood would be empty.


Hello

[The Larry Davis Experience]

Originally posted by Greedy,Greedy,Greedy
The problem is, in the 70s particularly but also the 80s our policies basically threw away fifty years of modernization when we decided to dig in in support of conservative regimes in Iran and Saudi and to treat the Westernized left as our enemies. Net result: Westernized left discredited throughout the Middle East as Radical Islam comes to the fore, and so anyone opposed to the established regimes gravitates toward Radical Islam as the force capable of overthrowing the dictators.

Basically, until an entire middle class and intelligensia grow up with some vested commitment to Democracy and capitalism, our goals are toast. It's work that will take a generation and cost lots of lives, not something that will happen in a couple of years.

Strongly agree. As I've mentioned before, it will be interesting from this point of view to see how things shake out with Iran over the next 6 months/year.

[Greedy,Greedy,Greedy]

Originally posted by Say_hello_for_me
The family was firmly behind Afghanistan., as its truly the type of place and people nobody could feel bad about helping OTOH, Iraq is going to make Democrats out of some very conservative members of my family.

Question (to all): If you were the new Marine commander in the Fallujah area, what response would you have to today's events, if any? (Assume 1000 armed men under your command, with 2-4000 more available on a non-emergency basis at 2 days notice)?

Y'all know where I stand on this one. That neighborhood would be empty.


Hello

Yes, from the perspective of which country would you feel better about dying in, Afghanistan is the easy choice. From the perspective of where are you least likely to die, I'm not sure of the answer.

Emptying the neighborhood is exactly the sort of thing that gets a spiral going. And if the local commander is making that decision, we have other issues. If I were the local commander, I'd be doing what I'm told.

If I'm telling the local commander what to do, I make sure it is secure and quiet, impose martial law for 72 hours, and during that time I tell them to do a house to house search, to bring photos of all those people dragging corpses, etc., and also to round up al the usual suspects. Of the 1000 people arrested, 900 will be released quickly but have a bit of a scare put in them. 90 of the remaining 100 will get more heavily interrogated and investigated; 10 of them will be clearly guilty from day 1. At the end of the day, 25-30 prosecutions for various things, with Iraqi courts handing out stiff sentances being the ideal.

Then if you find the people who actually killed them.

[Say_hello_for_me]

Originally posted by Greedy,Greedy,Greedy

Emptying the neighborhood is exactly the sort of thing that gets a spiral going. And if the local commander is making that decision, we have other issues. If I were the local commander, I'd be doing what I'm told.

Only that with which I quibble. This has already spiraled, and the loyalist Sunnis are not going to be won over by flowers and chocolate. Any way you count it, their lives did just get worse (as a group) when Hussein was taken out.

In any case, I'm not sure how empytying the neighborhood would suddenly increase the violence. Do it temporarily, and promise to ratchet up the evacuations/detentions etc... if someone so much as looks at a soldier funny tomorrow. But, given to how far this appears to have spiraled already, somebody in the U.S. better think about spiraling back.

For starters though, the house to house is about right. If things don't settle down, I'd start doing them 3 times a day for awhile.

Carrot and stick being the operative idea.

According to media reports from earlier this week, the Marine battalion commander on the scene is the commander for pretty much the whole town, though after today's pictures I'm pretty sure somebody else higher-up decided to get involved. And, isn't your position supposed to be that nobody is actively telling anyone there to do anything (i.e., there is no leadership from the Administration), because Bush and co. never anticipated (and still don't recognize) the problems our people are facing in Iraq?

A year later, and we are still wondering who is in charge over there.

Hello

[Sidd Finch]

Originally posted by Say_hello_for_me
And, isn't your position supposed to be that nobody is actively telling anyone there to do anything (i.e., there is no leadership from the Administration), because Bush and co. never anticipated (and still don't recognize) the problems our people are facing in Iraq?

Do you actually have a different view?


What would I do? F'd if I know. But your options sound like things Israel has tried, if only a bit more extreme, with less-than-ideal results (both in the immediate sense of whether it prevents future attacks, and in the wider sense of perception among the audiences you are trying to satisfy, or at least not infuriate).

[Say_hello_for_me]

Originally posted by Sidd Finch
Do you actually have a different view?


What would I do? F'd if I know. But your options sound like things Israel has tried, if only a bit more extreme, with less-than-ideal results (both in the immediate sense of whether it prevents future attacks, and in the wider sense of perception among the audiences you are trying to satisfy, or at least not infuriate).

A.) I actually do not have a different view, as I think this entire exercise has shown abhorrent aftermath planning.

B.) Israel stands against the world, so tries to be careful (yes, believe it) not to infuritate its own liberals or the rest of the world. In contrast, in places like Fallujah, its us versus Saddam's Sunnis. Having enjoyed wealth, prosperity and power for the last several decades, they will miss their old homes, and their cars, and their men, and their guns etc... if they are taken away.

As for Israel (again), every time I hear someone say that so-and-so has nothing to lose, I tend to think (for those in the West Bank at least)... well, your family does have that nice home... it would be such a shame if they were expelled to Gaza and the home was appropriated as military property until Israel signs a peace deal. After 40 or 50 families in some village are crowded into the last unconfiscated home (or living in Gaza), I'd imagine someone might think it was time to negotiate.

But I digress. How bout issuing national ID cards and telling all Iraqi males that they had to be carried at all times? There is a lot a government can do with ID cards, including digital image databases of matchable faces these days!

And I like how the press is now reporting that the military and Iraqi police never responded to todays incident. Have these bodies even been recovered? If so, how? The more I read this, the more I'd like to see Wolfowitz forced to live the life of a grunt for a few weeks.

Hello

[Greedy,Greedy,Greedy]

Originally posted by Say_hello_for_me
According to media reports from earlier this week, the Marine battalion commander on the scene is the commander for pretty much the whole town, though after today's pictures I'm pretty sure somebody else higher-up decided to get involved. And, isn't your position supposed to be that nobody is actively telling anyone there to do anything (i.e., there is no leadership from the Administration), because Bush and co. never anticipated (and still don't recognize) the problems our people are facing in Iraq?

It's the military. You expect orders to be given and taken.

I believe Bush, Cheney and Rumsfeld all overestimate our ability to impact Iraq. They really do believe a short-term military occupation can have a pivotal effect on the society in a positive way. This comes in part from the ease with which we now win military victories; it leads those who plan them to be a bit drunk with their success.

I do not think Powell has succomb to this illusion, and I think that is in part because when you actually spend your life in the modern military you understand better the limits of military power. Powell has spent a lot of time running through situations where various plans are used to intervene in out of control political situations, and has learned how to identify limited and achievable objectives. Cheney and Rummy have no interest in limited objectives; indeed, ideologically, I believe it is very important to them to prove that the "lessons" learned in the Vietnam war are no longer relevant (when the real answer is that those lessons are still relevant, though of course not the whole picture and to be taken in context).

So, I think there is plenty of telling people to do things going on over there. The problem is that people don't always do what you tell them, and that we cannot control the situation only with military and police power.

[Tyrone Slothrop]

Andrew Sullivan quoted this paragraph from an old column by Ron Rosenbaum (whom I admire):

• Here’s the analogy: Heidegger’s peculiar neutrality-slash-denial about Nazism and the Holocaust after the facts had come out, and the contemporary Left’s curious neutrality-slash-denial after the facts had come out about Marxist genocides — in Russia, in China, in Cambodia, after 20 million, 50 million, who knows how many millions had been slaughtered. Not all of the Left; many were honorable opponents. But for many others, it just hasn’t registered, it just hasn’t been incorporated into their "analysis" of history and human nature; it just hasn’t been factored in. America is still the one and only evil empire. The silence of the Left, or the exclusive focus of the Left, on America’s alleged crimes over the past half-century, the disdainful sneering at America’s deplorable "Cold War mentality"—none of this has to be reassessed in light of the evidence of genocides that surpassed Hitler’s, all in the name of a Marxist ideology. An ideology that doesn’t need to be reassessed. As if it was maybe just an accident that Marxist-Leninist regimes turned totalitarian and genocidal. No connection there. The judgment that McCarthyism was the chief crime of the Cold War era doesn’t need a bit of a rethink, even when put up against the mass murder of dissidents by Marxist states.

Good stuff.

[Atticus Grinch]

Originally posted by Tyrone_Slothrop
Andrew Sullivan quoted this paragraph from an old column by Ron Rosenbaum (whom I admire):

• Here’s the analogy: Heidegger’s peculiar neutrality-slash-denial about Nazism and the Holocaust after the facts had come out, and the contemporary Left’s curious neutrality-slash-denial after the facts had come out about Marxist genocides — in Russia, in China, in Cambodia, after 20 million, 50 million, who knows how many millions had been slaughtered. Not all of the Left; many were honorable opponents. But for many others, it just hasn’t registered, it just hasn’t been incorporated into their "analysis" of history and human nature; it just hasn’t been factored in. America is still the one and only evil empire. The silence of the Left, or the exclusive focus of the Left, on America’s alleged crimes over the past half-century, the disdainful sneering at America’s deplorable "Cold War mentality"—none of this has to be reassessed in light of the evidence of genocides that surpassed Hitler’s, all in the name of a Marxist ideology. An ideology that doesn’t need to be reassessed. As if it was maybe just an accident that Marxist-Leninist regimes turned totalitarian and genocidal. No connection there. The judgment that McCarthyism was the chief crime of the Cold War era doesn’t need a bit of a rethink, even when put up against the mass murder of dissidents by Marxist states.

Good stuff.

Why you gotta hate?

(Kudos on using the list tag to generate an indented quotation without those annoying bars, BTW. Good stuff, indeed. Genius.)