scribblings from a deist transhumanist libertarian minarchist citizen soldier

Iraqi Parliament announces new cabinet

Posted by Trevor in under other on May 22nd, 2006 | View Comments |

The weekend here in Baghdad was an eventful one. The Iraqi Parliament announced a new cabinet and the story is available here.

This despite the incessant shrilling for the last three years of the harbingers of doom, the prophets of gloom and the pundits of failure. The worst event was a minor shouting match as a small contingent of Sunnis walked out, upset over the failure to announce the important positions of defense minister, interior minister and minister of national security. Those will be filled in time.

Iraq’s new prime minister seems to be serious about dealing with the various elements that are fomenting continued violence.

The PM said disarming the militias would be a priority, along with promoting national reconciliation, improving infrastructure and setting up a special protection force for Baghdad.

There is still violence happening in the capital, but the government is not collapsing, despite the impression you may be getting if you watch the nightly news. For a city of six million, Baghdad is a violent place compared to other cities around the world of a similar size. But that is to be expected after 30 years of a despot’s rule. People are trying to settle scores and competing for power. It’s tragic, and it saddens me, but it is also to be expected considering the strongman mentality that has dominated the Middle East for so long.

What is done is done. In the short term, historically speaking, Baghdad is a dangerous place to live. But the level of violence is clearly unsustainable in the long term. I’ve heard my generals telling me that guerilla wars, insurgencies or whatever you want to call the tactics of the animalistic, calculating murderers who are carrying out this war against basic human decency last – on average – 13 years. We’re only three years into this war. Iraqis are tired of the violence and they’re calling in more and more tips that help kill and capture troublemakers.

What could cause the insurgents to win a whole or partial victory? Intellectually lazy voters back home. Politicians more concerned about their careers than about doing what is right. Weak willed, short sighted people who don’t understand the larger context of this war. The Iraqis can make it, if we stand by them. If you’re following the news, you know that the focus of the insurgency has shifted from spending most of the energy trying to kill coalition members to trying to kill Iraqi police and Army personnel, as well as the old standby of blowing up civilians going about their day.

I’ve said it before, and I will say it again – when all you have to offer people is violence, fear, murder – you’re doomed unless you have complete control of the population. The insurgency doesn’t have that, or anything close to it. They have a strong presence in al-Anbar, and there is heavy fighting around Ramadi right now (ignore the mostly ridiculous editorial portions of linked story). Ramadi is a hotbed alright, but not an unwinnable one by any means.

War isn’t antiseptic, it isn’t easy, and it is expensive – fiscally, mentally, physically and emotionally. But we are winning. Walking off the field now would be stupid and tragic.

Similar Posts:

Print This Post |

Mike Johnson

Trevor,

Which nation is it that's supposed to move away from tribalism and intolerance, America or Iraq? I expect Iraq to remain as barbaric as it's always been, not that I care. America, failing to control its own borders while busily invading the world, is in turn being invaded by folks who will make America much more tribal and much less tolerant. If I had any say in the matter, I'd withdraw our forces from Iraq and use them to seal our southern border.

Not everybody was convinced that Saddam had WMD. In particular, the British government wasn't. See http://www.downingstreetmemo.com/.

Trevor

Mike,

Everyone was sure Saddam did have WMD's on both sides of the political spectrum in the U.S. The Europeans thought the same thing. And I still think it's likely that Saddam had somet stockpiles hidden. Where are they? I don't know. Syria maybe. Not sure. Biological weapons tend to have short shelf lives, mostly.

Iraq is certainly far from perfect. I'm not going to make long term predictions about where Iraq will be in ten years right now, but I certainly hope it will be a safer, happier place to live for most of its citizens.

That will ultimately rely on Iraqis.

What benefit can Americans expect? I'm expecting a nation that will slowly move from being tribal, intolerant and statist to one that will have a government and populace that respects and values intellectual freedoms, practices religious tolerance and has an economy its neighbors envy.

Perhaps I'm overly optimistic. Time will tell.

Mike Johnson

It's really too bad that suppressing a guerilla insurrection takes 13 years. America's longest wars, the Revolution and Viet Nam (large forces committed from 1965 to 1973), have lasted only eight years. Do Americans really care enough about democracy in Iraq to sustain a war for 13 years? I doubt it.

Besides, the Bush administration told us at the outset that the war would be a "cakewalk." They said that our soldiers would be "welcomed as liberators." That doesn't appear to be true. They certainly didn't tell us that the sons of our current soldiers would still be fighting in Iraq.

It's difficult to understand why Bush invaded Iraq anyway. Saddam had no weapons of mass distruction, and wasn't much of a threat to us. He gave the Iraqis the government they deserved. If Bush had wanted to avenge our 9/11 dead and/or strike a blow at al-Quaeda's base of support, he would have done better to invade the country to Iraq's immediate south. If the war were an old-fashioned, imperialistic oil grab, then I'd support wholeheartedly, but it doesn't seem to be.

The British installed a replica of their government in Iraq in the 1920s. We've seen what became of it. The same fate will befall the replica of the French government that our army is installing now, except that it will probably take less time. Don't people understand that only Europeans can sustain a democracy for any length of time?

I know that it's difficult for someone who's made the sacrifice of serving in Iraq to be objective, but I've never seen the point of this war. What benefit can Americans expect to derive from it? If there's nothing in it for us, why should we sacrifice blood and treasure for it?

SK

Thanks for this one Trevor. Since I've gotten to know some folks who have actually been to Ramadi, hasn't it always been a hotbed? I've never heard from anyone in the Al Anbar Provence who didn't mention being 'very busy'.

kitanis

Sadley... The American Press and the anti-war/anti-bush crowd will not allow a positive spin on the conflict in Iraq.

Recently I went to a coffee shop that is in downtown Rapid City, SD. I never been in there before and had a jacket with the USAF symbol on it.

During the stay.. I had five different college students from the one or two in town come up to me and tell me that they were disgusted with the war and the military for fighting in Iraq. I confused the last one by thanking her for expressing her opinion under the 1st Amendment... The coffee shop owner apologized after I got up.. but still the thoughts lingered... I might not be back.

I would be disgusted if the forces would be brought home now. over 2000 of fellow servicemen and women have died and 10,000 of them have received wounds completing the mission. Finish the job and discuss it afterwards..

I guess we forgot the other time we went somewhere to topple and assit folks in rebuilding.. It was a country called Germany. 1941 the feeling of the nation was to stay out of WWII, Until Germany declared war on the United States after Pearl Harbor. We went in.. fought a terrible four years and then spent millions in rebuilding western europe. Ah history.. too bad too many forget such things...