Posted on 10/15/2006 1:47:36 AM PDT by MadIvan
IRAQ’S fragile democracy, weakened by mounting chaos and a rapidly rising death toll, is being challenged by calls for the formation of a hardline “government of national salvation”.
The proposal, which is being widely discussed in political and intelligence circles in Baghdad, is to replace the Shi’ite-led government of Nouri al-Maliki, the prime minister, with a regime capable of imposing order and confronting the sectarian militias leading the country to the brink of civil war. Dr Saleh al-Mutlak, a prominent Sunni politician, travelled to Arab capitals last week seeking support for the replacement of the present government with a group of five strongmen who would impose martial law and either dissolve parliament or halt its participation in day-to-day government.
Other Iraqis dismissed the idea that a unilateral change in the leadership would be desirable or even possible. “The only person who can undertake a coup in Iraq now is General George Casey (the US commander) and I don’t think the Americans are inclined to go in that direction,” said Ahmed Chalabi, head of a rival political party.
Any suspension of the democratic process would be regarded as a severe blow to American and British policy.
The establishment of democracy has been its cornerstone and successful elections in December last year were hailed as a cause for optimism. However, Anthony Cordesman, an influential expert on Iraq at the Center for Strategic and International Studies in Washington, said there was a “very real possibility” that Maliki could be toppled in the coming months.
“Nobody in Iraq has the military power to mount a traditional coup, but there could be a change in government, done in a backroom, which could see a general brought in to run the ministry of defence or the interior,” Cordesman said.
“It could be regarded as a more legitimate government than the present one as long it doesn’t favour one faction.”
This weekend Mutlak, who leads the Iraqi National Dialogue Front, the fifth largest political group in the national assembly, vowed to press ahead with his plans.. “We think Iraq is now in a tragic state,” he said.
“Maliki must step down. He has done nothing up to now. Hundreds of Iraqis are being killed almost daily and thousands are being removed from their homes in sectarian purges, and he takes no action.”
The main focus of a new regime, Mutlak said, would be to bring security back to Iraq by “cleaning out” the ministries of defence and the interior, widely seen as having been infiltrated by sectarian militias. He said he had the support of four other parties including al-Fadila, a Shi’ite party based in Basra.
Mutlak’s proposal is evidence of increasing frustration with Maliki who has failed to stop violence and to revive the economy.
Last week Iraqi officials estimated that up to 100 people, mostly civilians, were being murdered every day.
Yesterday’s grim reports included the discovery of seven headless bodies north of Baghdad. They were among 17 Shi’ite construction workers kidnapped last Thursday, apparently in retaliation for the burning of three Sunnis the previous day.
Regards, Ivan
Ping!
You're not the only one who thinks that, certainly. Sounds like events are going to overtake events yet again. Kim Jong Il is probably pleased if he's reading the papers.
Then Turkey will go to war and the BS will spread even wider.
In hindsight, disbanding the army was the wrong thing to do. Unfortunately, nothing can be done about that now.
I think we need a Sunni/Shia/Kurd trifecta leadership. If they are hardass strongment like Saddam, so be it. If things don't start to improve there by years end, all is lost.
Maliki! Stop us from killing each other! Right.
I think the best plan is to chop Iraq up and give the Kurds their own independent nation.It has its advantages. Presumably one would be a permanent US base in the new Kurdish state.
But it has a lot of problems. Sunnis get no oil. Iran gets a client state.
But still, it has its advantages.
That will assure an open, declared ciivil war and the involvement of Turkey and Iran.... A bad idea that doesn't improve with time or discussion.
Looking just at the situation with the Kurds in the event the country breaks up, the conventional wisdom is Turkey would not stand for it. I wonder. Would Turkey want to go through what the Russians did in Afghanistan? And a Turkish takeover of the Kurdish region, which would be extremely bloody, might ruin their chances of joining the EU.
Anyone ever consider that maybe, just maybe, the best thing to do is what we are doing? Just keep folks like AQ out and when the Iraqis get tired of killing each other they will settle down. It is a tragedy, but any other path may lead to far more blood shed.
Well,there's no doubt that WE need that.
Do you realize how absurd that is? WE need the enemy to do something that gets OUR ass out of a sling,which something is absolutely without precedent and has zero chance of actually happening?
We could have killed Saddam and gotten out. We could have conquered Iraq, and all of Arabia for that matter, and they could already be on the path to civilization with American governors, teachers, and missionaries.
But, NO - we had to put 140 000 troops among a hostile enemy population and then LEAVE SUCCESS OR FAILURE UP TO THE ENEMY.
Absurd.
RELEASE SADDAM!!!
Democrats seem to think that Capturing Saddam was the wrong thing to do. The administration should just come out with a statement saying that Democrats seem to feel that Iraq or terrorism was never a problem, so we are releasing Saddam on his "promise" that he will not rise up again.
This will send the left over the edge.
The fact is that Saddam was a secularist, with two thug children who enjoyed whores and alcohol.
They did not want a caliphate, or sharia law imposed on everyone else.
Sadly, Arabs can only be controlled by someone like Saddam.
We should have left him alone, and focused on the Islamist threat.
Factually incorrect and irrelevant. Saddam "secret police" and intelligence services had extensive contact with Islamic terrorists groups including Al Qeda. But that right, don't bother the Dinocons with reality.
Well at least you got that much correct, your rant was utterly absurd.
Perhaps the all Muslims are enemies crowd MIGHT try to explain why the bulk of the fighting, and dying, on our side of the War is being done by Muslims?
Counter Insurgency is not Total War. Way past time the Freeper Patton wanna bes learn the difference rather then mindlessly cling to their rabid ignorance about Iraq.
We are doing what we need to do. Killing Terrorists. Iraq is our kill zoen. The Dinocons simply refuse to give up their arrogant Neo Isolationist mindset that they can simply go back to ignoring terrorism and it will go away. They cling to their 09-10-01 mindset and refuse to evolve one inch beyond it.
The Biblical reason we have come to this point in this world.
Genesis 16
Hagar and Ishmael
1 Now Sarai, Abram's wife, had borne him no children. But she had an Egyptian maidservant named Hagar; 2 so she said to Abram, "The LORD has kept me from having children. Go, sleep with my maidservant; perhaps I can build a family through her."
Abram agreed to what Sarai said. 3 So after Abram had been living in Canaan ten years, Sarai his wife took her Egyptian maidservant Hagar and gave her to her husband to be his wife. 4 He slept with Hagar, and she conceived.
When she knew she was pregnant, she began to despise her mistress. 5 Then Sarai said to Abram, "You are responsible for the wrong I am suffering. I put my servant in your arms, and now that she knows she is pregnant, she despises me. May the LORD judge between you and me."
6 "Your servant is in your hands," Abram said. "Do with her whatever you think best." Then Sarai mistreated Hagar; so she fled from her.
7 The angel of the LORD found Hagar near a spring in the desert; it was the spring that is beside the road to Shur. 8 And he said, "Hagar, servant of Sarai, where have you come from, and where are you going?"
"I'm running away from my mistress Sarai," she answered.
9 Then the angel of the LORD told her, "Go back to your mistress and submit to her." 10 The angel added, "I will so increase your descendants that they will be too numerous to count."
11 The angel of the LORD also said to her:
"You are now with child
and you will have a son.
You shall name him Ishmael, [a]
for the LORD has heard of your misery.
12 He will be a wild donkey of a man;
his hand will be against everyone
and everyone's hand against him,
and he will live in hostility
toward [b] all his brothers."
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.