Posted on 02/24/2006 7:12:07 PM PST by CometBaby
"I can tell you the main reason behind all our woes — it is America." The New York Times reporter is quoting the complaint of a clothing merchant in a Sunni stronghold in Iraq. "Everything that is going on between Sunni and Shiites, the troublemaker in the middle is America."
One can't doubt that the American objective in Iraq has failed. The same edition of the paper quotes a fellow of the American Enterprise Institute. Mr. Reuel Marc Gerecht backed the American intervention. He now speaks of the bombing of the especially sacred Shiite mosque in Samara and what that has precipitated in the way of revenge. He concludes that “The bombing has completely demolished” what was being attempted — to bring Sunnis into the defense and interior ministries.
Our mission has failed because Iraqi animosities have proved uncontainable by an invading army of 130,000 Americans. The great human reserves that call for civil life haven't proved strong enough. No doubt they are latently there, but they have not been able to contend against the ice men who move about in the shadows with bombs and grenades and pistols.
(Excerpt) Read more at nationalreview.com ...
It's a good thing Buckley wasn't around in 1865 (or was he?). Things didn't look very civil in this country then either.
Funny how 'conservatives' claim a desire to leave the UN behind. But when it suits their needs (i.e. gives them an excuse to attack a 'belligerent' nation), we need to enforce UN resolutions...
Whereas members of al-Qaida, an organization bearing responsibility for attacks on the United States, its citizens, and interests, including the attacks that occurred on September 11, 2001, are known to be in Iraq;
The 'meeting' that supposedly happened in Eastern Europe was deemed to be a falsehood. The ties were tenable at best. Even the Vice President has admitted to this. The ties excuse was dropped early in the war
Whereas the attacks on the United States of September 11, 2001, underscored the gravity of the threat posed by the acquisition of weapons of mass destruction by international terrorist organizations;
Yes, where are those weapons? Oh, I forgot. World Nut Daily and DEBKA tell us they're in the Syrian deserts...
Whereas the Iraq Liberation Act (Public Law 105-338) expressed the sense of Congress that it should be the policy of the United States to support efforts to remove from power the current Iraqi regime and promote the emergence of a democratic government to replace that regime;
She has abstained from interference in the concerns of others, even when conflict has been for principles to which she clings, as to the last vital drop that visits the heart. She has seen that probably for centuries to come, all the contests of that Aceldama the European world, will be contests of inveterate power, and emerging right. Wherever the standard of freedom and Independence has been or shall be unfurled, there will her heart, her benedictions and her prayers be. But she goes not abroad, in search of monsters to destroy.Perhaps those hacks in Congress may want to read this before passing another 'resolution' for regime change. It was none of our businessShe is the well-wisher to the freedom and independence of all.
She is the champion and vindicator only of her own.
She will commend the general cause by the countenance of her voice, and the benignant sympathy of her example.
She well knows that by once enlisting under other banners than her own, were they even the banners of foreign independence, she would involve herself beyond the power of extrication, in all the wars of interest and intrigue, of individual avarice, envy, and ambition, which assume the colors and usurp the standard of freedom. The fundamental maxims of her policy would insensibly change from liberty to force....
She might become the dictatress of the world. She would be no longer the ruler of her own spirit.... --John Quincy Adams, 1821
Buckley is wrong and so are you. I don't know what Iraq will be like in the future. Ultimately it is up to them.
Indeed it is and history tells us exactly what form of govenment they will institute. A monarchy (doubtful as they have no royalty), a military dictatorship (which our nation had no problem with while they used and supported Iraq against Iran in the 1980s), or a theocracy.
We are giving them the opportunity to make those decisions by the elimination of a tyrant who killed over 300,000 people and buried them in mass graves.
Again while tragic, I would refer you to Adams' statement.
I remain optimistic that given a choice, most people will choose freedom and democracy, which is the wave of the future. I also lived for two years in Communist Poland, including during martial law in the early 1980s. I returned in the late 1990s and saw the remarkable changes that have been wrought. None of us in early 1980s would have ever predicted such a transformation a scant decade later.
Let's see. Communism around for a total of 70-80 years at that time, Islam around for 1000-1100 years. Nope, I see no problem whatsoever overcoming that mindset, they'll just give it right up when they see how great democracy is. Why it'll probably happen practically overnight!! While you're at it you can explain how all but less than one handful of Islamic nations haven't embraced democracy. Turkey has been going at it for 80 years and perhaps only their close proximity to Europe has kept them from sliding back to their Islamic roots. When will 'conservatives' wake up to the realization that it is not our business to determine the level of freedom or the internal affairs of other sovereign nations?
Of course,. No one loves an occupier. We are liberators and we will leave if the government of Iraq asks us to leave. I don't see that happening since the Iraqi government knows that it still doesn't have the resources to maintain security nationwide. We never stay in a country where we are not wanted.
For example, public polls in South Korea would seem to indicate that the US is not popular and that it would be better if we left. Yet, let Rumsfeld suggest that we are going to reduce our token forces there, and the Korean government goes bananas. The Germans have reacted similarly with the German mayors of cities adjacent to our bases coming to the US to plead for our bases to remain.
That's what Buckley is saying. He implies suspicion of social engineering, and when things go awry, who gets blamed but us... because by going to war, we are the ones who started this kind of social engineering and when things go awry, who gets blamed but us... because by going to war, we are the ones who started this kind of social engineering.
That goes with the territory. As long as the Iraqi government supports our presence, that is all that really matters. I would be concerned if millions of Iraqis took to the streets demanding our withdrawal. That hasn't happened. If you believe the reports from our military personnel, most Iraqis want us to stay and finish the mission. We don't want to be there for ever either, which is why we are handing over more and more of the security responsibilities to Iraqis.
Japan and Germany didn't have an active insurgency that's approaching its 4-year mark.
Different cultures and different circumstances. Both countries, Japan and Germany, suffered immense devastation and loss of life. Iraq is paradise compared to the state of the infrastructure and political structure.
I have seen this 4 year mark tossed about by the Dems and other kooks. Fact: We have been in Iraq since March 20, 2003 , the date of the invasion. We entered Baghdad on April 9, 2003. We really didn't start administering the country until May, 2003. The bottom line is that we have been there less than three years. During that time, there have been three national elections and an adoption of a constitution. Schools and hospitals have been built, roads contstructed, and a host of other infrastructure projects undertaken.
Indonesia never had a foreign force guiding them towards democracy.
Indonesia was a Dutch colony from the early 17th century until 1945 or 1949, depending on your perspective. Indonesia declared its independence in 1945 but the Dutch didn't recognize it until 1949. The leagal system is based on Roman-Dutch law, substantially modified by indigenous concepts and by new criminal procedures and election codes It has a written constitution. Having lived in Indonesia in the early 1970s, I can testify to the major influence the Dutch had on the political system and other democratic institutions.
Again, Buckley says in the article that the prevailing strategic postulates--like our belief in freedom--ought to be sustained, and are being sustained in latin American and much of Asia (to include Japan, Singapore, Indonesia, etc). But Buckley also says that Iraq may be a particular example where things don't work. And the way things are headed (i.e. Sunnis breaking off political talks with Shia and Kurds, continued disappearance of mixed neighborhoods in Shia-Sunni-Kurdish border areas, resulting homogenization of the country into 3 ethnic-based areas, etc.), the tactical picture does not look good.
I am not ready to conclude that the sky is falling tactically or strategically. We are talking about a country of 25 million and the size of California. The vast majority of the country is not in turmoil.
He's saying that we can preserve our strategic mission while sustaining a tactical loss--albeit a big one in the form of Iraq.
Much too early to come to such a conclusion. Also, we are fighting AQ in Iraq. Does Buckley think that AQ will leave Iraq if we leave? What kind of message does that send to our enemy?
No, that Republican would have just tossed Buckley in jail and thrown away the key as he did with hundreds of others when he illegally suspended habeas corpus.
Selective quotes from the Koran or Bible don't carry much weight with me. I prefer the reality on the ground.
But naturally you've read through both entirely intensely studying their credibility, right!
Sorry, but it's a little tough and entirely unpractical to post the entire Koran here. Nevertheless, if you'd read through it, even the first 10 chapters as I've suggested, you wouldn't be making absurd statements on "context." I realize that it's an unintentional admission of a complete lack of awareness. And yes, anytime you'd wish to go head to head on either, you know where to find me. I have done my homework there, and in spades.
As you wish, you are prejudiced.
Yeah, I can see how in your world I am. You muslim by chance?
Naturally, such text isn't prejudiced, right!
It has been amusing I must say. But my amusement with such nonsense has now ended.
It's been LESS than THREE YEARS. We deposed a dictator, and have been fighting successfully, not only Baathist terrorists, but foreign terrorists. In the mean time the Iraqis have had successful elections, are setting up a government, and 80% of them are living in peace for the first time in their lives.
When Bill Buckley starts blaming the Americans and expecting McDonald's drive-thru 'success' it's time for him to hang up the pen and let us remember him in greatness and not senility.
It IS working. Buckley has lost touch with reality.
Buckley is a smart man.......or at least used to be.
His tense is wrong here. The correct sentence should be, "This last has not yet happened."
I guess old men lose patience. I guess Buckley has become an old man.
As well, it's interesting that you mention taking "selective quotes from the Koran or Bible." Generally I am in agreement with you.
But if you've read through the Koran, and I presume that you haven't, you'd quickly notice that there doesn't appear to be much context as it were, unlike the Bible where the entire thing is set into the context of human history.
The difference between the two is remarkable in that way. The difference in "philosophies" or faiths is even more pronounced. One thing is for certain, both cannot be correct by design. Anyone admitting that the Bible is credible, absolutely must toss out the Koran or any other religious tome.
On the flip side, the same is true visa versa. So the question quickly becomes one of which God/god, the Living God of the Jews and Christians, or the god, Allah, that was the machination of a madman, pedophile, and terrorist holds greater water. That exercise is left to each man throughout the course of human history and I am no one's judge there. God will do that.
Suffice it to say however, it would indeed appear that Mohammed merely took a portion of the general framework of the Bible, took what served his purposes, which was very little, put in a bunch of stuff that did, and then pitched it as some sort of revelation. For any person to understand the history behind it and then voluntarily believe in that, is well, somewhat perplexing to be very, very kind.
But it has a fraction of the context that the Bible does and that's a big part of the problem. In it Mohammed commands muslims to take over the world but doesn't prescribe, specifically, the methods to be employed in order to do so. Dangerous! We see the fruits of that daily.
It's also why I say that the "radical" muslims are the Koran-believing variety. The "good" or "peaceful" ones are the more apostate who have no desire to carry out Mohammed's intentions. Doesn't make them very good muslims now, does it!
Write if you find time.
Perhaps not, but Victor Davis Hanson can. (From Radioblogger.com.)
Now do us all a favor and say "goodbye".
You just insulted my father. He also is old and has a crystal clear mind. You, sir, are a sad sick little excuse for a human being.
It has nothing to do with leaving the UN behind. We had an adversarial relationship with Iraq prior to 9/11. Technically, we were still at war with Saddam. We were part of the UN coalition that kicked him out of Kuwait. We entered into a UN approved Truce Agreement. Saddam was violating this agreement and ignoring multiple UN resolutions. Those are facts and part of the political reality. We had the legal authority to enforce those resolutions, which is why it was cited in the Joint Resolution. Period. We also have the right to self-defense.
The 'meeting' that supposedly happened in Eastern Europe was deemed to be a falsehood. The ties were tenable at best. Even the Vice President has admitted to this. The ties excuse was dropped early in the war
The Resolution does not refer to the meeting in Prague. It is a fact that AQ was present in Iraq and that Iraqi intelligence had documented contacts with AQ. This was noted in the 9/11 Commission Report. Here are some other links to information concerning AQ and Iraqi connectioins:
The Iraq -- Al Qaeda Connections
Osama and Saddam Worked together for years
Yes, where are those weapons? Oh, I forgot. World Nut Daily and DEBKA tell us they're in the Syrian deserts...
The UN inspectors docmented from Saddam's own records that many were unaccounted for. The question should be what did he do with them and why did play games with the inspectors. If he had demonstrated that all the weapons had been destroyed and allowed a comprehensive and unimpeded inspection by the UN, Saddam would probably be still in power and the sanctions would have been lifted. Instead he lied and deceived. The UN found and destroyed a significant amount of undeclard WMD and other prohibited weaponry.
Sending the WMD to Syria or burying it in the desert is not all that far fetched. Saddam flew over 100 military aircraft to Iran prior to the Gulf War. He alse buried jet aircraft in the desert.
Perhaps those hacks in Congress may want to read this before passing another 'resolution' for regime change. It was none of our business
Self-defense is our business. Allowing Saddam to remain in power represented a serious threat to our country. The world is better off without the tyrant or his sons in power. Iraq was a state sponsor of terrorism and Saddam had a history of irresponsible actions. The more we learn about his regime, the better the decision looks. Oil for Food.
Let's see. Communism around for a total of 70-80 years at that time, Islam around for 1000-1100 years. Nope, I see no problem whatsoever overcoming that mindset, they'll just give it right up when they see how great democracy is. Why it'll probably happen practically overnight!! While you're at it you can explain how all but less than one handful of Islamic nations haven't embraced democracy.
Are you equating Islam with Communism? Modern militant Islam has been arpound since 1979 and Khomeini. Iran is ground zero in the WOT. We are promoting democracy as a way to defuse the militant threat. Islam will have to reform itself, but we cannot ignore the impact on our democratic societies and culture. There are 5 to 7 million Muslims in the US.
Most of the countries in the world are not democracies. It has less to do with religion and more to do with history.
When will 'conservatives' wake up to the realization that it is not our business to determine the level of freedom or the internal affairs of other sovereign nations?
Nonsense. We have principles and values. Should we remain silent when Hitler, Stalin, and Mao murder millions? Or the killing fields of Cambodia and Rawanda? There are times when we may need to act. Do we wait to be attacked? No man is an island nor is a nation. We have learned that what goes on in Japan, Germany, Russia, and China can eventually affect us.
Yep, I've browsed late October/early November 1963 issues. Kind of spooky.
There was no insult to ALL old people......just THIS old person.
Exactly!
Find the Victor Davis Hanson thread for a more positive view, and a nice tribute to our soldiers.
Then tell me, what is your threshold for change? Everyone says that victory is a democratic and peaceful Iraq at peace with its neighbors and an ally for the War on Terror. Iraq is nowhere close to that state. No one wants to ask, "What is the threshold for loss?" Let's assume we continue this way for another year or so (the UN mandates ends at the end of the year). Are you still going to argue that we need to finish the job? The basic problem is that to finish the job requires Iraqi buy-in, and given the recent internecine and sectarian attacks, we're clearly not there yet. I'm sick and tired of everyone saying we need to finish the job, when it's up to the Iraqis to finish the job. And they don't seem to demonstrate any desire sufficient to meet the job (sure, training an Iraqi Army is great, but it's political reconciliation that needs to happen--and it's not happening).
I may not agree entirely with Buckley on the premise that we've lost Iraq. But I agree with him that we need to consider alternatives. We can't have the same situation continue after the end of this year.
BTW, sure, the Dutch wielded influence, but I don't think you can say that the Netherlands guided the Indonesians into democracy. In fact, the Indonesians waged a war against the Dutch to establish their independence. Not exactly an example we want to repeat in Iraq.
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.