Civil War In Iraq ????

[A4sForever]

Since we're getting really topical on some AW forums ... my question:

Are "we" heading for civil war in Iraq???

Are "we" already there ???

What's gonna' happen to the U.S. troops stationed there if we find ourselves caught in the middle?? Civil war?? U.S. troops in the middle ??? Can anyone say ... South Vietnam ??? The Bhuddists?? The Catholics running the government?? The Viet Cong??? The never-ending series of U.S. propped up South Vietnamese "governments"??? Oh, boy --- hope it's not a case of ..."here we go again...."

After the mosque bombings --- hey wait!!! Wednesday's bombing of the Golden Dome Mosque --- wasn't that MUSLIMs blowing up a MUSLIM mosque ??? Will it EVER end "over there". My take is ... NO. Remove all the Jews and Christans from the Middle East and the Muslims and/or Arabs will still be at each others' throats. It's the way of the world ... especially in the Middle East.

Maybe we should just start making more cartoons depicting whatever drives "them" up the wall ???

 

[squeeze]

You mean when you draw arbitrary national boundaries in a region dominated by sectarian tribes that have been kept in line by an oppressive minority ruling party for a long period of time then suddenly allow them to determine their own course of action they lash out at their oppressors who then fight back?

Wow... never saw that coming.

 

[A4sForever]

Wow... never saw that coming.

.... maybe someone should have asked these gents ???

 

[raptor10]

Machiavelli in his letter the Prince said there are three courses for those who wish to hold [conquered states]: the first is to ruin them, the next is to reside there in person, the third is to permit them to live under their own laws, drawing a tribute, and establishing within it an oligarchy which will keep it friendly to you. From the birth of our nation till today the US has proven the first course of action is correct, that a devastating force aimed at our enemies will crush them and eventually either brush them aside or will have them turn out as our allies:

The American Revolution
Manifest Destiny
The War of 1812
The Civil War
Tripoli
The Spanish American War
WWI
and with the most ferocity WWII

The comon thread behind these wars was that after the concept of Total War was applied, after the end of military operations, stability in the region was assured.

After WWII the United States appeared to have given up the concept of Total War and instead adopted the principle of limited war (because of the fear that eventually nuclear weapons would enter the fray), however the degree to which we limit ourselves is the problem, its perfectly acceptable to not pull out a gun in a boxing match, but we should not tie one hand behind our back either no matter how small the opponent, else the end result is to take hits to your face when there was no need.

So how do we win in Iraq? Tear it apart into its constituents and build it back up, sure it mightbe political suicide, but it will result in a lot less phonecalls to teary widows.

 

[Brett327]

I'm w/ A4s. Those fvckers have been going at it since the 3rd Caliphate in the 8th century. Can these people ever hope to "get" democratic principles and live in a civil society? Many folk in the business of figuring these people out indicate that one of the major hurdles and prerequisites of a positively progressing democratic society is the secularization of government. Look at places like Turkey - maybe they're on to something.

Brett

 

[metro]

Have to go with Brett and A4s on this one...screw 'em. Get everyone out who wants out, and let the rest of them kill each other...then let whatever God they wish sort 'em out.

 

[bellebeast1]

if you look at our constitution it states religious freedom--as long as the civil war is involving religion we have to remove ourselves or break our own laws. As soon as it is called a civil war between the Shiites and the Sunnis we are going to have to withdrawl. The shiites have to contain themselves or we will definately leave en mass as the French say.

 

[bellebeast1]

we could always do what the British did with Israel--set up two seperate states-(palestine and Israel) for each religion then leave the area. war broke out and the Jews took power and look where they are today

 

[Slammer2]

...Can anyone say ... South Vietnam ???...

yeah...I watched the primary race for the 2004 election

 

[Catmando]

.... maybe someone should have asked these gents ???

A4s, your prodigious grasp of history, and its relevance today is stunning (seriously, NS!).

Indeed, "those gents" know. But they are all unfortunately no longer alive to ask.

Would we ask them, even if they were still alive? I don't know.

Regardless, and irrespective of any politics, during my lifetime, our collective corporate memory in geopolitical, world affairs seems astonishingly myopic, while simultaneously ignoring very relevant history.

While you may have been, I wasn't around when these guys were alive early in the last century, so I am guessing. Help me out.

I think, from left top, clockwise, they are:


Arthur James Balfour – Lord of British Admiralty and later, Foreign Secretary. He wrote the "Balfour Declaration" which recognized the right of a Jewish state in Palestine.


George Picot and Pacifist General Berthold von Deimling shaking hands at the signing of the Sykes-Picot agreement.

A young and easily recognizable, Winston Churchill.

Sykes (?), signatory of the Sykes-Picot Agreement of 1916, which divided the Middle East into areas of influence for Britain and France, among others.

How'd I do?
[Your post highlighted my own ignorance of important, Mideast history, and I usually pride myself in knowing some of this stuff. Nice job.]

"Every time history repeats itself, the price goes up." (Anon)

 

[squeeze]

So how do we win in Iraq? Tear it apart into its constituents and build it back up, sure it mightbe political suicide, but it will result in a lot less phonecalls to teary widows.

It worked so well in Vietnam, why not? Oh...

George Santayana would like to have a word with you.

 

[Lawman]

we could always do what the British did with Israel--set up two seperate states-(palestine and Israel) for each religion then leave the area. war broke out and the Jews took power and look where they are today

Yeah because that worked so well when they tried it with what is now India and Pakistan. Hey no problems in that area, right folks?

Not to mention that they are presently handing back the Palestinian sectors to the Paletsinians lead by Hamas, removing their citizens, and building a big ass wall to keep that bad guys out. I wouldnt use Israel as an example of anyone doing anything right.

 

[bellebeast1]

no kidding--I wouldn't use pakistan and India either--they hate each other so much that they got nuclear weapons against the rules of the UN just so that they can show each other what they can do. And there is still a war pending over Kashmir which both countries claim.

 

[sirenia]

I'm probably going to get some flack for this, but hasn't sectarian violence taken place within Christianity as well? There were issues during the Catholic/Orthodox split, Crusades, the Protestant Reformation, and in the modern times with Ireland and countless others. I'm not condoning the violence taking place in Iraq, but surely this is an issue of rigid beliefs and persecution rather than a particular religion? Yes, Islam does bear the mark of violence right from the start, but so has Christianity through the ages. And there have been periods of harmony between the two, and within each umbrella-religion. While sectarian violence is certainly something they need to get in control, I believe external forces, especially historical ones, have had much to do with the present situation. I'm not trying to make this an Islam vs. Christianity issue. I'm just using it as an example.

No one really knows what the ultimate result will be for Iraq and Afghanistan; there is no easy solution, and only time can tell. I agree with Bellebeast; I don't think our troops should remain there in case a Civil War does openly break out.

 

[Fly Navy]

This is what happens when democracy is put upon people still obsessed with what is essentially old tribal rivalry. Africa has the same problems. What is essentially tribalism (new word?) doesn't jive with democracy.