← Autodidact Archive · Original Dissent · Faust

Thread 7659

Thread ID: 7659 | Posts: 4 | Started: 2003-06-27

Wayback Archive

Faust [OP]

2003-06-27 15:41 | User Profile

**QUAGMIRE: The Truth About Today’s Iraq By Carl F. Worden

Just as I predicted, the war on Iraq has not resulted in what the Bush Administration promised would be a quick and decisive victory. I don’t think you can call the relentless and almost daily killing of American and British soldiers occupying Iraq to be a quick and decisive victory. The exact same thing happened in Viet Nam, and as I recall, we ultimately lost that war too.

Saddam Hussein, in spite of his other faults, held sway over his people with an iron hand. But the incongruity of his particular dictatorial regime was that Saddam made certain just about every Iraqi household was armed with fully automatic AK-47 rifles, rocket propelled grenades, plenty of ammunition and Saddam solidly supported and enforced the Iraqi people’s freedom of religion, including Christianity. Saddam was also a solid promoter of education for the masses.

Every other dictator I’ve studied disarmed his people as soon as the opportunity presented itself to thwart efforts at violent overthrow. Every other dictator bestowed upon his populace a state religion – or no religion. Few if any dictators in history promoted the education of the populace, for fear they might recognize the tyranny by which their government had established and maintained itself.

Iraq, under Saddam Hussein, was a sustained and ordered society, even if a level of brutality was used from time-to-time to preserve it.

So now we, the Coalition Forces, are “liberating” Iraq to establish some sort of Democratic government, because our leaders are too ill informed to recall that a Constitutional Republic is superior. Neither form of government will work in Iraq anyway, because the established and opposing factions that existed, and have always existed during Saddam’s iron rein, are now loosed to exercise what they call their right to freedom. Their attitude is, “Thanks for the help with Saddam, now get the hell out, or we’ll blow you out!”

They’ve got the guns and other weapons to do it, and they are doing it.

The truth is that Saddam’s “loyalists” aren’t the only ones killing our soldiers one-by-one, and contrary to White House assertions and promises, Saddam’s demise won’t stop the killing. They claim that if Saddam is captured or killed, all resistance will end. They are in for yet another disappointment, and so are the Coalition forces.

If Saddam were captured yesterday, and publicly hanged and quartered for all to see on Iraqi television today, the killing of American and British forces would continue. Instead of pacifying the people of Iraq with the removal of Saddam, we have opened a hornet’s nest of rival factions, who are immediately committed to expelling our Coalition forces, followed by the establishment of a new government that only God knows will eventually prevail.

This isn’t a simple case where Saddam is removed and order and Democracy is established. The people of Iraq are not like us. They understand and accept ruling regimes, to the extent that they will fight and die to establish a regime as brutal and just as harsh as Saddam’s, only this time to the advantage of some other faction. It is their nature and it is their culture and that’s just the way it is. Further, they’ve got the weapons to eventually make it happen. They are going to defeat the Coalition one dead soldier at a time, just like I warned you they would.

I don’t know if you saw the movie, “Enemy At The Gates”, but it is an excellent example of what is happening in Iraq right now. They’ve got a super-sniper they call “The Hunter”, who is using the very supportive Iraqi population to hide in while he carefully picks his kills. Unless he makes a really stupid mistake or just has a run of bad luck, it is virtually impossible to nail a sniper like The Hunter. His successes are becoming folklore among the common people, and others are quickly adopting his example and tactics -- which is why the random killings of Coalition soldiers seem to be on the increase.

The other problem is that our Coalition forces aren’t winning the public relations war in Iraq either. In fact, their frustration at being casually picked off here and there makes them more likely to commit war crimes against the common citizens they encounter on the street. It comes down to pure survival in an atmosphere of constant dread and random, instantaneous death, and the common Iraqi on the street is killed just as easily as the guy shooting at you. The same thing happened on the city streets of Saigon. As a result, a number of Coalition soldiers have been killed by outraged Iraqi citizens in response to the soldiers’ harsh treatment of Iraqis on the street. It’s turning into the descending spiral of violence I predicted, and the only losers will ultimately be the Coalition.

Just like Viet Nam, we can’t seem to do anything right in Iraq, and we’d be smart to get out right now, but we won’t. We never do. We Americans never learn anything. Viet Nam is still a Communist nation, and Iraq will never become a sustained democracy, no matter how much American blood is shed there. Mark my words.

url:  [url=http://senac.com/forums/14400/bin/176.html]http://senac.com/forums/14400/bin/176.html[/url] **

triskelion

2003-06-27 19:39 | User Profile

It is clear that we have been lied to about the Ba'athist regime in Iraq. Unfortunately, it is very hard to find anything worth reading about Ba'athist ideology in English (it seems most material is in Arabic which I don't speak at all) so making a reasoned judgemnt of the ideology is tough. It seems to favour pan Arabism (what that means in practical terms I have no idea), a socialism of a sort that is not clear to me, authoritarianism, secularism with religious freedom and some sort of social egalitarianism. In many, meaningful ways, it seems that Ba'athist Iraq enjoyed more liberties then the West. Of hand, i'd say that it seems a reasonable system for Arab peoples but I lack the knowledge to be certain.

Faust

2003-06-27 19:44 | User Profile

triskelion,

Very True.

Unfortunately, it is very hard to find anything worth reading about Ba'athist ideology in English (it seems most material is in Arabic which I don't speak at all) so making a reasoned judgemnt of the ideology is tough. It seems to favour pan Arabism (what that means in practical terms I have no idea), a socialism of a sort that is not clear to me, authoritarianism, secularism with religious freedom and some sort of social egalitarianism.

Oddly the founder of Ba'athist Party and the main maker of it's ideology was a Christian.

triskelion

2003-06-27 21:13 | User Profile

Thanks for the interesting write up. I was aware that Michel Aflaq was an Orthodox Christian but most of the information in LG's new post was stuff I didn't know about. I would be nice to get some detailed information on the particulars of the ideology and some serious analysis from "highbrow" types about the practices of Ba'athist regimes and the policies they promote in a substantive fashion.

Most interesting was the referances to the NPF which it seems would indicate that in Syria the regime is far less autocratic then I previously thought. A good question would be along the lines of the degree to which Ba'athism outside Syria and Iraq are note worthy. Of hand, it seems that Nasser is the only one that seems to come close and he's been gone for something like 40 years.