Sunday, November 12

Iraq: a chance to change

The Democrats' attempt to improve the Iraqi situation will be fruitless unless the US administration starts listening to Iraqis.

The American widespread discontent about the performance of the Bush administration has finally come to fruition when the Democrats took over the House of Representatives after twelve years of a conservative government. There is an immediate need to deal with the situation in Iraq which has become catastrophic. The decision of the US to withdraw from Iraq has become inevitable. The question is how they should do it.

The promises of the Democrats in changing the US policy should not be associated with an optimistic view to Iraq’s future. The Democratic plan, seemingly as one-sided as the republicans’ who were also sure that they could fix the Iraqi situation, shows no signs that they intend to change the unilateral ideology in handling things in Iraq. And as long as the Americans commanding and controlling Iraqis instead of listening and cooperating with them, the situation will remain as is. The American administration must realize that it needs to work with Iraqis, not above them.

The vast majority of Iraqis sees the sectarian tension as a result to occupation, and hence, wants the Americans to completely withdraw from Iraq. If the Democrats were sincere to get out from the current crisis, they should work towards presenting a schedule for a complete withdrawal; one year is plenty. During this period, Americans are responsible for establishing a strong, united and independent Iraqi government that is capable of training a strong national army. Americans are also responsible for compensating destroyed infrastructure to secure water and electricity to Iraqi civilians. All other internal issues must be dealt with by Iraqis themselves. Iraq must be left for Iraqis.


Anonymous said...

I completely agree with you Majed. Iraqis know what is best for Iraqis. It is downright foolish for this administration to think that they can do a better job of establishing a democractic Iraq than Iraqis can do themselves. I think that if given the chance Iraq could become the shining example of an Islamic democratic society. I hope that the new Democrat controlled Congress will be somewhat effective in improving the situation in Iraq. But I'm even more thrilled that Rumsfeld finally threw in the towel. Let's pray that Rumsfeld's replacement will approach the situation in Iraq with a little more sophistication and sensitivity than his predecessor did. (Although he's still appointed by Bush, so I won't hold my breath. But I'll still hope for the best). :)

Hope all is well with you in Cairo. Take care. :)

Cyberotter said...

Peace to you,

I am comforted by Jack Murtha when he speaks on the issue in Iraq. He seems to always focus on rebuilding infrastructure as a major focus of getting out of Iraq. He will more than likely be appointed to House Majority Leader this week giving the Iraq conflict new leadership in the proper direction. The new Secretary of Defense is not much more trust worthy than Rumsfeld was. I feel for your people in this horrible war. I can only hope for both your people and mine that this new leadership will pay more attention to the real experts on this conflict and give less credence to those who just wish to politicize it. Great blog and I look forward to reading more of it in the future.

Bruno said...

Good post, Majed. I appreciate your commentary.

Anonymous said...

You think all that they didn't will be done in a year?

I swear i hope the usians do not train one more policeman. (on the contrary the next 4 years or so you get 2000 'top-rate' military instructors a month .)
So the part of setting up massive armed factions will be managed.

Likewise how can you think people settle down to usual relations?
If the usian anti-badr prop (ofcourse in fact anti iran prop),
is like 20% true, you have whole areas ethnically cleansed already,
(despite the obvious fact that no massive iraki casualty's are really reported).

Would they leave within a year, irak had better fall apart like yugoslavia.. after all it appears saddam had right watching these milosevic videos during the attack on baghdad.

otoh would they stay, for this year and longer, what a mess will it be?? 2.6 million displaced?
more militia violence to justify..

But they won't. they don't want to,
they don't plan it, they didn't leave afghanistan, vietnam has no oil left. Syria and iran are not yet degraded to the stone(aka-free-irak) age.

And when they do attack iran quickly , (so they could still leave in a year and attack syria via turkey and lebanon eg.) how long will the badr resenting joy last for these 20% sunni's?

btw i think there are still bases in saudi arabia ever since kuweit war.. so will they leave anywhere?
not as long as there is oil.

One last thing, don't despair, fall into anothers arms...!
because.. here it is worse, dumber,
people are so biased you could make them believe everything, and most of what i wrote here would be perceived as utter nonsense. Promptly fading away in the thick damp of propaganda and commercial conditioning.
After irak will be free, your job will still be to enlighten us.
Feels pretty sad i must say,
you being plundered and tortured for our sake, and if the oil and everything else runs out....
You will still have to help us, think for us, spend hundreds of years to reverse the indoctrination..
All the time these people will probably still be boasting the bigger weapons.

It's a nightmare, but one shouldn't dream when the reality is grim.

note no rightwing usian really gives a damn about 2000 dead usians when it is to support their megaconsuming lifestyle. I am not right wing, and not usian, but if i really agreed these kind of policies, think about it...
what would you care? In the light of everything since, well since, since , if u rili wanted it ?
And that makes sense, so that is (moreless) how it is.


Sally said...

I have said before that we (all the US troops) could leave in a week if we only would do so. A week might be giving extra time -- all we need do is remove our troops to any country outside the Iraqi border (to more safety) and then bring them home. Of course, this will not be done.

However, I heard someone (don't know who) talking of getting out without setting a schedule but by beginning to reassign troops and being out in less than a year.

Oh, one other thing I heard in this The person was asked what he would say to the families of those who had fought and died in Iraq? Would their deaths be meaningless? He said, their deaths would have meaning because they did their duty to their country. But he added, I will tell their families, though, that no more of your sons and daughters will be sent to die without a valid reason.

Whoever that politician may be, I hope he has some standing in the new legislature of January.

olivebranch said...

It's true and I agree entirely; my only question is this: How do the US create a government which is stable, supported and able to train a new Iraqi army.

Through dictatorship? I hardly think the American public would support this; Martial-Law is the only other option; but then who would be in command of the forces? The US? Someone else already in the political proccess? Someone outside of it ? a General?

Through Gracepeace said...

Let's paint this on every wall in Iraq.

Revenge is the fuel for the fires of Hell
thus Satan fears forgiveness
for grace not only quells his flames
it weakens his dominion