| Submit your comments on this article | |
| Home Front: Politix | |
| opinion: Time To Quit Iraq (Sort Of) - NYT article | |
| 2004-08-19 | |
Chevy Chase, Md. - Many Americans now believe that the United States is depleting its military strength, diplomatic leverage and Treasury to pursue unrealistic aims in Iraq. They are right. Democracy seems to interest few Iraqis, given the widespread Shiite proclivity to follow unelected clerics, the Sunni rejection of the principle of majority rule, and the preference of many Kurds for tribe and clan over elected governments. Reconstruction was supposed to advance rapidly with surging oil export revenues, but is hardly gaining on the continuing destruction inflicted by sabotage and thievery. And in any case, it is unlikely that the new Iraqi interim government will be able to oversee meaningful elections in a country where its authority is more widely denied than recognized. Yet few Americans are prepared to simply abandon Iraq. For one, they are rightly concerned that to do so would be a mortal blow to America's global credibility and encourage violent Islamists everywhere. An outright withdrawal would leave the interim government and its feeble forces of doubtful loyalty to face the attacks of vastly emboldened Baath regime loyalists, Sunni revanchists, local and foreign Islamist extremists and the ever-more numerous Shiite militias. The likely result would be the defection of the government's army, police and national guard members, followed by a swift collapse and then civil war. Worse might follow in the Middle East - it usually does - even to the point of invasions by Iran, Turkey and possibly others, initiating new cycles of repression and violence. Bwahaahahaa, what a mellon, and the US is a big liberator eyh? Thus the likely consequences of an American abandonment are so bleak that few Americans are even willing to contemplate it. This is a mistake: it is precisely because unpredictable mayhem is so predictable that the United States might be able to disengage from Iraq at little cost, or even perhaps advantageously. | |
| Posted by:Murat |
| #13 How's things at "Armenians Anonymous", Murat, you useless piece of corn in a chunk of maggot shit. |
| Posted by: tu3031 2004-08-19 10:51:51 PM |
| #12 CL - I've been looking for the current Pentagon / Defense Dept accident death rate for training, cumulative for all services, and so far no joy. I wrote the above in good faith, though. I recalled a Defense Dept press conference where this was stated as fact, but the briefer gave no specific numbers or where such detail could be found - it was probably on the briefing sheet given to the reporters because they didn't ask - so I've been looking for the detail. This ABC news story from June 21st put the US death rate at 1.9 for 140,000 troops as the average for the entire Iraq operation from rollout from Kuwait until the article came out. Converted to a rate per 100,000 we get 1.357. I believe this is in line with training deaths (not in-barracks time and not including off-base auto accidents, etc.), but until I find the magic document, I can't give you the definitive answer I'd like to. Sorry. Perhaps you'll have better luck! |
| Posted by: .com 2004-08-19 10:22:41 PM |
| #11 .com that's righteous stuff. I'm going to have to print that out and hang on to it. Oh, what's the source on combat casualty rates? I've been speculating that's the case, but have never seen any stats on the matter. |
| Posted by: Classical_Liberal 2004-08-19 9:45:26 PM |
| #10 ...with a stick up his ass. Funny you're using that phrase today, RC - coincidence / Freudian slip? |
| Posted by: Raj 2004-08-19 1:42:19 PM |
| #9 fake Murat....Fred can check the IP |
| Posted by: Frank G 2004-08-19 12:48:33 PM |
| #8 You know, now that you mention it "new" Murat really doesn't seem as articulate as "old" Murat. I think the guy is a semi-literate imposter posting from a dorm room in Berkeley. |
| Posted by: Secret Master 2004-08-19 12:42:28 PM |
| #7 It's not really about the information presented, it's about how it's presented and the motives. Luttwak is a CSIS denizen - so he's naturally an ally of the NYT editorial staff. Paid BS for Hire and Apology Consultants - a mouthpiece of oil ticks. You could quite easily reverse his premise and negate the entire load of tripe that follows. In reversing the spin you create a completely different scenario and reality. The premise lies in this single sentence: "Many Americans now believe that the United States is depleting its military strength, diplomatic leverage and Treasury to pursue unrealistic aims in Iraq." Dissecting this into its components and restating the case - within reality, not opinion - we get an entirely different story. For example... --------------- Many Americans understand there are many benefits accruing from our actions in Iraq. Militarily, the United States is honing tactics, perfecting coordination and quick response methodology, exercising the 'flypaper' strategy to perfection, and testing many new weapons systems in the only laboratory worthy: the field of battle. One benefit truly unavailable by any other means is the experience and espirit de corps gained by our forces. No one should ever again underestimate our forces, nor will anyone who isn't blinded by their ideology - the proof of the matter is there for all military analysts to see. Remarkably, in a live-fire zone and to the great dismay of the liberal Left which dreams of massive troop losses to discourage and dissuade Americans from exercising independent action, the average troop losses are approximately the same as the normal rate sustained in home-based training exercises. Live fire certainly focuses the mind. Our military strength and expertise in the war theater of the near future, small hot regional conflicts featuring urban warfare, is growing exponentially. The fact that the leaders of some previously allied governments, in a carefully choreographed dance of malice and perfidy, chose to turn the conflict with Saddam Hussein to private political and economic gain and, in doing so, discarded diplomatic coordination and cooperation and rendered the UN Charter meaningless, has proven far less an impediment to US action than was once hoped by the complicit internal liberal Left. In fact, the current military operations in Iraq and Afghanistan have demonstrated that the US has profited handsomely from the absence of recalcitrant, obsolete, and obstinate foreign forces - particularly the leadership baggage that comes with such dubious assistance. Thus, the hard way, the US has discovered there was no leverage to be gained from allowing foreign diplomacy to further delay and dissolve the resolve to action. In fact, there were immediate benefits - of a sort. For example, without the US troop build-up in the Persian Gulf, Saddam would never have allowed the return of the UNSCOM teams - a pet desire of many, yet it proved to be yet another pointless diplomatic exercise. What a surprise. Though the Treasury burden has been higher than the liberal socialist elements in the US would like, for they have many remarkably pointless programs they wish to float upon the waters of their largesse - using your tax dollars, it has proven to be manageable. US aims in Iraq cover the spectrum of possibilities, from merely ending the brutal regime of a madman, to ending his cooperation with and facilitation of international terror networks, to providing bases of operation for intel and future inevitable regional military actions, to undermining the other 22 Arab dictatorships and, under ideal conditions, introduce democracy to the Arab world. An experiment is now in progress in Iraq to determine whether Arab Muslims are capable of embracing and creating a workable democracy - something in which democracy is more than just a word to employ for 'diplomatic' effect. Expectations vary, for it is a novel attempt and subject to many powerful forces - not the least of which is the fact that Iraq, as an entity, is a silly confabulation of populations which have never voluntarily coexisted peacefully. From such bold and innovative policy, President Bush has plowed asunder the internal and external socialist dreams of self-hate and masochism, rendered foreign attempts to shackle and rein-in the US as the military muscle for an insane elitist European confabulation doomed to the ash heap of failure the instant it was uttered aloud, and demonstrated the futility of the hateful racist barbaric unrealistic aims of Islamofacists for World Dominion - their defeat is embodied by our actions in Iraq daily. --------------- Gosh, that was fun... Oh, and fuck you, Luttwak. |
| Posted by: .com 2004-08-19 11:44:46 AM |
| #6 mhw, correct. He has been a shaking old woman since 1990. His forecast was for 10k's of american casualties; chemical weapons, tank traps, elite troops. He was more wrong about the capabilities of the Iraqi military than the CIA was about WMD in'02. I hope the royalties on the old books are still good. |
| Posted by: Mrs. Davis 2004-08-19 10:52:38 AM |
| #5 I'd go for the impersonator. Could be one of those people hired to rile up blogs with DUmmies POV. Wouldn't take alot to steal Murats name, especially since he doesn't give an E-mail. Any chance Fred can check the IP's? |
| Posted by: Charles 2004-08-19 10:42:26 AM |
| #4 You also used to write better English. Perhaps this is a Murat impersonator? |
| Posted by: Robert Crawford 2004-08-19 10:31:43 AM |
| #3 Have I touched your Kurdish feeling John Wayne? |
| Posted by: Murat 2004-08-19 10:23:57 AM |
| #2 Murat, at one time you acted like you had a bit of intelligence. Now you act like you're a brain-washed, know-nothing bigot with a stick up his ass. |
| Posted by: Robert Crawford 2004-08-19 10:19:37 AM |
| #1 Luttwak is smart and knows a lot. However, he is arrogant as hell and some of his predictions and advice in the past has truly been for s..t. I recall he forcast something like 10k American fatalities in the first gulf war. |
| Posted by: mhw 2004-08-19 9:36:25 AM |