Article

2004-03-01

Archived material is restricted to Rantburg regulars and members. If you need access email fred.pruitt=at=gmail.com with your nick to be added to the members list. There is no charge to join Rantburg as a member.

Posted by Steve White 2004-03-01 00:09|| || Front Page|| [2 views since 2007-05-07] Top

#1 oy--zarquari must be gaspin' for air--oh learned noble brother leaders of this holy jihad--SEND OXYGEN--I CAN'T BREATHE

Posted by SON OF TOLUI 2004-3-1 12:25:15 AM|| 2004-3-1 12:25:15 AM|| Front Page Top

#2 "the interim constitution charter will recognize Islam as a major source of legislation and ban any laws which violate the tenets of the Muslim faith".

No more marrying cows Omar. Or you Dad, your bitch, your buddies best friend. Thats all out!

Posted by Lucky 2004-3-1 12:50:59 AM|| 2004-3-1 12:50:59 AM|| Front Page Top

#3
I'm sorry Steve but I don't see 25% woman participation in the provisional legislature as being effective as a stop against the pernicious effects of radical Islam. Who know how these women will vote, (more importantly who will select them, even more importantly, who will be whispering in their ear?)

Likewise, this "Not in conflict with Islam," is more than troublesome. For me Democracy has never been a touchstone, ( often this is only a way-stop on the way to a Tyranny of the Majority).

No, Freedom of Conscience, Guaranteed Individual Liberty, the great Liberal gifts of the West's Enlightenment is what the War in Iraq should have been fought over, (not that silly WMD thingy), and these should be explicitly placed in the forefront of Iraqi Constitution.

They are, to me, non-negotiable. But people ask, "Well then, if people don't accept this, just how many people are you willing to kill to see it implemented?"

My general answer is...a lot...over the years, a hundred million or so. But am I really serious in this?

To avoid this distressing conclusion, I have been toying with the idea of targeted assassinations as a regrettable but maybe necessary means to get the world to where it needs to get to.

And yet, as I wrote a little while back elsewhere:

âFor months now the rise of Muqtada al-Sadr in Iraq has troubled me. He stands for everything I am opposed to....he may be the single largest obstacle to the reformation of Iraq into a form I would find acceptable.

But you see this in your mindâs eye, the ability to have him taken out...but should you? What comes after? What are the short and long term ramifications? This is not an easy question. And yet, the mind muses, What would Iran look like now if The Shah had killed Khamenei, in 1978?

Shakspere said it best:

Thus conscience does make cowards of us all;
And thus the native hue of resolution
Is sicklied oââer with the pale cast of thought,
And enterprises of great pith and moment
With this regard their currents turn awry,
And lose the name of action.

I confess when faced with this stark choice, not as a thought, not as a potentiality, but as an actuality...I also probably...âLose the name of action.â

And yet the idea remains appealing. I donât know. Iâm thinking, Iâm trying on new ideas like clothes, to see how they feel, to see how they fit, to see if they are any good. Because I actually see this as a conflict of irreconcilable Ideologies...I squirm, I wiggle, I am trying to find some acceptable solution."

So Iâm curious how Rantburgerâs would handle this Question. It you could have Sadr, maybe even Grand Ayatollah Ali al-Sistani , taken out, to be brutal...assassinated, Would you? Or would you, âLoose the name of action?â

There are smart people here....I am really curious over what you may have to say to this.

Best Wishes,

Traveller

Posted by Traveller 2004-3-1 1:52:23 AM|| 2004-3-1 1:52:23 AM|| Front Page Top

#4
In the long run, of course, it's a big mistake to put this Islamic nonsense in the Iraqi constitution. In the short run, though, this wording will sufficiently deflate the religious opposition to a national accord.

Our own Constitution had to permit slavery in order to be ratified by all the states. Later, though, we had to fight our Civil War.

Posted by Mike Sylwester 2004-3-1 8:37:56 AM|| 2004-3-1 8:37:56 AM|| Front Page Top

#5 Given that this war is supposedly aiming to the defeat of Islamofascism, this proposed provisions are a bit like having the post-War II German constitution enshrine Nazism as a major source for law.

When the *Turkish* constitution doesn't to my knowledge make a single reference to Islam, I don't see why the Iraqi constitution should make any such reference.

Traveller> I would arrest Sadr for all the crimes and intimidation his men have commited. Assasination? I wouldn't want to create such a precedent.

Posted by Aris Katsaris 2004-3-1 10:43:12 AM|| 2004-3-1 10:43:12 AM|| Front Page Top

#6 aris - surely youre not saying that islam = nazism?? Im all for seperation of mosque and state (and church and state, and synagogue and state) myself, but surely we can all understand that the Islamofascist goal of a renewed Khalifa involves far more than say making Sharia the source of say inheritance law for muslims(Sharia is the source of family law for muslims in Israel, for crying out loud)

Turkey managed Kemalism under different circumstances than Iraq, and it took decades of military rule to make it stick. The attempt to use force to secularize Iraq didnt give us Kemalism, it degenerated into Baathism (which didnt Kemalize the population, but alienated it). With the Baathist officer corps out to pasture, there is no institutional basis for a Kemalist authoritarian rule in Iraq. US forces would have to impose Kemalism - this would be a vast drain on resources, would probably fail, and would turn much of the rest of the Islamic world against us.

Shakespeare in Hamlet, was having Hamlet contemplate killing the murderer of his father, not establishing assasination as the means to rule Denmark. If you want to see the bards view of what happens when "Action" replaces "the pale cast of thought" you should look at Macbeth - or for that matter the entire cycle of history plays, when England spends the better part of a century paying for the sins of Henry Bolingbroke, that man of action.

We've probably got the best deal possible in Iraq with the above constitution.

More on this later.

Posted by liberalhawk 2004-3-1 11:06:26 AM|| 2004-3-1 11:06:26 AM|| Front Page Top

#7 Traveller, it is in the nature of liberty that you don't know in advance what's going to happen. No one can guarantee that the women will support their own needs rather than succumb to the well-worn path of being "led" by the men. Or the mullahs, may Allah send a billion fleas to bite their private parts.

Posted by mojo 2004-3-1 11:14:22 AM|| 2004-3-1 11:14:22 AM|| Front Page Top

#8

Hummmm....people are a little more rational on this than I thought. No Trigger pullers, at least within a political context...even given the Khamenei example of being assassinated in 1978, something akin to killing Hiter in 1938 in my mind, there are still no takers.

As to the Iraqi Constitution and a reference to Islamic law I suppose that we did leave the Emperor in place in Japan after WWII for good and sufficent reasons. However, I think that Aris's reference to the Turkish constitution is a good one. If there, why not Iraq?

Lastly, Liberalhawk, why down so much on Henry Bolingbroke, or Hennry the IV? I presume that you are not Lancasterian...lol. Hennry the IV did begat Hennry the V, the Hundred Years war in France, but also Agincourt and a lot of interesting English history.

Well, as people have noted, History and the future are wiggly sorts of things.

Posted by Traveller 2004-3-1 4:30:01 PM|| 2004-3-1 4:30:01 PM|| Front Page Top

#9 I seem to remember reading an interpretation of WS that said that WS saw the wars of the roses as englands punishment for Henry IV, who despite his abundant justification, still sinned by overthrowing and killing an anointed king - redemption comes only with Henry VII, who is reunites Lancaster and York, and is untainted by the original (political) sin (and who just happens to be grandad to Liz) WS cant help but glorify Henry V - Agincourt is too rich in English glory - but thats a brief respite in a century of disaster. Henry V begat Henry VI, whose regents lost Henry V's gains, and whose madness and weakness allowed the bloodshed of the Wars of the Roses, and the final tyranny of Richard III.

And it all began with an assasination (of Richard II)

Posted by liberalhawk 2004-3-1 4:39:30 PM|| 2004-3-1 4:39:30 PM|| Front Page Top

#10 Traveller, asassination is rarely a good method for creating civil society and promoting democratic reform. The Iraqi people seem to know that Al Sadr is a punk with an Iranian accent, but even if he was powerful their challenge is to confront what he represents not have us make the boogie man go away.

MLK, JFK and Malcom X are two examples of political asassination in the US. The result of MLK dying before he finished his work is that his movement got taken over by Jesse Jackson, LBJ perpetrated welfare enslavement of blacks, and we are saddles with pepetual race quotas that MLK didn't intend. Malcom X was killed leaving crooks like Louis Farakan to twist Pan-Africanism into a vehicle for his theft. JFK died and we are left with a mythology that makes John Kerry attractive to some voters.

I read Fred's fisking of Kerry's speech that you posted. As a son of an English teacher, I was struck by the simularity of his speech to a plot summary of the WOT. Kerry's case for how he would have done better can be summarized with the statement, "I would have been more of a unilateral multilateralist."

I guess I was looking to see whether his vision for the future agreed with mine. The message that I got from his speech is that he has a secret vision that will be revised as events unfold.

I think I have a non-secret vision that I am willing to throw on the table for debate purposes. For instance, I believe that the WOT should proceed by having a coalition force replace Syrian troops in Lebanon. There is no reason that the world community should allow Syria to occupy Lebanon perpetually, espcially if they intend to allow it to be a terrorist haven. The effort to replace the Syrian force would take the political will to suffer casualties in the interest of bringing the likelihood of peace in the Middle East.
While Middle East peace might not follow from booting Syria out of Lebanon, I cannot picture the middle East being peaceful with Hizbolah running amok in Lebanon. I wonder what Kerry would think of my idea. I bet if I asked him in a press briefing, I wouldn't get a definite answer.

Posted by Super Hose 2004-3-1 6:19:21 PM|| 2004-3-1 6:19:21 PM|| Front Page Top

#11 A couple of points:

As to Henry V, a really excellent book is Desmond Moris's The Hundred Years War. The dominent theme was that the wealth of Elizabethan England was actually built on plunder from France. It is an interesting thesis for which he offers a lot of support. It is a nice popular history read.

In reference to Super Hose, I also read Fred's Fisking of Kerry and commented that I thought it nicely done. You also correctly note an almost peculiar American adversion to assassination. The point is well taken and it is something that is built now pretty firmly in the American psyche.

I suppose that having done some sniper work long ago that my mind almost automatically tends toward this area of expertise of mine. Just a little niggle in my consciousness.

However, I cannot see the US unilaterally moving against Syria. Nor do I see in the foreseeable future any international concensus on Lebanon being freed of Syria. I recently saw a report that seems to indicate that Lebanon, at least along the coast, is moving forward reasonably well as a nation. I understand your impatience but as previously noted, this is probably a generational war if not longer, and therefore, historical patience may be a necessity.

Well, heck, while I am getting things off my chest, I will return to the point that the core problem with Islam is the crucial question of apostasy. The Koran is quite clear and specific as to this and there could be no reformation of Islam without resolving this essential question of Freedom of Conscience.

Without this question being forthrightly confronted and defeated, I fear that anything the West does is merely...pissing in the wind.

Be Good

Posted by Traveller 2004-3-1 6:51:15 PM|| 2004-3-1 6:51:15 PM|| Front Page Top

#12 Traveller, let me clarify. My belief is that sniping and asassination can be effective tools in causing chaos within an enemy society town or camp. The predator attack in Yemen was both effective and warrented. If our special forces could infiltrate Iran to pickoff an AQ clown, I would support that action as well. I just can't see too many asassinations that could be an effective part of "nation building."
Even killing Castro, Chavez or Mugabe would seem to be counter-productive. For instance, there seems to be some kind of societal malady underneath that keeps generating Aristides in Haiti.
As for Lebanon, I don't think there will be a surprise unilateral invasion. I expect that the spotlight will be focussed on the Syrian presence there. Kofi will then be given a chance to work out a solution. Assad will be encouraged to cleanout the camps or to turn control of the militant areas over to an international force. Nobody will volunteer for the force other than us.

Posted by Super Hose 2004-3-1 10:35:12 PM|| 2004-3-1 10:35:12 PM|| Front Page Top

#13 Well this has at least been an interesting and thoughtful thread. You seem to shy away from political assassination, as do I when I seriously think about it, as do most people.

Still, it is a question I did want to put out there. And yet, if anyone had a shot at Osama, I am sure that everyone would take it...lol

Be Good,

Traveller

Posted by Traveller 2004-3-1 11:14:54 PM|| 2004-3-1 11:14:54 PM|| Front Page Top

09:59 Evert Visser
09:31 Raptor
06:48 Shipman
00:13 SON OF TOLUI
00:02 SON OF TOLUI
23:58 SON OF TOLUI
23:51 SON OF TOLUI
23:42 Anonymous2U
23:14 Traveller
23:00 Mr. Davis
22:59 Super Hose
22:57 mrp
22:50 Raj
22:50 Super Hose
22:46 Super Hose
22:38 Super Hose
22:36 Noel
22:35 Super Hose
22:28 Noel
22:16 whitecollar redneck
22:15 GK
22:13 Laurence of the Rats
22:13 whitecollar redneck
22:13 Damn_Proud_American