I was reading this blog from July 21 by a woman from Iraq. It is heartbreaking and makes me sick to think of what we have done to her homeland when they did nothing to us. This is not the first Iraqi blog I have read where they are LONGING for the days of Saddam and that is very sad. I"ll post a link and some excerpts. I highly recommend reading things written by Iraqi's about Iraq. It tends to paint a very different picture than what the government and media are feeding us.
LinkÂ
 "We shall keep on waiting until the American occupation's nightmare is removed, and they go out of Iraq…
Then, the Iraqis will go back to the proverb: tomorrow will be better; we will unite our ranks and build our country with our own hands…..
Amen…."
"I don't know why sometimes an old Arabic proverb comes ringing into my mind: "If you know; it is a disaster, and if you don't know, then it is a greater disaster…..". I think it is said about a person who thinks he knows everything, then he discovers he was a fool, and what was hidden was much greater…
Perhaps this is how it is with most people who follow up the news of Iraq, especially the poor American people, surrounded as they are by a government and a media that follows it, repeating all the lies day and night to keep the American people ignorant about what is taking place in Iraq, while they are the No. 1 party involved in that war, as it is financed from the pockets of the tax-payers. They tell them- you are sacrificing for America, for the freedom of America, and the reputation of America… and the truth is- they are sacrificing for a bunch of thieves; the owners of capitalist companies, so their investments should grow and their bank balances should increase, and let the American people go to hell, just like the Iraqi people went to hell…..
"Yesterday, Bush said- America will not withdraw from Iraq as long as the security conditions have not improved … and that means he will not withdraw from Iraq. And we all know he doesn't want to withdraw in the first place…
The building of huge American military bases in Iraq, the building of a big American embassy, and keeping the Iraqi government, the Iraqi army and police force as weak structures; torn apart, battling and divided onto themselves; that is exactly what corresponds with Bush's wishes, and what justifies remaining in Iraq indefinitely…
So, let Iraq remain torn, divided onto itself, with a conflicting government and Parties, sectarian warring militias, then bring on words like- Sunnies, Shia'ats, Kurds, and Arabs for ignorant people from all sides to keep busy with, and you can say goodbye to something called- Iraq…
Forget something called Iraq… for it has turned into a heap of ruins in which live miserable, poor, and sick people, gnawed by hunger, ignorance, corruption, and darkness…
This is Bush's Iraq…
And if we got back to the days of Saddam Hussein's Iraq, we would have found them the days of prosperity and welfare, compared to what we see today."
Â
Â
recommend
Facebook
Twitter
bookmark 
print
Comments: 48
"The problem is that we don't even know if we'll ever see this stuff again. We don't know if whatever we leave, including the house, will be available when and if we come back. There are moments when the injustice of having to leave your country, simply because an imbecile got it into his head to invade it, is overwhelming. It is unfair that in order to survive and live normally, we have to leave our home and what remains of family and friends… And to what?"
"The power dose not show up in here at all but we see the Green Zone from here has power all the time, and we are just living across the bridge from them and we don't have power. Only just once a week, and sometimes twice a week so how are they going to fix a whole country while they can't fix a small problem like power but they can provide the power for the green zone 24/7?! Why is this happening to us? They are supposed to let us live, not to kill us inside our own houses with their heavy guns or by cutting the power off for the whole day, and they don't care if we lived or died!"
We have too much invested in Iraq in human life and in money to just pull out and leave the country in a mess. Thankfully, the Surge is working now that all the troops are in place. Now, if we get the political situation straightened out, and get a good oil revenue sharing bill, things should settle down. Money in the common man's pocket seems to do that quite well.
This is so sad, not funny, and sickening.
Clark and Newshound, it is getting so tiring how there is always some reason being shoved down our throats by a President who didn't even know there was a difference between Sunni and Shia right before he invaded Iraq! They have been totally clueless about Iraq, about what is happening on the ground and about what long term effects this war is really having. They still want a united Iraq, but the reality is that Kurdistan has been totally independent for a long time and will separate at the first possible chance. Get us out of there and let the Iraqi's do what they want with their country now that we have "liberated" them.
The only thing we secured was the oil ministry, not the yellow cake that had been under international security, not the huge weapons stash that must have taken 40 10-ton trucks to be hauled away by insurgents, not the history of the human race in the national museum. If we were truly concerned about WMD, why didn't we at least secure the ones we KNEW about? If we were truly trying to liberate the people, why didn't we provide security? Security is the most basic need after a government falls and we took down the government with no plan for security. We do not have noble reasons for being there no matter what you have been told.
No, Dale. It's so sickening that we are killing people out of greed.
Yes, that was the point at which I realized this whole thing was a scam. There is no way the Administration could have not known what would happen if they removed the entire security apparatus from a "police state", and failed to fill the void immediately. No one is that ignorant, who achieves high rank in our government. Those who say we must "stay the course" are ignoring the truth of that course. This was not a botched attempt at liberating Iraq. It was a successful attempt at destroying Iraq.
"It is hard to tell if we were totally ignorant, irresponsible and blind or if there was a sinister plot behind it . . . "
Well, not really. As you have pointed out, the results of removing "law and order" from a society, by eliminating the "police" structure, are quite predictable. The folks that planned the invasion are experts on such things, not novices. The vague image of these fellows slapping their foreheads at some point and saying; "Jeez, what were we thinking?. . . we forgot that without police of some sort, criminals will run wild!", is silly.
Not only is it absolutely impossible that they themselves could forget such a thing, they were repeatedly warned by military advisers that a much larger force was needed for just that reason. Though it is rather uncomfortable to accept, it is irrational to reject, that dozens of experienced and learned officials, many of whom could easily be university professors in courses dealing with such societal matters, could NOT have simply forgotten what police are for several months. That they could have forgotten such a basic reality WHILE planning the invasion and reformation of a country, is not even worth mentioning, let alone believing.
I do think they listened to Chalabi telling them it would all be thanks and flowers and everything would fall into place politically. They only listened to people telling them what they wanted to hear, so I"m sure it was easy to believe that it was true. Of course they only saw the best case scenario going in and now only see the worst case scenario when it is time to get out, which also makes you suspicious.
Just surrender and leave. Yea, then everything will automatically just work itself out.
That happens in real life all the time, doesn't it? LMAO.
Clark, your arguments are laughable.
We're already there. There is no bigger hole. All we can do now is keep as much of the peace as is possible until the Iraqi government can set up a decent political solution. Our military has done it's part, now the diplomats need to work out their side. That is the only way this is going to end decently. Otherwise, this will blow up into a civil war.
"Staying the course" meant we were only able to go into neighborhoods that the Iraqi parliament had OK'd us to go into. Of course, those were not the neighborhoods that had the worst problems. So killings went way up, while we were not allowed to intercede. That was the frustrating thing about the first three years.
Fortunately, with the al-Maliki government weakening, they were forced to allow us to go into almost every neighborhood in Baghdad and root out the terrorists, door-to-door. Dangerous work, but almost the only way you can clean out a neighborhood infested with miscreants.
By all accounts, the The Surge is exactly what we should have been doing all along. But sometimes the diplomatic solution won't allow that.
First............the people elected in the '06 midterms were mainly Moderates, and mainly Democrats. So far, they've given President Bush everything he's asked for, repeatedly. So that hasn't changed much.
In addition to that, the al-Maliki government has become weaker than ever. What that means is this : we can now go into Shi'a areas of the country and root out terrorists like never before. al-Maliki is now too weak to stop us. He had to accept our terms for The Surge, or risk alienating his benefactor. Now we're doing what we should have done from Day One, but were not allowed to do.
No one expected the insurgency that occurred. I'm not even sure the NSA or CIA had a contingency plan for such an improbable occurrence. So we didn't allow any of those things you mentioned, to happen. We just didn't see them coming. Who knew?
But, as things turned out . . . the fact that they were "already there" didn't really justify staying indefinitely, or secure Germany at all. It simply provoked all sorts of other people to fear and despise Germany, and launch endless waves of horrible assaults till Germany could no longer threaten the world with such arrogant "stay the course" propaganda driven policies of confrontation and occupation.
What???? A lot of people warned Bush that this would happen, he just chose not to listen.
"WASHINGTON - The Bush administration disregarded intelligence reports two months before the invasion of Iraq which warned that a war could unleash a violent insurgency and rising anti-US sentiment in the Middle East, it emerged yesterday.
The warning, delivered in two classified reports to the White House in January 2003, was prepared by the National Intelligence Council, the same advisory board that warned the Bush administration last month that the violence in Iraq could descend into a civil war.
A homegrown insurgency, Shari? Maybe Sunni vs. Shi'a sectarian violence, but not of this scale.
And even though Ansar-al Islami operated in Iraq long before the invasion, I doubt anyone saw them merging with the larger al-Qaeda movement. They had communications with one another, but it just wasn't likely for them to become the major player that they did. This is the organization that helped Abu Musab al-Zarqawi get into the country originally.
I think the Rumsfeld exit was planned before the elections. The war wasn't going well, and Rumsfeld knew it was time for him to go. The elections just seemed an opportune coincidence of timing.
When people don't feel safe (as no one did with all the looting that we were standing by watching because our troops only had orders to protect the oil ministry) they are drawn to any person or group that can help to protect them. This pushed people into their sectarian groups even when they weren't that closely tied before the invasion. As an occupying power, security was OUR RESPONSIBILITY and we did nothing. Our complete incompetence and arrogance created the mess and I don't see why we should believe an administration who has made the wrong decisions throughout this situation to make the right decisions now.
Cheney said in 1994 that taking out Saddam would cause a quagmire so no one can say HE didn't see it coming.
Not sure you realize this, but the Iraqi Oil Ministry took a hit during the bombing. It was looted like all the other government buildings. Another Left Wing fallacy.
Security was not our responsibility, Shari. How could 150,000 troops, trained to fight and kill, have possibly secured a nation of 25 million people? It just isn't possible.
I think I'd rather have Saddam gone, and no possible threats from Iraq in the future...........wouldn't you? Or would you rather have him back?
"Security was not our responsibility, Shari. How could 150,000 troops, trained to fight and kill, have possibly secured a nation of 25 million people? It just isn't possible.
Um, Mr. Brainiac, that's what Shari's article is telling you. If it isn't POSSIBLE to provide security with 150,000 troops, then Mr. Bush just destroyed a nation of 25 million people, and there was really no other outcome ever even POSSIBLE. So why in the hell would it be wise to keep supporting this man's savagery? He won't turn into Gandhi tomorrow, he will continue to be the man that thought nothing of leaving 25 million people at the mercy of whatever criminals wished to do to them.
April 16 2003, 4:26 PM
Since US forces rolled into central Baghdad a week ago, one of the sole public buildings untouched by looters has been Iraq's massive oil ministry, which is under round-the-clock surveillance by troops.
The imposing building in the Al-Mustarisiya quarter is guarded by around 50 US tanks which block every entrance, while sharpshooters are positioned on the roof and in the windows.
The curious onlooker is clearly unwelcome. Any motorist who drifts within a few metres of the main entrance is told to leave immediately.
Baghdad residents have complained that US troops should do more to protect against the looters, most of them Shi'ite Muslims repressed by Saddam Hussein's Sunni-dominated regime who live in the vast slum known as Saddam City on the northern outskirts.
But while museums, banks, hotels and libraries have been ransacked, the oil ministry remains secure.
The symbolism is loaded, considering how vehemently the United States and Britain denied war opponents' accusations that the campaign to oust Saddam was driven by oil lust.
"They came from the other side of the world. Do you believe they're going to do much for me? They've just come for the oil," fumed Salam Mohammad Hassan, a doctor who lives near the ministry.
Residents noted that the irrigation ministry, just next door, was torched.
US forces, who say they cannot prevent looting across the capital of five million, respond that they are not trying to seize Iraq's oil resources but preserve them.
"Anyone who says we're protecting this ministry to steal Iraqi oil doesn't know what's really going on in this country," US Captain Scott McDonald told AFP at the ministry gates.
The United States, he said, is only safeguarding Iraq's potential which would otherwise be considered game for looters.
"Oil belongs to the Iraqi people; it's their property. It must be protected because it'll go, indirectly, to build schools and hospitals," he said.
McDonald said a few looters had managed to sneak into the ministry-cum-fortress after US troops entered Baghdad. A few offices were robbed but nearly all files and archives remain intact, he said.
Coalition forces also say they control all of Iraq's oilfields.
Amnesty International has criticised the attention on controlling oilfields, which it said must have taken "much planning and resources."
"However, there is scarce evidence of similar levels of planning and allocation of resources for securing public and other institutions essential for the survival and well-being of the population," the London-based rights group said.
As for wanting Saddam back, I'm glad he's gone, but many Iraqi's are not. I think that is the point of my article. They are actually longing for the life they had before the invasion. We have destroyed their country and possibly killed more Iraqi civilians than Saddam. This war in only making more terrorists and feeding the hatred of the US that al-Qaeda wants.
The country wasn't ravaged by us. It was ravaged by its own people, John. We did the best we could to keep things civil, but the population was so ravaged by its own ruler that looting became the common man's way to 'strike back at the Man'. Nothing wrong with that after 35 years of subjugation.
Where did you get this article about the oil ministry? It looks suspect.
When the oil ministry was turned over by Paul Bremer to the Iraqi Interior Ministry in December of 2003, one of the wings of this huge building had to be pulled down and rebuilt because of damage from the initial invasion and the subsequent looting.
-----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
When I was in Kuwait, we were briefed on how much we were supposed to secure under international law, and it was only the Presidential Palace (which we never got near), and the airport. We were not supposed to secure the whole country. However, the only looters in Kuwait were the fleeing Iraqi army personnel. Kuwaitis had plenty of respect for their own country, so there was very little looting. I can't imagine a similar situation in Baghdad after the hell the ordinary Iraqi went through just to survive.
"We did the best we could to keep things civil"
Don't you even pay attention to your own comments?
"How could 150,000 troops, trained to fight and kill, have possibly secured a nation of 25 million people? It just isn't possible."
Do you not realize there are criminals in EVERY society. You can't let them run rampant by removing the police and then say "Hey, they are Iraqi criminals, so it's not our fault."
Would the same be true if the President ordered all police out of a major city in the US? Would it be cool to say "Hey, those were New York criminals, so the president is not responsible"??????
"Aside from the damage to the top floor from the air strike and from the
first day's looting, photos of the building show it to be intact and
well guarded.
* On Weds Apr 16, AFP's Beatriz Lecumberri's report from the Iraqi
capital is headlined: "The oil ministry is the most secure building
in ravaged Baghdad":
Since US forces rolled into central Baghdad a week ago, one of
the sole public buildings untouched by looters has been Iraq's
massive oil ministry, which is under round-the-clock surveillance
by troops."
Contrary to your obvious beliefs, I think we did a great thing. Deposing Saddam was exactly the enema the Middle East needed. Saddam was the flush-out material.
35 years of victimizing not only his own people, but his neighbors too, was enough. We're the only ones who could have done it, while the rest of the world sat by, apathetically.
We didn't know Saddam didn't have nukes on March 20, 2003, Shari. We only knew that Saddam was an a**hole, and he'd used gas on his own people.
Consider again, please;
"How could 150,000 troops, trained to fight and kill, have possibly secured a nation of 25 million people? It just isn't possible."
"We did the best we could to keep things civil"
Now, these two things cannot both be true. If 150,000 was obviously insuficient to maintain law and order, then we did not "do our best".
I understand that Mr. Husein was a bad person, but there is no reason to assume that makes Mr. Bush a good person, for attacking him. Sometimes, fights are not about good and bad. Sometimes they are about bad and bad.
OK, I considered it.
Both statements are mutually exclusive, John. They remain that way today.
We aren't there to secure the whole country. We never were. We were there to remove a dictator and install the best form of democratic government we could cobble together.
The point is, there is no reason to assume Mr. Bush is not bad. He has done something which was virtually guaranteed to wreak havoc on millions of people. Reciting "We this" and "We that" changes nothing.
You assume he is good, which leads one to wonder if you are not yourself sociopathic, and unable to grasp the suffering of others. To you, a meandering rationalization makes millions of people living and dying in misery needlessly, OK. How unfortunate for you. It does explain your many odd takes on things, and your unwavering cries for blood.
There is plenty of reason to believe that Mr. Bush had the right aim, just the wrong plan (or the wrong implementer in place) when we went into Iraq. Turns out that we should have been doing The Surge the whole time in Iraq - with a major concentration on Baghdad.
I know you hate it when I use "we". Bummer. I guess you just get into that habit when I talk about my military brothers. We stick together, even when our tour is up.