Can we trust them?

[jdbjdb]

With these new Iraqi police officers and soldiers we are training, what steps are being taken to make sure they don't screw us? I just seen on the news that some Iraqi police have been involved in attacks on the coalition.

[Argyll]

Now this is a good topic for a change!!
I've also questioned this on other threads,the short answer is NO!!
I'm willing to bet that there are way too many ex Iraqi Secret Police that are gathering Intel within the regular Police Units.The fact the head of the Iraqi Police prior to the Op is still in there is a worry on its own!.
It was impossible for a 100% vetting system to be 100% accurate!

[SOG]

wonder if they could give em some sort of lie detector test? some people could beat it but generally it would work good. this whole thing is just a mess, maybe with the help of ex mil payed police and new police theyll be given something else to vent on. through in some iraqi on iraqi related attacks and you just might get the iraqis hunting down saddam remnants.

i figure, give enough iraqis dangerous police jobs, have em run around half trained, a bunch of iraqi police get taken out by a rocket or bomb multiple times, now there is a viable threat to hard working rebuilding iraqis, which in turn means saddams not gone, which in turn means we still need to be there.

were doing this right now cept with our boys. throw in the locals and you gain thier attitude against a common enemy and less animosity on "invading infadels" which they have been preached and warned to about for decades.

sure you get more risks involving iraqis in anything you do, but including them, giving them work, bettering thier opinion of you on a daily basis, eventually youll get a chain reaction opinion, eventually everything will be back to normal. this is a good and important step to social control and opinion and assimilation.[/img][/list]

[Argyll]

this is a good and important step to social control and opinion and assimilation.


Whoa there SOG,this is mot the BORG here!!,where "resistance is futile"

We do not want to assimilate the Iraqi people,I thought the war was about giving THEM back THEIR country,and allowing THEM to have a DEMOCRATIC society,we cannot force something on them,they have to be willing to accept changes,and for may who have lived through 40 years of the regime,they know nothing better,and a democratic ,and free society is a long way of for those who simply do not understand!

The future of Iraq lies in it's Youth,if these youths do not want to change then it will be increasingly more difficult for the people of Iraq to be free,right now they are not free,they are still under occupation,where the Coalition are cracking down on insurgents and the likes,there are curfews in place,and for sure there are signs of hope,but there are also signs that there are those who simply will not accept this!.
What can you do?It must be up to the Iraqi's to makes these changes,and not upto the West to Force them to change!.IMHO there has been a serious missjudgement made by the powers that be within the US/UK,of the level of resistance and the audacity and tenacity of these attacks,the General public were led to believe that the Iraqi people would welcome the Coalition with open arms and that as soon as the regime was no longer in control then the Iraqi people would be celebrating their new found Freedom,and that there would be Peace and Stability and Harmony within the country.........sadly this is not the case,yes there have been great strides forward,but there have been disasters along the way,and there will be many many more!

[Herrmannek]

With these new Iraqi police officers and soldiers we are training, what steps are being taken to make sure they don't screw us? I just seen on the news that some Iraqi police have been involved in attacks on the coalition.

It's better to have them registered and in one place for easier control. I'm almost sure that most of them are from old guard. You can easier infilitrate police than civiils because they must cooperate with coalition-forces and can't avoid such contact. So my opinion: Don't trust them, watch them carefully and then they will lead us to civil part of opfors.

[aeternum]

this is a good and important step to social control and opinion and assimilation.


We do not want to assimilate the Iraqi people,I thought the war was about giving THEM back THEIR country,and allowing THEM to have a DEMOCRATIC society,we cannot force something on them,they have to be willing to accept changes,and for may who have lived through 40 years of the regime,they know nothing better,and a democratic ,and free society is a long way of for those who simply do not understand!


You already force them to live like you do. Who says they want to live in a democracy? Maybe the want to have a king, or maybe they want to live in a islamic republic like Iran? Or maybe they want socialism, or communism in Iraq.

Just because you live in a democracy doesnt mean the Iraqi have to too.

The US attacked Iraq, conquered it and occupied it... and IS in deed forceing the Iraqi to live the way the US wants.... Sorry thats not freedom at all...


aet

[Herrmannek]

You already force them to live like you do. Who says they want to live in a democracy? Maybe the want to have a king, or maybe they want to live in a islamic republic like Iran? Or maybe they want socialism, or communism in Iraq.


**** what they want. They will live in peace and wealth, they wont that or not..:)

[aeternum]

f*** what they want.

That pretty much sums it up. The US will decide what is "good" for the Iraqi or better what is good for the US (US security and political interests), what does fit into the US-agenda most. But it is not about giving the Iraqi "freedom" whatsoever. Freedom would be giving the Iraqi a choice, but they dont have one....

[Argyll]

Aeternum wrote

You already force them to live like you do. Who says they want to live in a democracy? Maybe the want to have a king, or maybe they want to live in a islamic republic like Iran? Or maybe they want socialism, or communism in Iraq.

Just because you live in a democracy doesnt mean the Iraqi have to too.



Who is You?Me or the West?That would be the Same West that you belong to,or do you live somewhere else?

But there's one thing I agree with you here is that nobody seems to have asked the Iraqi people what they want,which is very ironic!

[Herrmannek]

But there's one thing I agree with you here is that nobody seems to have asked the Iraqi people what they want,which is very ironic!

It is easy to say ask them. Who you wanna ask? People living there don't know what they want beacuse they don't know how it is "out there". It's like asking blind what collor he likes most, when only "color" he can see is black. They will not know what they want, until they taste something then they should be asked if it suits them not before.

[Argyll]

I agree hermannek,
But assumptions are the mother of all fu*k ups!!
Did the Coalition just assume that the Iraqi's wanted to be free,and have a Democratic society?

[Herrmannek]

I agree hermannek,
But assumptions are the mother of all fu*k ups!!
Did the Coalition just assume that the Iraqi's wanted to be free,and have a Democratic society?
We must differanetiate two things freeing Iraqis and building new country organisation.
If you would make poll asking Iraqis if they wan't to get ride of Saddam, esspecialy you show them atrocities he made to their families and countryman, they would choose yes, other question is used method, but war was only fast, sure and simply practical solution for external coalition forces. Another thing is organising country without Saddam. Way we do that is implicated by used freeing method, we left political vacum by removing Saddam, and we must to fill that hole quickly to avoid further detruction. Yes we made in good intentions assumption based on our own experience, that democracy is best for that rolle, but we can't say that this educated guess is wrong esspecialy it isn't working there yet.

[Argyll]

From the past history of Iraq,you will never get the 3 factions to sit down in peace!
Give the Kurds something they have been wanting for years......an Independant state,and see the Turks squirm!!.
I'll give it less than 5 years when this will happen,tearing the already fragile Country apart again!Democracy will come at a cost,like everything in life there's no such thing as a free meal!!

[Herrmannek]

I'll give it less than 5 years when this will happen,tearing the already fragile Country apart again!
Optimist. We will sit there for next 20 or even more years :).

[aeternum]

Who is You?Me or the West?That would be the Same West that you belong to,or do you live somewhere else?


Wedo not want to assimilate the Iraqi people...

You talked about "WE" and i talked about "YOU" :)


But there's one thing I agree with you here is that nobody seems to have asked the Iraqi people what they want,which is very ironic!

The question is, will the US accept the whises of the majority in a vote? I mean you dont have to be a genius to see, that a 60% shiite majority will shape the future of Iraq if they get elected in a vote. But will the US risk the creation of an islamic state? I dont think so. So actually the Iraqi dont have a real choice. The US Administartion just likes to show how good they are for everyone... look we gave the Iraqi freedom... but thats not real freedom.. its only a freedom along US wishes and interests...

[Argyll]

A yes I see what you're pointing at,Iwas refering to the part of SOG's quote about assimilation!!

A valid point about acceptance of the vote ,indeed that will be interesting! :D

hermannek wrote

Optimist. We will sit there for next 20 or even more years

I was refering to the Kurds decalring independance!! ;)

[Haiw]

they're gonna get democracy, whether the majority wants it or not...

[Argyll]

Then it's not called democracy then is it?

[Haiw]

hehe, i know, its pretty trivial :D
but that's just the way things are now...just look at the country:
up to the north there's the kurds..... they want an own state Kurdistan, which is a problem since big parts of Kurdistan are in other countries...
then there's the Shi'ites (am i correct here, i mean the really religious muslims) to the south, that really want a muslim state...which is a problem since there's no way the US are gonna want and / or allow that...
then there's the 'sunni' triangle, which is kind of a big question mark to me since theres still quite some Saddam supporters around there...now what they would want if it aint gonna be Saddam I don't know, but it could democracy, a muslim state, a king or whatsoever...

come to think of it, what's really wrong with a king? I mean, what's the Iraqi opinion on that, especially since they had a king before Saddam showed up.
but anyway, I think the way things are going now it's kind of a mess, and I think some serious research should be put into the question whether the Iraqi's really want a western-like democracy? I mean, the Iraqi's are supposed to become in power of their country now, but what if we force them to shape their country in a way they don't want to? It's really asking for troubles if you ask me.
Anyway, a democracy that's forced upon people of which the majority don't want it is like...errm..for the lack of a better description, politically raping em.

[Argyll]

There seems to have been a severe lack of research done with the way the internal politics of Iraq will run,for starters IF and a big IF,the Iraqi democratically elected government ,wants to put a levy on oil exports,you think the US/UK will go along with that decision?
Who will decide with whom the Iraqi's will be allowed to deal with on an economic basis?,the Iraqi Government will be a puppet government,as the Coalition have way to much vested interests in that country to allow it to "overstep" it 's mark!!

For the Brits here,isn't it really really strange the that tosspot Blair wants to see a democracy in Iraq,and see an democratically elected Government,and is willing to send our troops into harms way,and to remove a brutal dictator,yet he sits on his arse over the **** that's going on in Zimbabwe?,where there are more British subjects at risk than there ever was in Iraq!!

[Loco]

brrrr...It´s sucha a mess...There isn´t any other possibility than training a full security iraki force, sooner than later. In the meanwhile, it´s necessary taking seriously the duty of giving electric power to cities, and a good water supply, because today is worst than the days before of the beginning of the war, and it´s a fault of the coalition that still 7 months after the "end" of the war irakíes are living worst than 10 months ago, and I think this matters are forgotten. Many irakies citizens who were afraid with Saddam, at least they weren´t afraid when they went to work at their jobs, they weren´t assaulted by robbers with Ak, and today every hour many pacific irakies are assaulted by others bandits, not terrorists. The pacific citizens are the ones who can rule Irak, but if they don´t have the resources to do it they won´t be willing to help the coalition.

[SOG]

this is a good and important step to social control and opinion and assimilation.


Whoa there SOG,this is mot the BORG here!!,where "resistance is futile"



well certain aspects have to be fully controlled and then destructed. we have to precisely control the iraqis opinions about us, and deconstruct the decades of hate toward us. this was pretty obvious when we said we just go in and boot saddam an split, then we said wed be there for months, now years. it was pretty obvious from the get go this cant be done quickly. if you look at the philipines or hawaii and how those places were taken over and the locals dealt with we have a good resume on what to do and not to do for iraq.

i dont mean to make it sound bad per say, i think the advantages of a US influenced, uber trade relation iraq right plop in the middle east is great. theres tons of little piss countries that are fine with the US in the middle east but its nice to score a bigger influence that had such a negative military impact on the whole mid east image and turn it into a giant purring pussy hopefully.

but basically what we are doing is wholly destroying certain aspects of thier history and society to get what we want.

and as some of you have stated about wether we should care what they want etc, sometimes you just gotta pull them out kicking and screaming. i think if we plunge them into a materialistic free corporate run society then yeah, i think there lives will be mildly better than before in many areas.

i think if you look at the advantages of no more warring with iran, a full US backing, eventually a stable economy, no more worrying about what comes out of iraq, newfound freedoms, and full bllown trade relations with everyone, iraq will be substantially better than before, but it all hinges on making it happen.[/list]

[Argyll]

Yeah but SOG you cannot force people to change,that is not a democratic process,if the West Forces this upon the Iraqi people then that makes us no better than the regime we replaced!.
You simply cannot destroy a culture and history without there being severe consequences!
Hitler tried this,and look what happend to him,are we,the West, trying to do the same as what the Nazi's tried to do in Europe and Russia in the 40's?

[Haiw]

well certain aspects have to be fully controlled and then destructed. we have to precisely control the iraqis opinions about us, and deconstruct the decades of hate toward us.
Okay, but where does the line fall between hearts & minds and 1984? Because trying to influence their opinions by helping em etc. etc. is good, but controlling their opinions? Kind of makes me think of controlling the papers, forcing them to think what you want them to think....now how much does that differentiate from the way Saddam got them to think badly about the US? I mean, isnt the joy of opinions that they're you're own? When you start to literally try to 'control' their opinions...well..then where does it end?


this was pretty obvious when we said we just go in and boot saddam an split, then we said wed be there for months, now years. it was pretty obvious from the get go this cant be done quickly.
Okay, we all pretty much agree that it's gonna be a long one....but what one of the big questions is right now is 'How is iraq gonna have to look and be governed at the end of that long haul'?
Because right now it seems pretty much like the whole 'giving back Iraq to the people' is gonna end up mostly like what the US defines as what's best for their interest, and it kinda feels like the peoples interest is being lost.. I mean, just think of it; if the Iraqi's get a democracy, and the democratic government isn't all that pro-US..what then? Or, let's just say the people want a king, and even get it...what if that king is anti-US? Or how about the whole Islamic state thingie? I don't think a certain guy living in some white place is really gonna aprove of that...
And then of course there's still the Kurds that to my knowledge can't be arsed to give a damn about a new Iraq and just want their own Kurdistan...


if you look at the philipines or hawaii and how those places were taken over and the locals dealt with we have a good resume on what to do and not to do for iraq.
'the locals dealt with'....but how many locals are you willing to deal with? What if at a certain moment you're trying to bring something to some people under the flag of 'their sake' when they don't even want it? It's almost like forcing the Amish to start getting internet! Besides, the Philipines and Hawaii aren't anywhere near as complicated as Iraq I'm afraid...


i dont mean to make it sound bad per say, i think the advantages of a US influenced, uber trade relation iraq right plop in the middle east is great.
Great...yea....for who? I mean, what's really gonna change for the average poor farmer Joe out in the desert?


theres tons of little piss countries that are fine with the US in the middle east but its nice to score a bigger influence that had such a negative military impact on the whole mid east image and turn it into a giant purring pussy hopefully.
Which kind of brings us back to a the tiny little problem we still have; the US still says it's gonna bring freedom to the people, and finally give them what they want....but what if what they want is not what the US want?
Shall they be 'liberated' into democracy against their will?


but basically what we are doing is wholly destroying certain aspects of thier history and society to get what we want.
'certain aspects of their history and society'..have you thought of the fact that not all reasons of the people standing up to americans can be related to Saddam's influence? The Iraqi history goes back before that....besides...how far are you willing to go in breaking down their culture 'for their own good'?


and as some of you have stated about wether we should care what they want etc, sometimes you just gotta pull them out kicking and screaming. i think if we plunge them into a materialistic free corporate run society then yeah, i think there lives will be mildly better than before in many areas.

i think if you look at the advantages of no more warring with iran, a full US backing, eventually a stable economy, no more worrying about what comes out of iraq, newfound freedoms, and full bllown trade relations with everyone, iraq will be substantially better than before, but it all hinges on making it happen.
Again...better than before for who? You should know that not all people suffered under Saddam, and a lot of people had pretty normal lives without much trouble..Now for the whole economics thing; I think this topic shouldn't be about the economics side but the 'how the country is governed' side... A countries economics shouldn't really be influenced by whether a country has a democracy, a king or even a dictature for that matter, as corporations and such only care about the money...If you ask me, when the Iraqi's would decide for, for example, an anti-US king, and that guy would come to power, the country could still have pretty good economics, for example by trading to any / all of the other 200-something countries in the world...

[Seiyuuki]

The difficult nature of politics is that you can't simply conform to just the majoritarian publics...There are many "publics" with differing opinions, the three most prominent in Iraq being the Shi'ite, Sunnis and the Kurds. What work for one might not work for another, you can let the Iraqis have a system like Iran, but that would probably only please the Shi'ite, not the other two. You can let them have a King, royal family, etc. like Saudi Arabia, but that might only bode well with the Sunnis and not the Shi'ite, vice versa...

You can't please them all and if you try to please them all, you'll just end up making all of them displease...or so it seem most of the time.

[California Joe]

I think it boils down to best interest. We prop up a corrupt regime like the Saudi Royals because it's in our national interest to do so. They play ball when we need them to. If they were overthrown, Osama would be essentially running that country. Democracy in Iraq is a pipe dream. It would be grand if it was a perfect world and all but it isn't. I think the Shiites are going along right now because 5 seconds after we leave they will take over the existing government and infrastructure that we create, pound the Sunnis and create another Iran. Clan loyalties and old grievances and feuds die hard in that country and revenge will be taken when we leave...

[aeternum]

I think the Shiites are going along right now because 5 seconds after we leave they will take over the existing government and infrastructure...

Thats exactly what i think. It also explains pretty much why there is not much violence down in the South where the Shiites live. They just dont want to start trouble and piss the US off, because they do know they have 60% of the Iraqi population and if some kind of voteing is going to happen, they have a good chance to get in power, leagally.

[California Joe]

Legally or not. We will spend huge amounts of money to create a working country and government. The infrastructure will be there. Take it over and reap the benefits of American tax dollars.

[SOG]

Yeah but SOG you cannot force people to change,that is not a democratic process,if the West Forces this upon the Iraqi people then that makes us no better than the regime we replaced!.
You simply cannot destroy a culture and history without there being severe consequences!
Hitler tried this,and look what happend to him,are we,the West, trying to do the same as what the Nazi's tried to do in Europe and Russia in the 40's?

yes you can force people to change, you can force anyone to do anything given time and pressure. this is obvious from public opinion to business practices to poltical conditions to base torture methods. you can force change without them even realizing theyve changed. and yes it is a very undemocratic process and in some ways we are no better then the previous regime, but on the upside id have to say we are half better and in the future will be much better. of course its easy to jest what has been done and so far accomplished since people are entertainment and result on demand hoors and demand everything to happen right away. but for the current plan to work it will take time. time is needed to make the iraqis fall in with our views and basically become complacent. i never said i liked it, but its obviously whats being done.





You simply cannot destroy a culture and history without there being severe consequences!


by destroying i meant the end of a past. how it is destroyed is what your reffering to. you are reffering to a forcfull takeover and killings in europe, when i am simply referring to the replacement of ones past and culture with a new and exciting or different one and not being allowed to take up your old practices. and hell no, its not democratic. installing a new government, police, policies foreign and domestic, running the business etc, youll never get the peoples full trust that way, but you can obtain after a while a sort of complacent livable peace. like i said the iraqis have been hardened against westerners for decades, give em five years of us running around thier country and theyll get used to us. like others have said, the iraqi people didnt overly hate saddam after a while, even as blatantly criminal as he was they grew toloerate him because of the FORCE and PRESSURE he applied to them over time. same thing with us. id say were a bit nicer on the outside and a bit more underhanded on the inside. then again thats the whole western capitalism ideal. look suave on the outside and shake and bake on the inside.

[Argyll]

You see this is where the problem is,we have no right whatsoever to do this on the Iraqi people!!
This has fu*k all to do with IRAQI FREEDOM whatsover,and that is why this whole thing now stinks of ****!!
I was 100% behind the reasons stated by our Leaders,as they led the public to believe differently,but now my support for the war has waned ,as the smell of Subversion,and Political ****e has seen the reasons for the war change faster than a babies nappy.
How would we feel if this was happening to us?This is a Bull**** Democracy,and I feel sorry for the majority of the Iraqi people.

this will be the same ways in which the Israel /Palestinian will never be at peace,because neither wants to be dictated to!

[Haiw]

yes you can force people to change, you can force anyone to do anything given time and pressure.
Yes but the whole point of OIF was kind of to finally let the people be and think how they WANT, this kind of assimilation is simply a modern day of conquest which makes the US forces reek a helluva lot like an occupation force and I believe that was pretty much what everyone wanted to avoid?


this is obvious from public opinion to business practices to poltical conditions to base torture methods. you can force change without them even realizing theyve changed.
The problem is people aren't that stupid...And there's bound to be people who resist anyway....but whether people even realize and our resist is only secondary; what really matters is that this kind of assimilation is not what this should all be about! It's supposed to be about freedom...this way you basically say 'you have the freedom to become how we want you to become'. I'd say George Orwell if he were still alive could have writen a nice little novel about it with an opressed animal farm that gets 'liberated'


and yes it is a very undemocratic process and in some ways we are no better then the previous regime, but on the upside id have to say we are half better and in the future will be much better.
Half better just won't cut it when you want to make it seem like you're the allmigthy saviour... besides, I'd say it's quite debatable whether all people think you're even just 'half better'... And about the future...the only way this kind of policy would lead to 'being better in the future' would be to have a nice obedient young youth that's willing to accept their 'liberation into forced democracy' since it's all they've ever known.....just like most of the young youth now have never known anything else than Saddam..


of course its easy to jest what has been done and so far accomplished since people are entertainment and result on demand hoors and demand everything to happen right away. but for the current plan to work it will take time. time is needed to make the iraqis fall in with our views and basically become complacent. i never said i liked it, but its obviously whats being done.
Again....it's like we're talking about some fat recruits that have to PT their asses untill oblivion to make the DI happy...that's not the case... And, even if you have all best intentions, when you start doing things against the peoples will people tend to resist...get angry...get pissed.... If a lotta people get that way they get organised...If they get organised...you're gonna get trouble.



You simply cannot destroy a culture and history without there being severe consequences!
by destroying i meant the end of a past. how it is destroyed is what your reffering to. you are reffering to a forcfull takeover and killings in europe, when i am simply referring to the replacement of ones past and culture with a new and exciting or different one and not being allowed to take up your old practices. and hell no, its not democratic. installing a new government, police, policies foreign and domestic, running the business etc, youll never get the peoples full trust that way, but you can obtain after a while a sort of complacent livable peace. like i said the iraqis have been hardened against westerners for decades, give em five years of us running around thier country and theyll get used to us. like others have said, the iraqi people didnt overly hate saddam after a while, even as blatantly criminal as he was they grew toloerate him because of the FORCE and PRESSURE he applied to them over time. same thing with us. id say were a bit nicer on the outside and a bit more underhanded on the inside. then again thats the whole western capitalism ideal. look suave on the outside and shake and bake on the inside.[/quote]
Sigh...again it's like the Iraqi people are just some sloppy recruits walking out of line... the whole point is that, even although it's called Operation Iraqi Freedom, it sometimes appears like it's more about reshaping Iraq into a more 'comfortable' shape for the US, and not into the way the people want it.

[SOG]

Okay, but where does the line fall between hearts & minds and 1984? Because trying to influence their opinions by helping em etc. etc. is good, but controlling their opinions? Kind of makes me think of controlling the papers, forcing them to think what you want them to think....now how much does that differentiate from the way Saddam got them to think badly about the US? I mean, isnt the joy of opinions that they're you're own? When you start to literally try to 'control' their opinions...well..then where does it end?

its not so much forcing them as exposing them to something they didnt have before and having them intoxicate themselves with it. any society, i dont care which, once exposed to such a drastic level in change of freedoms, and later on, provisions and import influence will change themselves and thier opinions and thus will bring them inline more with what we do and believe.

one of the major problems in the middle east that concerns us westerners is a near medieval thought process where everything is controlled from media, to what you read, to what you do in some cases. by cracking open such a hard core middle east country and freeing it in some ways you also open the box for that one country to show off what they have now and influence other countries. sow a seed and all that **** with the ultimate propellant being the quest for material goods. before all of these indulgences were somewhat limited in iraq with only certain ways to gain riches basically by going through saddam. now with tons of american backed companies and product in iraq that whole power channel of wealth and the distribution of it will open a bit more allowing more of a middle class type society and less of that middle east bull****, where the princes and kings own all, and the majority of the rest is **** poor.



Okay, we all pretty much agree that it's gonna be a long one....but what one of the big questions is right now is 'How is iraq gonna have to look and be governed at the end of that long haul'?
Because right now it seems pretty much like the whole 'giving back Iraq to the people' is gonna end up mostly like what the US defines as what's best for their interest, and it kinda feels like the peoples interest is being lost.. I mean, just think of it; if the Iraqi's get a democracy, and the democratic government isn't all that pro-US..what then? Or, let's just say the people want a king, and even get it...what if that king is anti-US? Or how about the whole Islamic state thingie? I don't think a certain guy living in some white place is really gonna aprove of that...
And then of course there's still the Kurds that to my knowledge can't be arsed to give a damn about a new Iraq and just want their own Kurdistan...

well the new iraq will somewhat be a democracy in the half assed sense that the US is a democracy. it is at some levels but special interests and greed, corruption etc will always take half your democracy away. so in some sense the iraqi's will be able to vote and ****, say what they want in public, you know, the **** we take for granted. but since there are special interests in financial returns from iraq then those interests will govern major policy and in a sense anyone iraq votes to any substantial head of power will always be on some sort of leash to the US and behind that the huge companies who have backed the iraqi attacki and moved in with thier business. so the worst thing that could happen is that iraq in the end could become like a small time US. some see that as a travesty after looking to the many corruptions etc that happen here daily.

as for the kurds and them wanting thier own place that will have to be negotiated most likely between the new iraqi government witht he US as a referee, by force if needed. or the kurds may just want to hang out and be left alone and we as the US can make sure they are left alone. if they really want to form thier own piss ant government then that may lead to some rough seas. in the end the whole kurd thing will be so small it will probably escape almost everyones radar thanks to the news media.


'the locals dealt with'....but how many locals are you willing to deal with? What if at a certain moment you're trying to bring something to some people under the flag of 'their sake' when they don't even want it? It's almost like forcing the Amish to start getting internet! Besides, the Philipines and Hawaii aren't anywhere near as complicated as Iraq I'm afraid...

for the philipines im referring to early 1900's, not post ww2. when we went in initially and they didnt want us there we butchered many of them. it was semi short and brutal. when ww2 came along long after we had left our influence on them and the japanese invaded and slaughtered philipinos on several islands, we came and slapped the japs and the philipinos loved us. so its interesting at how things can change simply in a couple generational families and how that will set in the future. if youve noticed recently weve been doing some work in the phils concerning terrorists and anti american sentiment. were trying to cut short the attitude of kidnappings for money like in south america and also fix relations with the base public there. hawaii wasnt nearly as complicated as iraq but it can also be seen as how we invaded a island, killed some at 1st, but then integrated ourselves quickly. unlike with the native indians in mainland america who we killed and corraled. so if you look at some of the instances of when this happens we do make some sort of progress and i think in iraq with the "world" watching you will see some pretty slick maneuvering.



Great...yea....for who? I mean, what's really gonna change for the average poor farmer Joe out in the desert?

maybe some US aid and a bigger more free market place in town. i know saddam didnt control the people that hard core but theres now a chance to branch out industry wise, and not be afraid of corrupt soldiers or police hurting or stopping you. one of the things that made saddams rule quantify in villainy is that at the base level the soldiers and police could be "mini" saddams or criminals and there was very little you could do if the local head was in on it. this made for almost a organized mob rule mentality. so now even at the that lowly level of policemen you will have the world watching and also the US watching for any signs of corruption on this level. if any of this petty mob **** starts again then that will reflect poorly on the US and the installed administration that we went in and basically didnt change anything. we have to watch out for this as this is at the public root and can effect the majoritys opinion here and in iraq with blown out stories etc.



Which kind of brings us back to a the tiny little problem we still have; the US still says it's gonna bring freedom to the people, and finally give them what they want....but what if what they want is not what the US want? Shall they be 'liberated' into democracy against their will?

that all comes into line with modernization. if you replaced half of these dopes guns with a **** $50 pc five years old and gave em a copy of starcraft theyd shut the hell up to put it bluntly. basically what you want to do is open the flood gates of materialism on such a level it consumes them. it doesnt matter if you dont like it, if your busy doing something else, youll notice what you dont like alot less. now im not saying the average iraqi has the means to go "material girl" overnight, but opening the flood gates for instance on the internet, and the information overload, coupled with US forces still tooling around, coupled with new jobs and construction, coupled with all the negatives of the old regime gone, coupled with the new generation of iraqi teens, adaults and kids, who dont like the old ways, the new iraq is going to have some fun stuff to focus on. in the end it comes down to, sure you can cry or bitch about US special interests and the hand up the ass regime they installed, or you can worry about your kid getting std's or being on drugs, or what to make for dinner, or when you can buy a play station, or how to deck out your 80's american car in chrome wheels. its a priority shift, a softening of tradition, a refocus on what matters, getting laid at a rave. if they dont like it then the corporate hoors can cook up something to keep em busy or we can pull out certain influences, let the government revert to a corrupt south american styling, then we can say "see, this is what happened when we left, or if you let non hacks do it themsleves, they dont know what they want".



'certain aspects of their history and society'..have you thought of the fact that not all reasons of the people standing up to americans can be related to Saddam's influence? The Iraqi history goes back before that....besides...how far are you willing to go in breaking down their culture 'for their own good'?

exactly. thats what i pointed out. you simply assumed that i was talking about saddam. saddam is a sad part of thier history but not thier culture. im talking about thier lack of ****, material greed, exposure to western everything. basically if you get everyone on par with you on some level then that simply self destructs traditions and past society. wether or not its for thier own good i cannot say. i can see both positives and negatives to our society so i can see both positives and negatives to theirs. ever hear your boss say, you dont have to like it, you just have to do it? there could be a end goal that is decent.

what they want, is VERY subjective. thats like asking a brainwashed post saddam traumatized kid who has had zero experience with poltical doings, world affairs, any other countries etc, how to run the world or what the world should be like. its ridiculous to give that choice to a uneducated society. on the same level i think its rip roaring stupid to have americans vote on things they dont research, know, have heard of, or have never talked about. so regardless of what they want, are you actually proposing people who cant read, people who have never voted, people who were cornered and beat by a regime, people who still certainly have thier past clear as day in their minds be allowed to simply scoop up all power and have the knowledge, backing and control to make a utopia which they find tolerable? odds are it wont happen and history will repeat itself like it has across the globe in similar situation of revolt and rebelion.



Again...better than before for who? You should know that not all people suffered under Saddam, and a lot of people had pretty normal lives without much trouble..Now for the whole economics thing; I think this topic shouldn't be about the economics side but the 'how the country is governed' side... A countries economics shouldn't really be influenced by whether a country has a democracy, a king or even a dictature for that matter, as corporations and such only care about the money...If you ask me, when the Iraqi's would decide for, for example, an anti-US king, and that guy would come to power, the country could still have pretty good economics, for example by trading to any / all of the other 200-something countries in the world...

if you consider normal dealing with police who can take anything they want, if you consider normal being carried away in the middle of the night for voicing a opinion the day before, if you consider normal not being able to voice your opnion about a regime thats beena round forever killing, supressing, getting you into stupid wars with iran and kuwait, constant guerilla warring with kurs, i mean sure, like i said before, you can force anyone to change given time and pressure. you saying thats normal is somewhat underhanded in how it came to be the norm. if you rape someone every day for five years sure, it becomes routine, or the norm. and sure, saddam didnt wholly effect some people who simply did a job, went home, got skunked and slept. i mean theres people in our society you could rule with a iron fist and they wouldnt care because they are so regimented. those people will simply have something they didnt have before. but odds are removing saddam will in the future, let you say or do something you couldnt before and its literally up to the new generations to run with it.

saying a country shouldnt be affected by how its ruled is just....ugh... sure, i mean look at the middle east, look at how its ruled, look at all the kings and the way they distribute the wealth. they have tons of money and the people dont. its funny your suggesting, let them be and decide what they want. well whats the one thing theyve ever known? so of course what will they make? and remake. and make again.

if you look at the many broken countries off russia who bitched and whined about being forced into one motherland, then when they get free they just simply turn around and make the same exact thing with the same level of corruption on just a smaller scale. they have mobs, corruption, body trade, it didnt make anything better, it got rid of a ethnic force they didnt like by pure rascism. woopteedoo, there swimming in the high life now......

and if we were to let iraq elect a anti US king then that would simply hurt the people because the american companies projecting american and self interest would simply pull out. thats like up front saying i hate you, i hate your society, but hey do business with me because i need money? cmon. why are american companies in iraq? to make money. if it were to turn hostile again theyd simply pull out.

half of what america government and business is doing in iraq is nothing but greed driven crap, then theres the political and seed projections. but if you can honestly say that they will be worse off then before i can easily prove you wrong simply looking at any given model where we have gone in and made another country our "workforce bitch". im not going to candy coat it because it simply is opening another avenue of cheap labor. but i know there will be more jobs, more freedoms, and in general a happier nation. not only are we rebuilding lost jobs were funding tons more. then you can bitch about the loss of innocence and tradition and history then you can weight that against the gains of less terrorism, terrorist funds, terrorist camps, and other societies around hopefully reacting and taking in a new nation and its prosperities. not to mention jobs, money, kids being kids, and maybe even watching women gain even half of the rights american women have.

having dealt with philipines workers from my last job and basically doling them out internet mundane work i can say they may not have liked the work but they loved being employed and loved the pay. or you can look at india which is a hub of computer programming today and how many of our computer companies are giving them work and how they are shaping our future in turn for us giving them thousands of very good paying jobs they never had before that were taken away from american workers. im not bitching. i lost my job eventually to myself being replaced by a philipino head so the company i worked for could undercut the competition by 5 bucks a job, tough ****. i got another job and in turn some poor sod in the phils now has a barely stable good paying job. so for people to bitch about our interests in iraq, **** theyd love any work, because theyd get paid. unlike before where iraqis unemployment rate was off the hook.

[SOG]

The problem is people aren't that stupid...And there's bound to be people who resist anyway....but whether people even realize and our resist is only secondary; what really matters is that this kind of assimilation is not what this should all be about! It's supposed to be about freedom...this way you basically say 'you have the freedom to become how we want you to become'. I'd say George Orwell if he were still alive could have writen a nice little novel about it with an opressed animal farm that gets 'liberated'

right heres the problem, your expecting we or they will rebuild themselves a utopia because the evil US wouldnt be involved or that we build for them something that we oursleves dont have? so you expect a rebuilding non occupation royalty free? are you envisioning illusions? so if we just zip out, give the iraqis and appearntly you thier way, and if iraq rebuilds into its former self, jobless, crime, new organized small time crime bases, your saying they will beat all the odds and not succumb to what they were before? what happens if they go the same way? live in misery perhaps? or force a structure so they can gain ground then decide what they want for themsleves? your suggesting simply let a newborn survive on its own while ignoring the immediate faucets of crime and corruption of the previous regime and hope to god they dont reinstall themselves on a smaller scale all over? your suggesting that they can rebuild, how they want, jobs, no corruption, some middle east wonderland with no backing, no way to fight resurgence, no way to even rope the land under its new lead, not to mention using your own argument, what if alot of people dont want what the other want? why would all iraqis agree when all americans certainly dont? lets split iraq!



Half better just won't cut it when you want to make it seem like you're the allmigthy saviour... besides, I'd say it's quite debatable whether all people think you're even just 'half better'... And about the future...the only way this kind of policy would lead to 'being better in the future' would be to have a nice obedient young youth that's willing to accept their 'liberation into forced democracy' since it's all they've ever known.....just like most of the young youth now have never known anything else than Saddam..

well this is where i think your full of it. show me this QUITE debatable idea about how iraq will be worse off if we got them work, trade relations, more freedom then they had before etc. point out exactly where we would be doing more harm to them than good then under saddam. i have yet to see this fairy evil iraqi world you think we will create that wasnt under saddam. show me where we wont create more jobs, show me where we wont create more freedom, show me where the good wont outweigh the previous bad. you are literally saying that after the US finishes bringing all this to the plate and fully installed it will be worse than before? not even half better? where are these ubiquitous downsides? so far i hear the trolling of, they wont like it, or they didnt make it.... thats it? that beats thousands of lives, jobs, hapiness, money?

i consider that opinion truly inhumane from these so called people who love life and insist others keep theres yet turn and say let em live downtroddenly discontent, occasionally dying because of a mad man or his sons whims. all that pain, tortue, lives lost, youd let them have that all back instead of being commercialized with jobs, more freedom? or do you think we should pull out, hope to god they can keep a entire country in check by themselves with the same people who caused the problems coming back, hope to god they dont start warring, then sit back and watch em recreate little gangs, mafias, etc and we and the rest of the world are supposed to reinstate full relations with this oasis of a place?


Sigh...again it's like the Iraqi people are just some sloppy recruits walking out of line... the whole point is that, even although it's called Operation Iraqi Freedom, it sometimes appears like it's more about reshaping Iraq into a more 'comfortable' shape for the US, and not into the way the people want it.

1st of all, you have no clue how the people want it. do you think they want a king that keeps all the money? how bout socialism? how bout some failed communism? how do you know what they want? have we asked the people? have you? all they say is we want bad infadels gone! gee wonder where that comes from? why dont we give them a platform then let them decide? that doesnt sound painfull......

and now your trying to knock the meaning of OIF? common, it was just a very politically toned nice way of saying here we come. **** in half the cases terms like this are made by the news media. holding the government to the chosen popular words of this war are hilarious when they or someone else baked them up to be politically correct. i mean cmon, why call it US armed forces when its the special interests that shape what they do? why not call them AOL time/werner armed forces? or oily armed forces. the term was simply picked to focus on a positive facet of the war. ooooo......... well if you want to be technical its freedom, we didnt say which, but hey, you pointed it out. if you or any of the uber smart public thought we were going to go in there, hand over billions, and say hope you dont end in ****, what did i say before about the public being stupid?[/list]

[SOG]

You see this is where the problem is,we have no right whatsoever to do this on the Iraqi people!!
This has fu*k all to do with IRAQI FREEDOM whatsover,and that is why this whole thing now stinks of ****!!
I was 100% behind the reasons stated by our Leaders,as they led the public to believe differently,but now my support for the war has waned ,as the smell of Subversion,and Political ****e has seen the reasons for the war change faster than a babies nappy.
How would we feel if this was happening to us?This is a Bull**** Democracy,and I feel sorry for the majority of the Iraqi people.

this will be the same ways in which the Israel /Palestinian will never be at peace,because neither wants to be dictated to!

so we have no right to help, no right to say anything, we should just bitch and abide our time in the UN who does nothing at all, we should watch a user abuse the hell out of his people, rape them of all thier money, and of course his hier to the throne would have been oh so great for iraq, then when all this is going on, we should send in foreign aid and equipment, thus retianing the cost of what a mad man has done to his people. then we should watch and sit back when saddam corrals the foriegn aid, food, materials, and uses them against his own people to get what he wants. then we shoudl try and hellpp thier economy which of course doesnt go to them, but instead saddam, a verified mad man, gets all the money so he can go nail kuwait again, or maybe hell take a shot at the oh so good relations between iraq and iran, or maybe hell push the kurds off completely in a huge genocide and we can show up as the tough UN and get to watch. i mean as of late, or rather ever since the UN was created, it in its utmost decisiveness has saved countless lives or rather watched from the sidelines as theyre lost so as not to disturb delicate poltical climates. gods forbid we waste a whack job.


this will be the same ways in which the Israel /Palestinian will never be at peace,because neither wants to be dictated to!

its not the same way because neither israel or palenstine have been wholly forcefully occupied by a super power today, nor have they been liberated wholly by force and had thier entire government laid to waste. had they had either of those and still not changed then i would see a point. saying iraq is like either of them is baffling since the two situations have huge dissymmetries. also israel is not telling the PALS how to live, arguably its a dispute over where to live. much like the kurds and iraqis or many mother russia countries breaking free and fighting over it. i mean you can argue they live in the middle east and both hate israel and america but thats about it. even thier government is disimilar. one was based off of visible hard force, the other was more underhanded and based off its opinion of thier sworn enemy. when PALS fight they want to, when iraqis fight they were corralled to. saddam in the end was throwing away hundreds of thousands of iraqi lives because he wanted more power/money. we took those lives in the defence of others. now we have gone in and forced sadam out to keep him from doing any number of retarted things that would result in more iraqis getting wasted by the thousands. and instead of going in and freeing them we are lending a hand in rebuilding. or we could just leave after a month, let saddam or his homies come back, start everything all over again on a smaller scale? or would the iraqis actually fight saddam off this time? yeah right, there still wondering when he'll come back even with the US presencse there.

so out of 3 scenarios i see, dont do anyting, and soemthing really bad like kuwait could happen AGAIN, gang rapes, torture, murders, killing, you know, the works, or saddam just keeps being saddam in any case, killing as he sees fit, how many more should he add to his total? few thousand more before he kicks? then his tame sons take over?

number two, go in, break stuff, leave the iraquis free, but wait, what if saddam comes back? what if a warlord emerges? what if the kurds start again? what if they simply revert to what they were before? just let em continue killing? well lets let them split off into gangs or mafias like russia, lets watch em deal and trade death, and now instead of one oppresive regime you have tons of little power mongers all doing there own thing, all doing some bad **** in the dark that will be hard to track. hell, they could even forge a terrorist town!

or number 3, the US goes in, breaks the army, kills the government and puts a long term end to the killing. and of course being the evil giant we are we give them jobs and money for our standard profit! tough choice, i see yours is choice number one right? just let things be? its no ones business? right.

[jizzmonkey]

The fact of the matter is that western democracy will never work in Iraq.
I must admitt that I am very pesamistic when it comes to us actually establishing a society like ours in Iraq.

Iraq is one of those places where nice guy's finish last, and they always will.

Black Hawk Down:

-you americans are all the same, do you really think that because you'r here we will simply put down our weapons, and adopt American democracy.
In Somalia killing is negotiation.
This is how things are in our world you see.


Eventhough its a movie it rings true.

[SOG]

well what about giving them the platform of democracy in its infancy to use as a springboard for what they want to choose?

i mean nowhere are we saying you can only have elected officials in for a set amount of time. you could have basically a elected king, and as long as he did good he'd be around. and if you didnt like him you wouldnt need to revolt and kill him, youd just vote him out. and as long as the government was kept on a financial leash to the rest of the world it wouldnt try anything stupid like warring with neighbors or robbing its people because you have angry people, and a leader then that might be taken out by force. a watered down democracy system being watched with a carefull eye from super powers might work. or even if the iraqis could get to a state such as kuwait where they just work and chill, that would be great.

basically all the iraqis need is a good leader who doesnt restart what saddam did but at the same time who doesnt enforce what the clerics do with a iron fist, which is partly the wisted reason as to why iraqis view the rest of the world with such hate. i mean before sadam it was another mad ass and before that it was a religous mad ass of a ass of a ass.

if we can sit around, whack some odd rebels, install someone the iraqis half trust, and split, leaving them moneys to rebuild themselves WITH themselves, then were golden. i see this somehwat as our current plan, it really hinges on the timing of the military and them splitting at just the right time. thats why its imperative that we get a police force up and running with full kinks run out, so they can start to police themselves, then we can leave, with a fully controllable society under a iraqi leader most approve of, specially since its impractical to think all would improve of him given not everyone agrees.

this would make it so the society cant break down right away, and with plenty of projects, factories etc opening, alot will be busy. and basically the building of the police is what this topic originally refers to.

but going in and pulling out immediately would just have been crazy in its utmost form. weve simply made a investment in the future, and have to stay till its based. if our government computer database role playing teams have thier data in order then they probably have something that has worked out statistically. to some vile end or another.

[ßå$tĮТHÏ¿ð]

Well Iraq's a ****-storm waiting to happen. Heres the way I see it:
You got 3 major groups, Kurds, ****e(spelling? f*ck it), then everyone else.

K, Kurds want Kurdistan. As far as I know that entitles a part of Turkey/Syria. Not going to happen, last time I checked Turkey wasnt stoked on the idea of Us using airplanes in its airspace before the war(if i remeber right America paid em off in the end). I doubt they'd be willing to donate land. Syria well Syria is a terrorist ****hole, they are fuct up enough no need to drag them into this. Turkey/Syria isnt too fond of the idea of a Kurdistan, if there was that would cause more problems and yes f*ck everything up the asshole more.

Kurds+****e's=fighting. Any ****e leader Kurds will hate any Kurdish leader ****es will hate (I doubt it though ****e are the majority of the population). Any Christian leader or puppet aka Akmhed Chalabi (or any x-Iraqi exile/everyone else) will be seen as a poofter for the United States and the Coalition which would cause more problems. Democracy would be a good idea, although remeber majority of the population is ****e therefor the ****es will obviously vote for ****e leaders, therefor causeing more ****. Which leads to one big cluster f*ck called Iraq and its current state of f*ckedness.

Either move your f*cked, someones getting f*cked over in this process its yet to be determined who at this time. It would probably be the easyer to shaft the Kurds (smaller population base plus they have a good # of Kurds living outta the country) but if I do remeber they still like the Us and shafting your friends doesnt pay off in the end (i.e. Kurds turn into a training ground for Al-Queda). You could turn it into an second Iran, that wouldnt be an idea to persue. Either way its going to be pointed back and twisted and pointed at Americans/Coalition for "liberating" Iraq, thus making them steaming mad and more pissed off at western countries/europe and willing to unite with terrorists and bomb the **** outta us. If Iraq goes down the ****-tubes in 5 years the middle east will hate the Coalition/Us even more then it does today, thus possibly creating more destabilization in that region which isnt good and would totally defeat the purpose of the Coalition being there today.

Point being its fucted, get used to talking about Iraq for a very long time. The Coalition is in it for the long haul, either way whatever happens get used to talking about Iraq.

Thats my .02 Canadian cents worth and a few beers talking.

[Royal]

For the Brits here,isn't it really really strange the that tosspot Blair wants to see a democracy in Iraq,and see an democratically elected Government,and is willing to send our troops into harms way,and to remove a brutal dictator,yet he sits on his arse over the **** that's going on in Zimbabwe?,where there are more British subjects at risk than there ever was in Iraq!!

Because they're black, have no oil and are all going to die of AIDS anyway.

But, to go back to the original question. Yes it can work with supervision and more importantly with mutual respect. The use of "firqat" in the Oman in the 60's and 70's by British and Royal Omani troops is a prime example - hard line islamist and communist rebels trained in China converted and use as an effective fighting force.

But, I'll say it again mutual respect - that's what's lacking in Iraq. It's not just the US that is guilty of this. I was out (Mostly in Southern Iraq) there in September and got sick to the back teeth with the number of times I heard "f**king ragheads" or similar phrases.

We've already learned the lessons the hard way. I just wish we would apply them, rather than re-learn them yet again.

[duck]

What if the new Iraqi government wants to use the new Iraqi army to "liberate Jerusalem from the Zionists"? The crowd cheering over the spanish intel guys bodies was jubilant because they thought the dead were "Zionists".

[Loco]

What if the new Iraqi government wants to use the new Iraqi army to "liberate Jerusalem from the Zionists"? The crowd cheering over the spanish intel guys bodies was jubilant because they thought the dead were "Zionists".
No, they just blamed spanish of being foreings, americans, allieds, atheist, everything, that it´s all. Naming the deads as zionists was only other thing in the list.
I think in Irak there´s a mix of emotions, religion and nationalism and a deep rage, like a shaken bottle of beer and suddenly the tap is off. I was shocked when I saw the spanish bodies, because I´m spanish, but before that I was astonished when I saw the news about teens smashing with concret americans bodies in Mosul. As I know, Mosul is out of sunni triangle, is a kurd city, and it´s supposed kurds are helping a lot americans troops, then what´s the matter there??

[Seraphim]

http://us.news1.yimg.com/us.yimg.com/p/rids/20031203/i/r2480668520.jpg
An Afghan policeman stands near a blood stain on a street in the southern Afghan city of Kandahar December 3, 2003. A U.S. soldier had a leg blown off when a renegade Afghan policeman threw a grenade at a U.S. military vehicle police said. The attack occurred in a crowded market area in the center of Kandahar as four U.S. military vehicles were driving through, a senior police officer said. Photo by *******

[Saranof]

You already force them to live like you do. Who says they want to live in a democracy? Maybe the want to have a king, or maybe they want to live in a islamic republic like Iran? Or maybe they want socialism, or communism in Iraq.



*chough* niether socialism or communism means anti democracy, if you read the Capital.
Just had to point that out.

[WARPIG]

Look asking if they want "freedom' is the stupidest thing I have ever heard. Of course they do. They may not know what to do with it. They also very likely don't like that their freedom was given by the "infidels." Some small groups of people are striking out at the coalition because they want to control their own freedom. Different groups are using the same tactics to try and get rid of the only thing that can stop them from taking power. The US.
Guerillas and terrorists don't have some uniform that they wear and all meet at the local terrorist lodge. They are ex-soldiers, politicians, construction workers, teachers, students, cops, and robbers. Iraq it self is a mash of several different races that have never gotten along. The US proposes that one government rules them. They don't want that. Each tribe, or group wants autonomy.
Even without all that complication.. what group of people would react to martial law in a postive way? That is the basic environment in Iraq. An occupation is never welcomed. Arabic and muslim people have historically reacted violently to unwelcomed presence. The thing is .. maybe a lot of Iraqi's don't want us there.. but they do want a free country. Democratically .. they can have that. They can make it as liberal or conservative as they want.