Posted on 09/23/2005 4:57:06 PM PDT by Fzob
Well yes your right, but doesn't a lot of religions want power? There's a good web site for information on iraq, it by Juan Cole. I don't agree with his political views but he does have good insight into Iraq which does appear to be disintegrating right now.
JasonC wrote: "Buy a freaking clue. This isn't San Francisco."
Look, I've lived in Saudi Arabia...been there many, many times. I didn't insult your knowledge, so please don't insult mine. If you have some greater insight into the makeup of the royal family, please explain.
You know, the US was founded by Christians, so all government employees serve Jesus.
The House of Saud is reproducing itself in a frenzy of self-destruction. Read the great new Patrick Robinson novel on the topic of Saudi royals ruining the country and leading them into civil war.
Well it is, what with the hurricanes one after another, traffic jams in Houston, Hitlery running for POTUS, Mother Sheehan headed for sainthood, RINO joining the Supremes, iPod Mini discontinued, and other disasters, but it all ain't nobody bidnyz but ours!
Perhaps Poppy Bush misplayed his cards in 1991. He should have instructed Ambassador Glaspie to let Saddam know that not only did the US acquiesce in his acquisition of the Nineteenth Province, but that we looked forward to his bringing order to the region ... especially Saudi Arabia. Just stay off the WMD and don't overcharge for the crude or we'll have to nuke you.
By now Saudi Arabia would have landfills full of those pesky Wahabbis. Bin Laden would be dead. Saudi women would be driving cars and getting drunk. 9/11 would not have happened.
At the point of American and Israeli guns, of course, with instantaneous, overwhelming annihilation for any who resist.
We must put our boot on the throat of the Muslim world and never take it off.
-ccm
Why? Those cities were the ancient home of Jewish tribes that were slaughtered by Mahomet and his fiends. Let them be avenged.
-ccm
That may be true, but you don't need a majority of the people's support to win a revolution. In 1776 the revolutionaries had maybe 25% support. Revolutions, except in cases like Marcos in the Philipines, rarely have majority support. If they did, they wouldn't need to do the things they do.
"We've killed hundreds of terrorists this month."
The British killed a lot of "terrorists" in 1776 too. The British complained loudly about how the revolutionaries didn't fight according to the recognized rules of engagemennt. The revolutionaries would hide behind rocks and up in trees and pick off British troops.
Make no mistake, this is an effort to remove occupiers from Iraq and factions trying at the same time to seize power through any means necessary.
Oh gawd, what idiocy people spout when they let MSM lies
mislead them. Saddam was a playful kitten and a wahabbist-killing pal, eh?
Never mind that he's been a sponsor of those same groups for years and they are now working together to undermine Iraq's emerging democracy.
Letting Saddam keep Kuwait would have made the whole world more dangerous.
Saddam was one of the top terrorist sponsors in the world. His intelligence met with Bin Laden in 1998, he offered Bin Laden safe haven, and he supported numerous terrorist groups. He also started 2 wars and committed multiple genocides, quite a feat even in that bloody region.
Leaving saddam alone would have meant more dead kurds, democracy hopes dashed, a more dangerous mideast
and a major terrorist sponsor who also would have had nuclear weapons.
Oh joy.
Saddam owning the world's oil supply would have meant Hamas running Jerusalem or Tel Aviv, or if not another hot mideast war. Wahhabists would be thrilled by it, not in landfills.
9/11? Small potatoes compared to what we'd have had to face.
Go ahead and read and quote from my blog: http://freedomstruth.blogspot.com/
Our goals are the right goals in Iraq. Democracy in Iraq is taking hold and the terrorists are getting defeated.
We are winning in Iraq.
Hoping has nothing to do with it. They are a brutally repressive regime, and it is OUR Achilles tendon that we are so reliant on their oil... we should have begun decades ago developing new energy technologies...
Do you really think this country's interests would be better served by a radical Islamist Saudi Arabia????
The Saudis have been the biggest supporters of the Madrassas schools which have radicalized a whole generation of angry young men against us. They DIRECTLY support the people who would have us destroyed in order to deflect attention from their playboys-of-the-western-world lifestyles.
That's a good point. I was thinking more along the lines that Al Saud is terrified of religious conflict breaking out in Iraq that will no doubt spread into the Kingdom
"Iraq will vote on the Constitution, vote yes, and the issue will be settled."
Iraq will vote on the Constitution, vote yes, and the war of attrition will continue as now.
In 2008 Hillary Clinton will probably be elected to the White House and begin withdrawing forces.
"the war of attrition will continue as now."
Great, because the people being attrited are terrorists. We get more target practice on new weapons, destroy all Al Qaeda wannabes, and help build up a better Iraqi army in the process ...
http://www4.army.mil/ocpa/read.php?story_id_key=7963
"The Guided Multiple Launch Rocket System destroyed two insurgent strongholds from a distance of more than 50 kilometers away. Battery B, 3rd Battalion, 13th Field Artillery Regiment fired eight guided rockets in Tal Afar Sept. 9 and 10, killing 48 insurgents, said Maj. Jeremy McGuire, deputy of operations, Force Field Artillery, Multi-National Corps – Iraq"
Bush will be drawing down forces starting next year as Iraqi army improves further. Already we've handed over certain areas fully to Iraqi forces.
Expect American force levels to be under 50,000 by 2009.
Expect some forces to stay in Iraq no matter who is in the white house, for at least ten years. Zero probability of full withdrawal.
Hillary or whomever follows will take Bush's victory and try to take credit for it as best they can.
"That will be news to the 90% of Iraqis that support the Government of Iraq. What's going on in Iraq is terrorism against an emerging democracy."
"That may be true, but ..."
Dont be a but-monkey...
" you don't need a majority of the people's support to win a revolution. In 1776 the revolutionaries had maybe 25% support."
You dont know that, you have no poll number, and besides that was against a King who had not much more support either.
Iraq has had numerous polls where support for democracy rates in the 85-90% range, support for terrorists is quite low.
Revolutions against democracies rarely succeed for good reason.
"We've killed hundreds of terrorists this month."
"The British killed a lot of "terrorists" in 1776 too. "
Thanks, Michael Moore, for the most inapt comparison you could possibly make.
I dont consider American patriots terrorists, and the anti-Iraq terrorists that are killing policemen, assassinating clerics and Government workers and civilians, bombing mosques, churches, killing American and Iraqi soldiers ... are NOTHING BUT TERRORISTS. THERE IS NO COMPARISON!
"Make no mistake, this is an effort to remove occupiers from Iraq"
You are completely ignorant if you believe that nonsense.
The terrorists were killing election workers last December and demanded that no elections could be held. They are THE ONE REASON WE ARE STILL SO INVOLVED IN IRAQ! Without them, our presense and profile would be much lower.
The terrorists are AFRAID OF DEMOCRACY. They are against the Shia and the power base they will have in a democratic Iraq; they want to bring back Saddam and the baathists to rule via desptoism; they want to destroy the Iraqi Government and civilized society there. They want a culture of fear, so that vioilence can rule the streets. They have no real political program, just violence and criminality as a means to hang on to power. Most of the 'pawns' are simply criminals who are in it for the money, paid by baathists who have hidden bank accounts in Syria and set up cells; aided by foreign Al Qaeda Jihadists who simply want to destroy Iraq as a way to get at us.
What balderdash to talk of a Saudi jihadist who comes to Iraq and blows himself up in a baghdad street, killing Iraqi civilians as fighting the 'occupiers' ... Zarqawi's group *are* the foreign invaders, and the Iraqi army - with our help - is the one defending their homeland from this invasion!!
" and factions trying at the same time to seize power through any means necessary."
... enemies of democracy ,like I said.
Probably right.
Iraq will stabilize into a Northern Ireland (circa 1975) situation.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.