Posted on 12/11/2005 2:51:21 PM PST by neverdem
WASHINGTON and Baghdad will be tempted, with the adoption of a new Constitution and the election on Thursday for a four-year government, to declare victory in Iraq. In one sense, they are right to do so. The emerging Iraqi polity undoubtedly represents a radical break not only with the country's past but also with the whole Arab state system established by Britain and France after the collapse of the Ottoman Empire.
But in the larger sense, such optimism is misguided, for none of the problems associated with Iraq's monumental change have been sorted out. Worse, profound tensions and contradictions have been enshrined in the Constitution of the new Iraq, and they threaten the very existence of the state.
How did we get here? Much has been said about American failures in Iraq. And rightly so. But, as I've seen as a participant in political discussions both before and after the war, we Iraqis have also failed to lay the ground for a new order. For the new political elite cast into power by the elections last January has been unable even to begin to create a stable and strong Iraqi state to replace the one overthrown in April 2003. The increasing daily casualty rate for Iraqis, from 26 in early 2004 to an average of 64 in this fall, is only the most glaring sign that something has gone terribly wrong, and not for lack of any American effort to turn the situation around.
Unfortunately, we cannot expect the situation to change following Thursday's election. There is little chance that the winner will command the authority inside Parliament to reverse the decline, for a simple reason: the Constitution.
All signs suggest that this Constitution, if it is not radically amended, will further weaken the already failing central Iraqi state. In...
(Excerpt) Read more at nytimes.com ...
"But in the larger sense, such optimism is misguided, for none of the problems associated with Iraq's monumental change have been sorted out. "
Sure they have - Saddam Hussein is no longer in power and Iraqis are themselves 'sorting out' the problems.
Iraq is no longer totalitarian state, that's the biggest cause for optimism. To the NYSlimes, removing Hussein was a mistake - wish the NYT would actually TALK to Iraqis before telling everyone how they should feel.
Just more "canned liberal sunshine" from the radical leftists that are so heavily invested in negativism and defeatism.
Only thing wrong is that the insurgents terrorists can't seem to control their angst.
Ya think?
Here's Makiya's PR biography, where you can go if you want to buy a speech from him:
http://www.benadorassociates.com/makiya.php
"the most glaring sign that something has gone terribly wrong"
Witness the Clarion of Doom..
Saddam was running 150+/day through wood chippers and other such means of murder. What they have now is a hell of a lot better if you ask me. Of course the slimes, err..., Times failed to include this. Probably didn't have room with all the Macy's ads for the upcoming 'Holidays'...
One of the main leaders of Iraq, I think the gentleman is the Kurd, says that's what the cost of freedom is all about.
Excellent point.
The Democrats want the troops to come home in defeat, with their heads down.
Um...the "stable and strong" pre-2003 Iraq was murdering tens of thousands of people on average. If you bother to do the math, that comes to a hell of a lot more than 64 a day.
is only the most glaring sign that something has gone terribly wrong,
Yes, something has gone terribly wrong with your religion.
Thanks for the link. I can't remember if the author is a Kurd, Shia or Sunni Arab, or whether he's secular or not. Do you recall?
Perhaps figuratively, but never literally as they're too much the pacifist type. I'd like to know who gave the dispiriting title to this OpEd column, the Times or the author. I'm inclined to think the former. I took the column as a plea to amend their Iraqi Constitution.
no sudden moves, relax, then react, nothing more
The author is well aware of Saddam's toll. I have a register which lists 397 eliminated villages, Kurdish villages in northern Iraq. ... The work is called "The Register of Eliminated Villages." You flip the pages, beautifully scripted and done with a pencil. Then the writer of this book has covered it, folded it very neatly with a nice, great big book cover made of paper, with great big white flowers against a red background. It's a very decorative, pretty thing. ... You look at this person who has taken such immaculate care of this book, which records the destruction of 397 Kurdish villages. ... You look at the book and you know you're touching evil somehow. That link says the author is an aetheist. He talks as if he's an Arab, not a Kurd.
That's the first I heard about that. Do you have any references?
Yes, he appears to have written earlier books and articles portraying Saddam Hussein as a murderous butcher. I suspect that was during the clinton years, when Saddam was one of the official villains, and the press all fell in line.
My take on this guy is that he writes and gives speeches for bucks. So he says whatever the folks who control most of the publishing houses and media sources want to hear. This would also help him get bigger speaker fees.
This article clearly panders to the New York Times.
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.