Now the Shi ites are killing our boys

[WRESTLINGFAN]

US soldiers killed in Sadr Iraq (http://www.cnn.com/2004/WORLD/meast/04/04/iraq.main/index.html)

In my opinion there is going to be a major US Military response within the next couple of days, after this and the massacre in Fallujah last week

FIRE SATHER!!!!!!!

[HBox]

This is bad. Now we are fighting the Sunnis and the Sh'ia. Hopefully, this is a small group of Sh'ia, but if it isn't, and we have to start essentially reoccupying cities, it will be ugly. I have a feeling they will put up more of a fight than Saddam's lackeys, and they'd be more inclined to use suicide attacks.

http://members.aol.com/joepersico/myhomepage/sig1.jpg?mtbrand=AOL_US

[keithy_19]

I was in favor in going into Iraq. I still support our boys and always will. But I think it's time we exit.

I've thought that since they dragged our soldiers down the streets. Fucking savages. Every last one of them over there.

http://www.silentpix.com/modules/Coppermine/albums/userpics/smokepotkeith.jpg
Thanks to katylina...

[Se7en]

We CAN'T exit now. Like it or not, we're going to be there for years to come.

Oh, and if you will all indulge me of a moment of prejudice: big surprise the fucking Muslims attacked us.

<center><img border="0" src="http://se7enrfnet.homestead.com/files/7_sig.gif" width="300" height="100">
<br>
<br>
Don't blame me....I voted for Kodos.
I look forward to an orderly election that will eliminate the need for a violent bloodbath. </center>

[ChrisTheCop]

Exit? Are you inspain??? (get it?) ok, seriously, the Spanish are learning what we knew all along, you dont back down to your enemies, cuz they wont stop, theyll just come at you harder. If we leave Iraq because we're getting attacked too much, that only weakens American interests all over the world. Like it or not, we're in there, and we gotta stay til its over. How can we make it over quicker? Not less troops, MORE troops. These assholes who dragged our boys in Faluja and Sadr MUST be caught, arrested and punished by whatever the local law is for their crimes. With justice will come order.

<img src="http://rfcop.50megs.com/images/jersey_rich-fluffernutter_sigpic.gif">jersernutter productions

[Yerdaddy]

Before we start making excuses for prejudices let's have some perspective on the Shiia. The violence of this weekend was conducted by the followers of the radical cleric Moqtada al-Sadr. He represents a minority of Iraqi Shiia, mainly in parts of Baghdad and some southern cities. The most powerful Shiite cleric in Iraq is Ayatollah Ali Sistani, who has urged cooperation with the US occupation from the beginning and publicly <a href="http://www.theaustralian.news.com.au/common/story_page/0,5744,9192791%5E1702,00.html" target="_blank">called for calm</a> today. In fact Sadr himself <a href="http://news.yahoo.com/news?tmpl=story&u=/washpost/20040405/ts_washpost/a50349_2004apr4" target="_blank">called for the same yesterday.</a> Hopefully this is a sign that Bremmer has a plan for dealing with Sadr without provoking a major uprising. But the Coalition Authority had to have been expecting clashes when they began cracking down on the Sadr group last week by closing down their newspaper and arresting a top aide to Sadr. In fact Sadr and his militia, the Sadr Brigades, has been a looming problem from the beginning of the occupation, but conflict has been averted by the more moderate groups of Sistani supporters and SCIRI, a Shiite political group that is represented on the Iraqi Governing Council. Their continued support of the majority of the Shiites should not be overshadowed by the violence of the Sadr supporters should the Coalition Authority continue to press the crackdown. The Iraqi Shiites cannot be seen as a monolithic group and their cooperation has been extremely benefitial to the US in Iraq so far, and will be key to containing the violence now.

Sistani's opposition to the Coalition has been political, and in fact have been part of his demands for more a democratic transition than the US originally planned for. Whatever complications that causes the US, it has to be seen as a positive sign. (A little bit on Sistani: <a href="http://www.reuters.com/newsArticle.jhtml?type=ourWorldNews&storyID=4738345" target="_blank">Iraq's Shi'ite Leaders Mix Politics with Piety</a>)

Also, I very much agree with Chris' post, and so does Anthony Cordesman: <a href="http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/articles/A46854-2004Apr2.html" target="_blank">There's No Turning Away From Iraq's Harsh Realities </a>

<img src="http://scripts.cgispy.com/image.cgi?u=bonedaddy5">
<marquee behavior=scroll direction=right>http://hometown.aol.com/bonedaddy5/images/duo2.jpg</marquee>

This message was edited by Yerdaddy on 4-5-04 @ 8:08 AM

[DarkHippie]

Like it or not, we're in there, and we gotta stay til its over.
When will it be over? They LIVE there!

<IMG SRC=http://home.comcast.net/~jamesgpatton/eo.jpg>
<marquee>"Last night I went running through the screen door of discretion, for I woke up from a nightmare that I could not stand to see. You were a-wandering out on the hills of Iowa and you were not thinking of me." Dar Williams "Traveling III (Iowa)"</marquee>

[TheMojoPin]

I demand Yerdaddy stops making sense.

<img src="http://scripts.cgispy.com/image.cgi?u=TheMojoPin">
2% << December boys got it BAD >> "You can tell some lies about the good times we've had, but I've kissed your mother twice...and now I'm working on your dad..."

[Recyclerz]

Like it or not, we're in there, and we gotta stay til its over.


When will it be over? They LIVE there!


Although I understand where Se7en, Chris and Yerdaddy are coming from (not backing down to an enemy, who already views us as weak, without inviting more attacks), I think the problem is that this view only sees one side of the equation. Bush confirmed again today that we're giving sovereignty to "somebody" on July 1. What happens if one of the first acts of the newly legitimate Iraqi government is to ask the Americans to leave the country?

Assume a best case scenario: we get the fuckers in Falluja and "pacify" that area; this Sadr guy gets marginalized and his militia turns out to be relatively small. A larger governing body takes sovereignty, roughly in proportion to the country's demographics, with some theoretical protections for minority rights.

Does anybody really think that a majority (or even a significant minority) of the population is going to give its loyalty to a newly established national authority that we set up? Or is it more likely that people will default to the native institutions (clerics for the Shi'a, Baathists for the Sunni, nationalists for the Kurds)? How many Iraqis are going to be willing to die for the icons we're handing them - James Madison and Henry Ford? I think it more likely that they're gonna wanna settle it Iraqi-style: the Shi'a getting even with the Sunni for centuries of underclass status and religious differences and the Kurds using the chaos in the South as a pretext to establish the Republic of Kurdistan.

I really hope I'm wrong, but I don't see anything good happening from this whole mis-guided adventure.




[b]There ain't no asylum here.
King Solomon he never lived 'round here.[b]

[DarkHippie]

The problem with a scenario like we have in Iraq is that it is not a war where one side surrenders. In a case of occupiers vs occupied, the occupied always win, because eventually the occupiers leave.

We have to think of our military now as police, not as soliders. That is the role, and its a more difficult role because they have to stop trouble, but do it in such a way as to not make things worse.

So when can we leave? When the Iraqis are able to keep the peace for themselves. But remember, when we leave, it will still look as if the Iraqis "made us leave" (there will still be violence going on, it just won't be our responsibility anymore)

<IMG SRC=http://home.comcast.net/~jamesgpatton/eo.jpg>
<marquee>"Last night I went running through the screen door of discretion, for I woke up from a nightmare that I could not stand to see. You were a-wandering out on the hills of Iowa and you were not thinking of me." Dar Williams "Traveling III (Iowa)"</marquee>

[A.J.]

In a case of occupiers vs occupied, the occupied always win, because eventually the occupiers leave.

Well, we ARE still in Germany, Italy, Japan, and South Korea. I'm wondering if we're going to have a similar presence in Iraq.

<img src=http://img40.photobucket.com/albums/v124/Canofsoup15/Sigs/AJinDC-Sig.jpg>

A Skidmark/canofsoup15 production.

Red Sox Nation

[Justice4all]

Exit? Are you inspain??? (get it?) ok, seriously, the Spanish are learning what we knew all along, you dont back down to your enemies, cuz they wont stop, theyll just come at you harder. If we leave Iraq because we're getting attacked too much, that only weakens American interests all over the world. Like it or not, we're in there, and we gotta stay til its over. How can we make it over quicker? Not less troops, MORE troops. These assholes who dragged our boys in Faluja and Sadr MUST be caught, arrested and punished by whatever the local law is for their crimes. With justice will come order.



Hey Chris...refresh my memory...is'nt that the same argument for Vietnam? And we all remember the outcome of THAT little fiasco.
I cannot understand, if I recall the B'aath party was pretty much surpressing any other form of prayer or belief and when we disbanded the party the Sh'ites and everyone else were given the freedom to pray publicly without fear of retrobution.
And now they attack us?

<img src=http://home.ix.netcom.com/~camman/_uimages/Justice4All.gif>
Bowie, Md.: Berkeley, I'm so glad you're back!; I've really missed The Far Side all these years.

Berkeley Breathed: Yes, thank you, but I don't draw Far Side. I draw Calvin and Hobbes.