Politics As Usual

[sgtclub]

Originally posted by Tyrone Slothrop
You are back to the question of opposing the war, while I am still talking about the occupation & rebuilding. If we can't keep that straight, what's the point. I posted any number of links (including one from NRO) about the countries -- including the French and Germans, but also including the UK -- that wanted the UN to run post-war Iraq. You seem to be saying that since we were bound to have a great number of troops in any event, we should get to run things. Your "to the victor go the spoils" outlook is the sort of fucked-up thinking that got us to where we are now, but in any event does not prove your original point, which is that the UN said it wanted control but didn't really. That is all I am arguing about, and it is still wrong. By arguing against red herrings instead of the serious alternative to what we have done, you are just wasting time.

Maybe we are just talking past one another (as usual). The UN may have wanted to make decisions regarding the reconstruction, but I do not believe it wanted to run, and certainly was not capable of running) the post war clean up. How could it? It has no military and no stomache (e,g., witness the pull out after the first bombing). So yes, it could have "run" post war Iraq from NYC head quarters, but it certainly could not have, and had no intention of having, the boots on the ground necessary to accomplish this.

Originally posted by Tyrone Slothrop
Our military is found of calling the opposition Ba'athist, to suggest that they are living in the past. I will suggest to you, however, that this is PR, and that whoever is doing the shooting in Iraq probably is rational enough to have some sort of forward-looking plan. Maybe not, but probably.

Of course they have a plan. And it is no longer hidden (and hasn't been for several months). See the letter I posted above.

Originally posted by Tyrone Slothrop And they may be shooting at us because we are occupying their country. Americans would do the same, out of patriotism as much as in the name of democracy.

See the letter. That is why they are shooting at us.

Originally posted by Tyrone Slothrop A poll just taken showed 68% of Iraqis supporting him. (I posted about this a few days ago, and oddly enough none of the conservatives here had anything to say about it.) That was before the Abu Ghraib, which suggests to me that only mathematics will keep his support in double digits. If this is "losing popular support," what do you have to say about Bush's support? It's a lot lower than that.

Sadr is much more likely to be dead soon.

I didn't see the post, but I don't believe it is accurate because it just doesn't jive with what I've been reading. Sadr and his militia have been left hanging out to dry by the clergy, and it is just a matter of time before he is gone (I agree, most likely he will be killed, or turned over to authorities for proescution for the murder he is alleged to have committed).