PDA

View Full Version : World News Iraq. Endgame?



Atomik
18-10--2006, 10:19 AM
The Baker report on an exit strategy from Iraq, leaked this week in the US, is as sensible as it is sensational. It rejects "staying the course" as no longer plausible and purports to seek alternatives to just "cutting and running". Stripped of political sweetening, it concludes that there is none. America must leave Iraq without preconditions and hope that its neighbours, hated Syria and Iran, can clear up the mess. This advice comes not from some anti-war coalition but from the Iraq study group under the former Republican secretary of state, James Baker, set up by Congress with President George Bush's endorsement. Students of Iraq studies should at this point sit down and steady their nerves. Kissinger is in Paris. The Vietnam moment is at hand.

http://www.guardian.co.uk/commentisfree/story/0,,1924736,00.html

It was self-evident to anyone passingly familiar with middle-eastern politics and Iraq in particular that we'd end up exactly where we are now if military intervention was pursued as an option. If you look at the current situation, it's pretty much word for word what I and many others predicted over six years ago. Now none of us have the massive intelligence and diplomatic resources of the US and UK governments at our disposal, so one can only conclude that these fools moronically stumbled into war on the basis of wishful thinking and an unwillingness to look past the blinkers of their own particular ideologies. We told them a war in Iraq was not only immoral, but would fail to achieve its stated objective. And guess what? We were right.

But then we have the conspiracy theorists. These guys are just as bad, with their belief that the Iraq was is just one step in a complex power-play for global domination, carefully coordinated by a well-oiled Machiavellian machine. It isn't. Those involved have demonstrated that they couldn't organise a piss-up in a brewery. If this is the New World Order, then it's a joke.

I wish I'd been proved wrong. I wish that Iraq hadn't collapsed and that we'd been able to create some form of democracy there. But we didn't and we can't. Democracies can't be imposed or created. Democracies evolve. They rely on a complex series of institutions that come into being through hundreds of years. You can't just create that, because you're talking about a culture and a mindset. There's no shortcut. I'd have had more respect for the allies if they'd been realistic and talked in terms of an imposed, benign dictatorship. But the idea of creating a democracy was always farcical, and terrifying in what it said about the blinkered ignorance of all involved.

So here we are, on the brink of a policy change. What has the war in Iraq actually achieved? Fuck all. It hasn't even secured Western oil supplies. By any measure you like, it's an abject failure, all the worse for its grim predictability.

John
18-10--2006, 10:25 AM
Well, unfortunately we all knew it was going to happen. I can't help but think this is going to help the conservatives one hell of a lot if we leave or if we stay. It seems our government should have listened to us - as usual...

Bodhisurfer
18-10--2006, 10:33 AM
:( The part that upsets me and will probably be overlooked fairly shortly is all the dead. All those people on all sides, good and bad, young, old... What a waste.

Coyote
18-10--2006, 10:48 AM
http://www.guardian.co.uk/commentisfree/story/0,,1924736,00.html

It was self-evident to anyone passingly familiar with middle-eastern politics and Iraq in particular that we'd end up exactly where we are now if military intervention was pursued as an option. If you look at the current situation, it's pretty much word for word what I and many others predicted over six years ago. Now none of us have the massive intelligence and diplomatic resources of the US and UK governments at our disposal, so one can only conclude that these fools moronically stumbled into war on the basis of wishful thinking and an unwillingness to look past the blinkers of their own particular ideologies. We told them a war in Iraq was not only immoral, but would fail to achieve its stated objective. And guess what? We were right.

But then we have the conspiracy theorists. These guys are just as bad, with their belief that the Iraq was is just one step in a complex power-play for global domination, carefully coordinated by a well-oiled Machiavellian machine. It isn't. Those involved have demonstrated that they couldn't organise a piss-up in a brewery. If this is the New World Order, then it's a joke.

I wish I'd been proved wrong. I wish that Iraq hadn't collapsed and that we'd been able to create some form of democracy there. But we didn't and we can't. Democracies can't be imposed or created. Democracies evolve. They rely on a complex series of institutions that come into being through hundreds of years. You can't just create that, because you're talking about a culture and a mindset. There's no shortcut. I'd have had more respect for the allies if they'd been realistic and talked in terms of an imposed, benign dictatorship. But the idea of creating a democracy was always farcical, and terrifying in what it said about the blinkered ignorance of all involved.

So here we are, on the brink of a policy change. What has the war in Iraq actually achieved? Fuck all. It hasn't even secured Western oil supplies. By any measure you like, it's an abject failure, all the worse for its grim predictability.
Oh I dont know......

Brent Crude
http://newsvote.bbc.co.uk/1/shared/fds/hi/business/market_data/commodities/28696/img/31+XBNT+bbc-big_thick-line+twelve_month.png

Its had some "benefits" (to all the Bush's saudi mates selling oil..... :whistle: )
Not to mention the arms companies......

And the "real" NWO is primarily an economic entity not a monolithic natin-state military one....

Atomik
18-10--2006, 10:53 AM
Its had some "benefits" (to all the Bush's saudi mates selling oil..... :whistle: )
Not to mention the arms companies......But it's obvious to any fool that they weren't there for a short cash boost - they wanted the rewards of the long game.

Coyote
18-10--2006, 11:02 AM
But it's obvious to any fool that they weren't there for a short cash boost - they wanted the rewards of the long game.

Increasingly I wonder if they did.... They were warned repeartedly that it would lead to civil war, they MUST have known that such would be the case if you remove a kingpin from the situation. They MUST have known that democracy cannot be imposed (regardless of my views on democracy itself :D ) but they went ahead anyway.

So although it could well all just be an allmight fuckup....me thinks perhaps this game has not yet run its course

Atomik
18-10--2006, 11:07 AM
Increasingly I wonder if they did.... They were warned repeartedly that it would lead to civil war, they MUST have known that such would be the case if you remove a kingpin from the situation. They MUST have known that democracy cannot be imposed (regardless of my views on democracy itself :D ) but they went ahead anyway. That's because they're idiots. I have problems comprehending the depths of their stupidity, but I'm now convinced that this is the case. Reading Rumsfeld's idiotic ramblings makes you realise the moron really believed that a war could be won with technology. And I'm pretty sure they expected flowers strewn on the streets wherever they went. No, these guys fucked up. Looking at how the Republicans are about to be wiped out in the upcoming elections, I'm pretty convinced they didn't plan for this eventuality. It's simply a classic example of what happens when governments surround themselves with policy advisors who tell them what they want to hear.

Coyote
18-10--2006, 11:17 AM
That's because they're idiots. I have problems comprehending the depths of their stupidity, but I'm now convinced that this is the case. Reading Rumsfeld's idiotic ramblings makes you realise the moron really believed that a war could be won with technology. And I'm pretty sure they expected flowers strewn on the streets wherever they went. No, these guys fucked up. Looking at how the Republicans are about to be wiped out in the upcoming elections, I'm pretty convinced they didn't plan for this eventuality. It's simply a classic example of what happens when governments surround themselves with policy advisors who tell them what they want to hear.

Nah, you really think they are anything other than disposable assets (I use the term asset lightly lol) for the real string pullers. Bush, Cheyney and Rumsfelt are very unlikely to be the real powers - more likely they are puppets to divert attention from the bods who always stay "in power" behind the scenes.....

Atomik
18-10--2006, 11:25 AM
Nah, you really think they are anything other than disposable assets (I use the term asset lightly lol) for the real string pullers. Bush, Cheyney and Rumsfelt are very unlikely to be the real powers - more likely they are puppets to divert attention from the bods who always stay "in power" behind the scenes.....Now you're into a whole new realm of paranoia and conspiracy. It's the lizard lounge if you carry on at this rate! :harhar:

Coyote
18-10--2006, 11:32 AM
Now you're into a whole new realm of paranoia and conspiracy. It's the lizard lounge if you carry on at this rate! :harhar:

Not really...we all know how politicians are servants of the uber-rich transnational businesses and banks who could seriously shag up a countries economy if they so wished. Its a not a conspiracy to say the politicians have their strings pulled by an oligarchy of uber-rich bods/corps.

So I seriously doubt Bush et all were the architects of Iraq nor the beneficiaries either....

Make the markets a little unstable (like with war) and the uber-rich snap up the shares, then when the market recovers they sell again and so on. Whilst arms companies (owned by Mr U Rich ;) ) sell the weapons....and then the rebuilders get the contracts to rebuild (ker-ching for Mr U Rich again). And so on again.

Sure Iraq may well have been a monumental fuckup....but its such a stupendous one I wonder......

Atomik
18-10--2006, 11:34 AM
Not really...we all know how politicians are servants of the uber-rich transnational businesses and banks who could seriously shag up a countries economy if they so wished. In this country maybe. But in the US, the politicians are the uber-ritch businessmen and bankers.

Coyote
18-10--2006, 11:37 AM
In this country maybe. But in the US, the politicians are the uber-ritch businessmen and bankers.

A fair point...but in that case, given that their bottom lines have all flourished and that an administration cannot serve more than 2 terms in the US.....perhaps they have achieved what they wanted?

Atomik
18-10--2006, 11:46 AM
A fair point...but in that case, given that their bottom lines have all flourished and that an administration cannot serve more than 2 terms in the US.....perhaps they have achieved what they wanted?It's pretty clear from all the evidence leading up to the war that they wanted Iraq to work. Their entire military planning has been based around a long-term occupation. Even the contracts where American companies stand to make shit loads of money won't be worth the paper they're written on if the allies withdraw. Plus withdraw will hand a strategic victory to Iran, as well as destabilising the Turkish border and removing Iraqi oil from American control. It's really hard to see what they've gained here. Even if you assume that their gain is the fast buck, then that's an odd argument to support a conspiracy that should be much more far sighted. But whatever.... look hard enough for a conspiracy, and you'll find evidence for one wherever you look.

mithra
18-10--2006, 04:17 PM
:surrenderIt must be a real bummer for Dubya to be told by his daddy's best mate what a complete failure he is; and now he has to hope that one (if not 2) members of his "axis of evil" (Iran and Syria) will bail him out.

Now I'll just have to sell my Halliburton shares...

M

Atomik
18-10--2006, 05:21 PM
Now I'll just have to sell my Halliburton shares...:madlol:

PlutoPete
21-10--2006, 12:07 PM
Increasingly I wonder if they did.... They were warned repeartedly that it would lead to civil war, they MUST have known that such would be the case if you remove a kingpin from the situation. They MUST have known that democracy cannot be imposed (regardless of my views on democracy itself :D ) but they went ahead anyway.

So although it could well all just be an allmight fuckup....me thinks perhaps this game has not yet run its course
the americans want a civil war, they can then sit back while the factions destroy each other and then mop up what's left

Atomik
21-10--2006, 12:11 PM
the americans want a civil war, they can then sit back while the factions destroy each other and then mop up what's leftNo they don't. If they wanted a civil war, they'd have bought one. They don't need troops on the ground for that to happen. And they'll sure as hell be in no position to "mop up the mess".

schizomorph
21-10--2006, 12:31 PM
An extended crisis in the middle east is guaranteed to keep oil prices up. The problem for bush (and his puppy Blair) is staying in power while achieving their goal for high oil prices. I realy think it is just a case of take all you can while you're in power/let the next government sort out the mess. This war has been staged by bush and blair and i don't think it is by chance that as they are both about to step down there is talk about moving out.

Atomik
21-10--2006, 12:45 PM
An extended crisis in the middle east is guaranteed to keep oil prices up.In which case, it would make more sense for keep the troops there rather than the withdrawl that they're now contemplating. It's pretty obvious that this is never what they planned and they're leaving in a hurry with egg on their faces. Look hard enough, and you can find evidence for whatever conspiracy you like.

matthew
21-10--2006, 12:59 PM
wrong bloody thread.. oops.

matthew
21-10--2006, 01:03 PM
An extended crisis in the middle east is guaranteed to keep oil prices up. The problem for bush (and his puppy Blair) is staying in power while achieving their goal for high oil prices. I realy think it is just a case of take all you can while you're in power/let the next government sort out the mess. This war has been staged by bush and blair and i don't think it is by chance that as they are both about to step down there is talk about moving out.

Oil Prices Keep Dropping Despite OPEC Output Cut (http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2006/10/20/AR2006102001405.html?nav=rss_business) - Washington Post - Oct 20 7:19 PM
OPEC skeptics push oil prices lower (http://news.yahoo.com/s/ap/20061020/ap_on_bi_ge/oil_prices_69) - AP via Yahoo! News - Oct 20 2:39 PM
Oil prices tumble as traders cast doubt on OPEC move (http://news.yahoo.com/s/afp/20061020/ts_afp/commoditiesenergyoil_061020202031) - AFP via Yahoo! News - Oct 20 1:24 PM

Are they useing http://www.ukhippy.com/forums/showthread.php?t=8381

to create hurricanes ? :whistle:

schizomorph
21-10--2006, 04:46 PM
Oil Prices Keep Dropping Despite OPEC Output Cut (http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2006/10/20/AR2006102001405.html?nav=rss_business) - Washington Post - Oct 20 7:19 PM
OPEC skeptics push oil prices lower (http://news.yahoo.com/s/ap/20061020/ap_on_bi_ge/oil_prices_69) - AP via Yahoo! News - Oct 20 2:39 PM
Oil prices tumble as traders cast doubt on OPEC move (http://news.yahoo.com/s/afp/20061020/ts_afp/commoditiesenergyoil_061020202031) - AFP via Yahoo! News - Oct 20 1:24 PM
yes but the comparison doesn't go before the war


Are they useing http://www.ukhippy.com/forums/showthread.php?t=8381

to create hurricanes ? :whistle:

It wasn't me, I swear !

Atomik
21-10--2006, 04:50 PM
yes but the comparison doesn't go before the war
But if you take the view that it's all about oil prices (although this is a convenient shift from the pre-war conspiracy theories that argued that the war was all about securing Iraqi oil for the West.....), then there's a shit-load more the Americans could easily be doing to inflate prices still further, if they so wished. A little bit of sabre-rattling directed towards the Iranians would hike at leas $10/barrel onto the price straigh away. And yet they've shied clear of any serious hint at military action. Sorry, it just doesn't add up. And like I said earlier.... you can find evidence for any conspiracy if you look hard enough.

schizomorph
21-10--2006, 04:54 PM
Are you saying there are no conspiracies then?

Atomik
21-10--2006, 05:02 PM
Are you saying there are no conspiracies then?Depends how you define a conspiracy. Usually though, I don't think you have to dig that deep to find out what's really going on.

Anyway, this is rapidly headed off topic.....

For anyone who thinks that the Iraqi authorities are gonna be ready to take over from the Americans any time soon, check out this video report from Iraq:

http://www.guardian.co.uk/video/page/0,,1927660,00.html

mithra
21-10--2006, 05:43 PM
That's because they're idiots. I have problems comprehending the depths of their stupidity, but I'm now convinced that this is the case. Reading Rumsfeld's idiotic ramblings makes you realise the moron really believed that a war could be won with technology. And I'm pretty sure they expected flowers strewn on the streets wherever they went. No, these guys fucked up. Looking at how the Republicans are about to be wiped out in the upcoming elections, I'm pretty convinced they didn't plan for this eventuality. It's simply a classic example of what happens when governments surround themselves with policy advisors who tell them what they want to hear.

Policy advisors certainly, and the general feeling with the Bush administration that whatever they do they have God on their side. There was good evidence (no I don't have it to hand or head) that Dubya was always planning to invade Iraq to finish off Daddy's war even before 9/11 but was merely looking for a pretext. My guess is that he was convinced that running Saddam out of Baghdad would be as easy as running him out of Kuwait.

M