How Basra Slipped Out of Control: by Gareth Porter

POSTED BY: Howard
UPDATED: Thursday, October 27, 2005 15:21
VIEWED: 10359
PAGE 3 of 6

PREV PAGE 1 2 3 4 5 6 NEXT PAGE

HOWARD

Monday, October 24, 2005 5:14 AM

TWEEK:

please see

http://www.fireflyfans.net/thread.asp?b=18&t=14242

TWEEK128

Monday, October 24, 2005 5:17 AM

Sorry. Not a Fisk fan.

HOWARD

Monday, October 24, 2005 5:21 AM

This is happening because the US and British
governments have made it happen.

They tout a constitution that removed the
paragraph that gave rights to women. But
still Bush glows whenever the constitution
is mentioned.

One of the first acts by the US Occupation
authority was to ban the secular non-tribal
Iraqi trade union movement.

HOWARD

Monday, October 24, 2005 5:23 AM

That is NOT the bloody point!!

You see how star-celebrity determines
who you listen to?

Read the interview for information
regarding what he has witnessed and
what is happening. It is NOT about whether
you like him. He is not a candy bar or pop
star. He is a witness to real events.

Read it. It won't kill you.

TWEEK128

Monday, October 24, 2005 6:50 AM

Yeah, but he sure wishes he was and acts accordingly.

As for what's been happening, no, it's not quite the fault of the U.S. and U.K. so much as it is the radical Shi'a elements in Basra and Iran.

But, I'm not the type to assume that evil can only be done by Western powers. Evil doesn't only happen through the inaction of the good. It happens through the actions of the evil, and remains unchecked through the actions of the good.

And for all you want to say about women's rights, laws and declarations don't kill or unkill prostitutes in the streets. Force against the elements willing to kill does. Something the Americna forces tend to do is enforce order and law. The British, out of respect for the Shi'a turned a blind eye to the growing theocratic elements in Basra. Now that they're reaping what they've sown, there's a want to criticize the US?

Laughable. Five months ago, there was likely praise for the British contingents "hands-off" tendencies and cultural sensitivity. And what do we have now? Increasing order in the U.S. areas and a rising theocratic movement in U.K. administered Basra.

Cultural sensitivity is no reason to let theocrats usurp power.

HOWARD

Monday, October 24, 2005 7:47 AM

The US anti-Sunni pro Shia policy has created
this.

You are ignoring so much of what Fisk reports.

By the way. How many more people exactly are
you prepared to have murdered in your name
in order to achieve the imposition of "our"
values upon a people that may not want it?

At what point would you say. We have killed
too many now. We have tortured too many and
mostly tortured the wrong people and that
torture is wrong and that it all has to end?

And remember this as you seem fixated about
Iran.

Who was it that drove Iran into a religious
solution.

It was the CIA and Kissinger who helped the
Shah to purge Iran of all secular Left-Wing
dissent leaving the Iranian people who never
wanted a theocratic option no choice but to
back a cleric lead revolution to rid themselves
of the Shah. CIA supervised torture and murder
under the Shah convinced them of this.

Meanwhile the CIA under Bush Snr put their fave
thug into the Presidency of Iraq. Saddam was
first hired by the CIA as a young assassin in
1959 last year of Eisenhower admin. Saddam took
defacto power in 68 then official President a
decade later.

In the corridors of the CIA the relationship
between Bush snr and Saddam was known as
"the love affair".

TWEEK128

Monday, October 24, 2005 11:32 AM

Way to spasm all over the post.

As for Iran, points noted. That's another mess that needs cleaning.

As you said, Saddam was our mess, too. We've rectified it. Are you suggesting we should go into Iran, too? I tend to like that idea if the situation was right.

Speaking of torture, are you familiar with that his regime was responsible for? We've ended more suffering there than we've caused. Further, torture? What torture are you referring to specifically? Humiliation is a form of torture, sure. But so is raping a wife and daughter in front of the husband. So is feeding a man feet first into a plastic shredder so you can hear him scream, and so that the pain lasts longer.

If you really consider anything the U.S. has done as "torture," then any moral grandstanding you presume to do is hamstrung from the outset.

All the "refusal to impose our values" has done is allowed Basra to degenerate to the point noted above. Have any opinion on the fact that the U.S. is better appreciated in their administered areas than the less-imposing British forces?

And, y'know, you've got a point about them "not wanting" our values. That democracy is a pesky, and decidedly Western thing. Heavens forbid we impose such a wicked concept as voting for leadership into a Middle Eastern state.

HERO

Monday, October 24, 2005 1:29 PM

Quote:
Originally posted by Howard:

In the corridors of the CIA the relationship
between Bush snr and Saddam was known as
"the love affair".

Ok, thats enough. Put the koolaid down and step away from the internet.

I give you credit. Your an equal opportunity nutjob. You bash Clinton with the grace of Rush Limbaugh and Bush with the moral outrage of Michael Moore.

So if you hate Bush and hate Clinton that leaves only one catagory for you to fit in. Your an anti-American.

Here, I'll prove it, I'll be you for a moment: America, bad. American policy, bad. American charity, bad. American culture, bad. Anything that hurts America, thwarts American policy, or American allies, good.

That makes you a French licking, earthquake loving, hurricane cheering, Bin Laddenite. Hey, one of you Kerry supports out there, I'll hold him, you poke him in the eye.

'Look son, an old Europe America hater in his natural habitat. There's wine, a statue of Lenin, a suicide bomb making kit, and even a connection to the internet with all the crazy anti-American websites listed under favorites.'
'But Dad, I wanna see the Hippos...'

H

SIGNYM

Monday, October 24, 2005 4:22 PM

Wow Hero, you sure managed to derail a detailed discussion!

I was going to point out that I'm also very unhappy with Clinton. As for the lack of sovereignty in Iraq- I didn't need a signal moment (like the tank and helicopter retrieval of two Brits from the Basra jail) to tell me that! Clearly, the US and Britain are supporting a puppet government and a puppet process. But as far as what those two officers were actually doing, and what they had in-hand: so far, there are a lot of allegations of the work of agents provocateurs but no proof. I'm not dismissing for one instant the possibility that this is occuring- after all my dad was an agent provocateur and I've seen plenty of evidence that the tactic is still favored by the USA and prolly Britain. But still- no hard evidence that such is occuring in Iraq. In my mind, the jury is still out. And it seems while Bush is really pushing for a unified Iraq, the provocateurs would seem to be pushing in the opposite direction.

I'm more interested in where this is all going. al Sadr is one powerfully underappreciated actor. He seems to be playing deep strategy in the political, security/military and popular arenas... and winning. His wiining message is USA OUT NOW. (Gives y'all an idea of how appreciated we are there.) Parliament includes many of his supporters who ran under different banners. Any opinion as to his ultimate strategy and goal?

Please don't think they give a shit.

TWEEK128

Monday, October 24, 2005 4:43 PM

Sig,

Problem is mostly with the Brit admin'd Shi'a areas. Sunni areas are coming around.

Regarding the agents, an impression I'd gotten elsewhere was that they were active in tracking terrorist elements and were deep cover when they were taken in by the corrupt locals.

Overly simplistic view? Perhaps. Correct? Also, perhaps. Incorrect? Perhaps.

But the bottom line is, these were Brits, who like to look down their noses at American insensitivities and who were allowing murders to go uninvestigated by the thoroughly infiltrated local police, so is it any wonder that law and order might not be at hand in Basra?

Again, meanwhile, our "heavy-handed" tactics are earning U.S. forces in the Sunni areas to gain the trust of the locals who want the so-called "insurgents" to stop killing children and innocent Iraqis. We're actively working towards civility in the heart of the "insurgency" while the Brits have allowed a new fever swamp to grow where there was once order.

Something to be said for getting your hands dirty and sacking up to the task at hand.

EDIT: Oh, yeah, and about al-Sadr: Again, that's a problem more in Shi'a areas where he can accuse the Brits of being distant, imperialistic occupiers who care more about looking tough and care less about people living and dying unjustly. In the U.S. areas, the hands-on approach has yielded more positive results.

And, yeah, Iran's hand is likely up al-Sadr's backside. Better our puppet than theirs. But better no puppet at all, and we're more likely to withdraw the hand than Iran would be.

Others may disagree, but if they do, anyone with working knowledge of state actors other than the U.S. and U.K. can well disregard whatever follows or precedes such blatantly ignorant disagreement.

PREV PAGE 1 2 3 4 5 6 NEXT PAGE