Saddam Hussein arrested part II

[Ming]

Pick it up where you left off.

[Winston]

Re: Saddam Hussein arrested part II

Originally posted by Ming
Pick it up where you left off.

I'm telling you, the lefties got it all wrong.

[Snotty]

.

[lord of the mark]

from the Guardian, via Andy Sullivan (my favorite Thatcherite gay new American)

'In the same northern Iraqi town yesterday, about 700 people rallied, chanting: "Saddam is in our hearts, Saddam is in our blood." US soldiers and Iraqi policemen shouted back: "Saddam is in our jail."'

[Q Classic]

zed? zed's dead, babe.

same thing with saddam, but not as easy to rhyme.

[Ramo]

So?

There was no corollary. That was simply the point I was making to Kramerman. And I'm not saying that's a bad thing. I don't want Iraq to be a US client state.

No worse than Afghanistan, say.

That remains to be seen.

[GePap]

Thye say in Fallujah a police station was occupied, the cops driven out and files burned.

The capture of Saddam does nothing to alleviate the two basic problems- the shift in power form the suni Arabs to the Shia Arabs, a first in 80 years of Iraq, and how to handle the position of Islam to the state.

[lord of the mark]

Originally posted by GePap
Thye say in Fallujah a police station was occupied, the cops driven out and files burned.

The capture of Saddam does nothing to alleviate the two basic problems- the shift in power form the suni Arabs to the Shia Arabs, a first in 80 years of Iraq, and how to handle the position of Islam to the state.

it was necessary but not sufficient to rebuilding Iraq.

The two things you mention are basically things that Iraqis must work out together - capturing Saddam gives them more "space" in which to do it, by reducing the disincentives, real or imagined, that hinder participation in the political process.

[GePap]

I don't see how it does anything to further either issue. Certainly it was important to put the past behind, but the rule of Sunni over Shia has been true since 1920-way before Saddam, and the issue of islams relation to temporal power is one that is present in the whole islamic world.

[GhengisFarb™]

Originally posted by lord of the mark
from the Guardian, via Andy Sullivan (my favorite Thatcherite gay new American)

'In the same northern Iraqi town yesterday, about 700 people rallied, chanting: "Saddam is in our hearts, Saddam is in our blood." US soldiers and Iraqi policemen shouted back: "Saddam is in our jail."'

[SlowwHand]

Bush Says Saddam Deserves to Be Executed
1 hour, 28 minutes ago

WASHINGTON - Saddam Hussein (news - web sites) deserves the "ultimate penalty" but it will be up to the people of Iraq (news - web sites) to decide whether he should be executed, President Bush (news - web sites) said Tuesday.

The president also said that Iraqis are "capable of conducting the trial themselves."

Bush made his comments in an interview with ABC News' Diane Sawyer.

The president, at a news conference on Monday, had said he had his own opinions about Saddam's fate but he declined to spell them out. He elaborated in the interview Tuesday, and the network released a partial transcript of his remarks.

"I think he ought to receive the ultimate penalty ... for what he has done to his people," the president said. "I mean, he is a torturer, a murderer, they had rape rooms. This is a disgusting tyrant who deserves justice, the ultimate justice. But that will be decided not by the president of the United States but by the citizens of Iraq in one form or another."

[lord of the mark]

Originally posted by GePap
I don't see how it does anything to further either issue. Certainly it was important to put the past behind, but the rule of Sunni over Shia has been true since 1920-way before Saddam, and the issue of islams relation to temporal power is one that is present in the whole islamic world.

Perhaps youd find the following of interests


US seeks compromise on Iraqi elections

Im not sure these ARE the two basic problems, as opposed to establishing security and rebuilding the economy. The Sunni arabs are 20% of the population - if they cant reconcile themselves to that fact, that is ultimately their problem. Assuming a federal constitution that allows them control of some governates, and enough division within the Shia so that transethnic coalitions are necessary (the former a certainty, the latter likely) the reasonable among the Sunni, especially the educated professionals in Baghdad will be reconciled. A considerable number in Tikrit and Fallujah will likely never be reconciled - they will have to be put down by force - there are Afrikaaners who are not reconciled to majority rule in South Africa - doesnt matter much. Assuming that Sunni arab neighbors dont meddle, which the coalition can deal with in a number of ways.

Islam - I think they are headed towards a compromise on that - I dont think Sistani expects any formal role for himself or other clerics in the constitution whether it formally recognizes Islam or not. He does expect an informal influence over the Shia population - but thats inevitable, and should wane over time as Iraqis gain political maturity.

[GePap]

I forgot to add the Kurdish nationalists who would rather have a Kurdistan than an Iraq, but that is another issue. If this 20% were spread out, maybe it would be a problem, but they are concentrated, specially around the centers of power. That does make a 20% of the pop with few loyalties to the state a danger to stability.

Rebuilding the economy is probalby the simplest thing.

The issue is not what the coolition will do. The coolition must leave at some point. The US controlled the Phillipinnes for 40 years, then we gave them independence in 1946..and then the coutnry became a military dictatorship and we are back fighting muslim rebels.

Latin America shows us new democracy is unstable-having 10% of the pop against it is bad news.

[Ramo]

US seeks compromise on Iraqi elections

Already? I figured it'd take Bremer another month or so till he'd decide he'd have to give into Sistani on one-person one-vote elections.

[lord of the mark]

Originally posted by GePap
I forgot to add the Kurdish nationalists who would rather have a Kurdistan than an Iraq, but that is another issue. If this 20% were spread out, maybe it would be a problem, but they are concentrated, specially around the centers of power. That does make a 20% of the pop with few loyalties to the state a danger to stability.

Rebuilding the economy is probalby the simplest thing.

The issue is not what the coolition will do. The coolition must leave at some point. The US controlled the Phillipinnes for 40 years, then we gave them independence in 1946..and then the coutnry became a military dictatorship and we are back fighting muslim rebels.

Latin America shows us new democracy is unstable-having 10% of the pop against it is bad news.

hmm - 40 years. Well i hope im around in 40 years to see if youre right about Iraq - i fear youve just made the assertion "this will all end badly" effectively unfalsifiable - can we keep our prognosis to say the next 10 years?

In any case i wonder what the literacy rates, per cent urbanized etc were for PI in 1946? Probably far lower than Iraq in 2003.

I also dont expect the sunni arabs to keep fighting the state for 40 years - at some point, assuming the state offers them decent treatment, theyll pragmatically accept that their insurgency has failed. memories of past glories will fade. As hungarians manage to live in peace in romania, swedes in finland, and even russians in the Baltic states (where the numbers and the regional balance of power are far worse than in the case of Iraq) Oh, and Muslims in India.

Take as a case in point the different actions of Israeli Arabs and west bank arabs - the israeli arabs who have citizenship and the vote grudgingly accept the Israeli state. The west bank arabs who do not have citizenship or the vote, and know Israel can never grant it to them, are not reconcilable. Sunni arabs will have votes, citizenship and will be a tolerated minority.