Iraq after the war?

[Ned]

I failed to see the option where America installs a brutal imperialist military puppet government, kept in power and taking orders from US occupation forces, even while permitting corporate friends of Bush to drain Iraq of its oil and make themselves and the Bush family enormously wealthy.

[MichaeltheGreat]

Re: Re: Iraq after the war?

Originally posted by Shi Huangdi


The Iraqi Shi'ite have been crushed before when they tried to rise up. If needed, they can be crushed again.

Since they're a majority of the population, I guess that royally ****s your pretense to be for democracy, human rights, or anything other than a naked power grab.

[MichaeltheGreat]

Originally posted by Ned
I failed to see the option where America installs a brutal imperialist military puppet government, kept in power and taking orders from US occupation forces, even while permitting corporate friends of Bush to drain Iraq of its oil and make themselves and the Bush family enormously wealthy.

Well, that's a given.

[MichaeltheGreat]

Originally posted by Drake Tungsten
This is exactly the impression I got from Bush's speech about creating a functioning democracy in Iraq...

Mouthing platitudes in Washington for domestic public consumption is a bit different from actually doing something on the ground, in the midst of nationalist, religious and ethnic rivalries of which we have little understanding, while dealing with outside political interference, power maneuvering and influence games from our erstwhile "allies" and the Iranians.

[St Leo]

Where's the "Saddam's loyal army destroys that of the invading imperialist lackeys of the Great Shaitan and goes on to recreate the Arab empire." option?

[Ned]

MTG, Of course.

I was watching a reporter conduct a survey of the Arab street to ask their opinion of the upcoming war. Of course, they were against it. When the reporter asked why - the answer was uniform: OIL. Bush was after the OIL.

Why, even I would be against the war if that is what I thought it was about.

[Drake Tungsten]

Mouthing platitudes in Washington for domestic public consumption is a bit different from actually doing something on the ground, in the midst of nationalist, religious and ethnic rivalries of which we have little understanding, while dealing with outside political interference, power maneuvering and influence games from our erstwhile "allies" and the Iranians.

I was mocking Ramo's pronouncements on Bush's "political disposition", as if he has any idea what Bush is really thinking on the matter. I have my doubts about how successful American attempts to introduce democracy to Iraq will be, but I'm not so far gone as to believe that a ruthless dictator is Bush's best case scenario...

[SlowwHand]

Why not just do the Iraqi people's dirty work, dusting Hussein and son's asses, then go away ?
Give them a chance to do it right, or not.

I don't want the US to turn into full-time babysitters.

[Shi Huangdi]

"What working model? Saddam's regime? The people in the south won't put up with Ba'athists ruling them once Saddam is gone and there really isn't any other elites that the US could coopt to run the area (unlike the Kurdish north where there are somewhat functional institutions, where things should go relatively well unless the Turks **** with things to "protect" the Turkomen in Kirkuk)."

What I meant by installing order is putting down any inital rebellions- the model we have there is Saddam's military actions against the Shiite. If they can be crushed before they can be crushed again. In an absolute worst case scenario though where it appears democracy doesn't stand a chance in hell, though, we could install a number 8 scenario.

"In which case would people of a given religion be less inclided to secularism? One in which an Islamist government is oppressing you or one in which a adamantly secular government run by people of a different religion is tyrannizing you?"

It's hard to say. Hopefully there might be some connections between the two Shiite communities. It is really hard to tell whether the Shi'ites of the South would be willing to cooperate with a secular government. Keep in mind though Shiites are a majority but an overwhelming majority, so if a significant minority of Shiites are secular, the Islamist Shiites would not gain powe. As far as the adamantly secular government tyrannizing you, that may work towards our favor. They really hate Saddam and if we do replace Saddam with a government in which Shiites would have a say they might be grateful to the USA.

We should have a better idea of what is possible once our forces our on the ground there.

"I don't think there'll be all that much, the Bush administration's attention span isn't that long and there isn't the Communist Peril to goad the US into putting a lot of effort into it as was the case with Germany and Japan."

From Bush's speeches, he might pay attention. It sounds like he wants to make Iraq his big project for democracy in the Middle East.

"
Since they're a majority of the population, I guess that royally ****s your pretense to be for democracy, human rights, or anything other than a naked power grab."

In putting in another dictator, that would be a worst case scenario. I believe a #1 option should be possible.



Also if we wanted to a federation of warlords a la Afghanistan might not be completely impossible if we wanted to go that route. Simply arm local tribes and commanders, and keep order by making it clear if they piss us off we can side with other warlords in crushing them. Al Qaeda is Sunni, so we shouldn't have to worry too much about them getting support of the Iraqi Shiite.

[Kontiki]

Definitely Afghanistan-like, but not exactly the same due to the differing infrastructure and groups. The US will nonetheless bribe/cajole the differing groups to form a loose coalition which will be just about as successful as it is in Afghanistan.

However, the Afghanistan option is really just a first stage. It's still too soon to say what Afghanistan will look like 10-20 years down the road (except that it definitely won't be prosperous). As I said, I see Iraq looking like Afghanistan immediately after the war, but it could turn into a number of the other scenarios at a later date.

[Ramo]

I was mocking Ramo's pronouncements on Bush's "political disposition", as if he has any idea what Bush is really thinking on the matter. I have my doubts about how successful America attempts to introduce democracy to Iraq will be, but I'm not so far gone to believe that a ruthless dictator is the best case scenario...

Why do you think you have any idea what Shrub is really thinking on the matter? Because he said it in a public speech?

It's very likely Shrub wants to maximize US authority. The quickest, cleanest, simplest way to do that is to put a more loyal Sunni dictator into power. Which is why I said it's the best case scenario.

Of course, Shrub isn't quite the brightest guy that's ever been in a position of power, so I have my doubts. I really hope Iraq doesn't turn into another Lebanon, but Shrub has shown some remarkable incompetence in terms of international diplomacy.

[Shi Huangdi]

Originally posted by SlowwHand
Why not just do the Iraqi people's dirty work, dusting Hussein and son's asses, then go away ?
Give them a chance to do it right, or not.

I don't want the US to turn into full-time babysitters.

Because if we do this, this is where the leftists worst case scenarios keep talking about have a chance of coming into play and we could end up with a government worse then Saddams.

[MichaeltheGreat]

Drake - I figured as much - I don't even bother to mock some of the more absurd pronouncements here.

[Drake Tungsten]

Why do you think you have any idea what Shrub is really thinking on the matter?

I don't think I ever claimed to know what Bush is thinking. I was just pointing out that your view has no basis in reality, although I'm wondering now why I even bothered...

[SlowwHand]

Originally posted by Shi Huangdi


Because if we do this, this is where the leftists worst case scenarios keep talking about have a chance of coming into play and we could end up with a government worse then Saddams.

Maybe, maybe not.
People deserve a chance.
So we go to Phillipines. Stay there.
Go to Iran. Stay there.
Go to Samolia. Stay there.
Go to N. Korea. Stay there.

Nahhhhhhh. Thanks for the opportunity, but no.