A Quietus and a Bare Bodkin

I'm not trying to make a false parallel, as I know the Israeli-Palestinian conflict is so different on so many levels from what is going on in Iraq. But with every day that goes by, I am more and more grimly reminded of the IP conflict when reading the latest from Iraq. I'm not asserting any political statement by that, just a disquieting observation.

Comments

[Haggai]

Definitely, the situation has taken a dramatic turn for the worse in the past week alone. Are those crazy lynchings in Fallujah representative of only an extreme few, or is there growing sympathy within a lot of the Iraqi population like that, much like the (partly caught on video) horror show lynchings of some Israeli soldiers in Ramallah in September 2000? That was only a few weeks into the intifada, and it was one of the first signs of the significantly worse things to come (the suicide bombings still didn't kick in until some months later).

[Milton]

I don't know. What disturbs me most is that it was Sunnis who formed the core of Saddam Hussein's loyalists and supporters; he brutally oppressed the Shiites, and yet now it is the Shiites who are fighting Americans now.

The problem with the mantra that the 'enemy of my enemy is my friend' is that once 'Dr. Evil' is removed, there may be no reasons for the friendship, and it may in fact, turn into an adversarial relationship.

The core Sadddam loyalists don't like us in Iraq, and now the Shi'a majority don't like us in Iraq. It does not bode well.

[Botman]

Doesn't bode well at all, Milt. And I don't think it would be a "political statement" to point out that we have no plan to extricate ourselves from this mess. That is, unless arbitrarily picking June 30th out of a hat for a handover date constitutes a withdrawal plan.

This IS a political statement: right-wing ideologues from the Dick Cheney, to Wolfowitz, to Rumsfeld, either utterly disregarded the potential problems of a post-war Iraq, or completely failed to devise an effective strategy for dealing with those problems.

[Owen Courrèges]

There are many radicalize Shiites in Iraq, but they are not anywhere near being the majority. That's exactly why they are rebelling; they have little hope of gaining significant representation in a democratic Iraq. In my mind, that's why the violence is continuing to escalate the nearer we get to the June deadline. These people fear it.

The majority of Shiites, I believe, still support the US. We are, after all, talking about one very radical cleric among many more moderate clerics. If al-Sadr actually had substantial support throughout the Shiite population, rather than just concentrated numbers of fanatical followers, you'd see more leaders coming out to support him. From my vantage, he looks pretty much alone.

What is important is that we hand over sovereignty ASAP so that people like al-Sadr don't grow in popularity. We want them to stay marginalized and scared, which is how they are now.

[Milton]

Owen,

Shi'a Muslims are the majority in Iraq. Now, obviously, not all Shi'a are radicals, of course, but it's a keg of dynamite, IMO.

[Owen Courrèges]

Milton,

I said that "radicalize [sic] Shiites" are nowhere near being the majority. I am, of course, well aware that Shiites in general are the majority, but the radicals do not make up the majority of Shiites. That's what I was saying.

[Milton]

I know that's what you said, which is why I said "not all Shi'a are radicals." I still think this is a problem that is only going to get worse before it gets better. Upon what do you base your belief that the majority of Shi'a still support the U.S.? Blowing up mosques is unlikely to turn undecideds to our cause (not criticizing the military tactic).

[Owen Courrèges]

I mainly base my belief upon the fact that we have the support of most Shiite leaders. That support has waned somewhat, but I believe it's still there.