Here Goes Nothing ...

Hey guys, I didn't read through all the posts, but I thought that this was a really good read on what's going on in Iraq.

washingtonpost.com - nation, world, technology and Washington area news and headlines (http://washingtonpost.com)

It talks about how President Bush's strategy of a "surge", by all early signs, is working. One can only hope.

Your right, good article

Interesting article. It's interesting that the press has remained fairly silent about the relative peace in Baghdad. I guarantee you that the press would be jizzing all over themselves if the plan was failing horribly. But, then again, the press knows that disasters sell more papers than success stories.

Reading in some of the Iraqi blogs:

"Not only official statements say so (Defense ministry officials said today that attacks are down by 80% in Baghdad (http://www.radiosawa.com/arabic_news.aspx?id=1163405)). It’s a reality I live in nowadays, at least in my neighborhood and its surroundings. It is also what I hear from friends and relatives in other parts of the city.
We are hearing fewer explosions and less gunfire now than two weeks ago and that, in Baghdad, qualifies as quiet."


"Looking at the relative increase in the number of attacks and their geographic extent one can expect the coming days to bring more escalation, but with the amount of power available for US and Iraqi troops I think the bad guys will not be able to achieve much."

-Quotes from (IRAQ THE MODEL (http://iraqthemodel.blogspot.com/))

Reading in some of the Iraqi blogs:

"Not only official statements say so (Defense ministry officials said today that attacks are down by 80% in Baghdad (http://www.radiosawa.com/arabic_news.aspx?id=1163405)). It’s a reality I live in nowadays, at least in my neighborhood and its surroundings. It is also what I hear from friends and relatives in other parts of the city.
We are hearing fewer explosions and less gunfire now than two weeks ago and that, in Baghdad, qualifies as quiet."


"Looking at the relative increase in the number of attacks and their geographic extent one can expect the coming days to bring more escalation, but with the amount of power available for US and Iraqi troops I think the bad guys will not be able to achieve much."

-Quotes from (IRAQ THE MODEL (http://iraqthemodel.blogspot.com/))
DAMMIT, I knew I should have taken????????? Taken?????? Hmm....Iraqi instead of Spanish!! Who knew

It looks to shed a little light on Iraq.

I'm very cautiously optimistic. As far as the whole media thing, I'm not surprised at all.

I think you could add West Germany to the list.

west germany wasn't just america, and it wasn't unified either. there were other countries helping there and it took 44 years to finally get it right.

Although the status quo is unacceptable, I do not think that we can simply walk away from Iraq.

If Somalia or Afghanistan looked like terrorist havens, what do you think Iraq will look like post-withdrawal? Iran, and other states, will use Iraq as a staging ground to launch terrorist attacks elsewhere. However, unlike Somalia or Afghanistan, Iraq is not located in some desolate area without any significant infrastructure and far away from large cities.

Although Al Qaeda was not in Iraq before the invasion, they are there now and we cannot simply retreat without emboldening those who think that America is a paper tiger that will run at the sight of blood. I believe that our enemies' resolve to fight is, in part, dependent on whether they believe that we can be defeated. Most think that we will run and lack the determination that they do. The war in Iraq not only affects our present, it affects our future ability to wage wars successfully and our credibility in general.

If people were/are concerned about humanitarian crises like Somalia, Rwanda, Darfur, etc., what do people think will happen in Iraq if we leave? The Iraqi civil war is not going to end, it is going to get worse. I've never understood why some opposed the war in Iraq and supported intervening in Bosnia, Rwanda, Darfur, etc. (BTW, I opposed both Iraq and all other humanitarian interventions).

What do we do about those hundreds of thousands who have cooperated with the U.S., its allies, or the Iraqi government? They, and their families, are almost certain to be killed in a horrible way if we leave and I do not think it would be honorable to simply leave them to their fates.

iraq had stability that darfur etc do not. and though saddam killed a lot of his own people, it's not even close to what's been happening in parts of africa (and they have much more primitive armies and populations that would be much more supportive of ending their enduring civil strife, instead of a situation like iraq, were it got made a LOT worse than it was pre-invasion).

btw, the supporters and iraqi employees of the US are already the ones paying the steepest price in lives lost. while leaving would obviously make it much worse, it's not exactly roses right now anyways.

west germany wasn't just america, and it wasn't unified either. there were other countries helping there and it took 44 years to finally get it right.

You're right the Americans had some help from the British, just like they are getting in Iraq. I guess the French did get a token portion in the South. The reunification of both East and West Germany took ~44 years but West Germany (Bonn Republic) was relatively stable in a much shorter time period.

iraq had stability that darfur etc do not. and though saddam killed a lot of his own people, it's not even close to what's been happening in parts of africa (and they have much more primitive armies and populations that would be much more supportive of ending their enduring civil strife, instead of a situation like iraq, were it got made a LOT worse than it was pre-invasion).

300,000 of his own civilians were killed during his reign and another 1M Iraqis and Iranians were killed when Saddam made a land grab during the Iran-Iraq War. It's pretty hard to beat those numbers.

west germany wasn't just america, and it wasn't unified either. there were other countries helping there and it took 44 years to finally get it right.

This is why I think it's so hard to say "the US needs to be out of a completely rebuilt Iraq by year XXXX." Maybe it's our culture, but it seems like no one wants to face the fact that rebuilding a nation, especially one that still has to deal with outside influences that want to build it into a decidely anti-Western state, is going to take a very long time.