Friday, May 18, 2007

Exit liberators

The people who have an interest in the US remaining in Iraq have insisted that if we leave, all hell will break loose.

Which makes you wonder what the fuck you call what’s going on over there now, right?

But I never bought that argument. First of all, there’s the reason that Bill Maher sums up so beautifully when he says “They’ve been wrong about every single thing in Iraq up until now, so why should we believe them about this?”

Secondly, it just doesn’t make sense to me on a gut level. After all, it is our presence there that seems to be the catalyst for insurgent violence. And it is our presence there that inspires ordinary, peaceful citizens to identify with the insurgents instead of their government.

Yes, I may be oversimplifying. But as it turns out, BushCo and the Coalition Provisional Authority may have secretly agreed with me.

Remember the Coalition Provisional Authority, the body that ruled Iraq until it was handed over to some Iraqis that we approved of? Right before the CPA ceded authority, there was a decrease in violence, and one of the explanations given was that many Iraqis, including the insurgents, mistakenly thought that because the CPA was giving up their governing duties, that therefore the Americans were leaving.

That’s right. The CPA concluded that the (mistaken) idea that the Americans were bugging out caused violence to decrease in Iraq.

And yet, not only did BushCo keep that CPA report secret, they also refused to admit publicly what they did in that report: the possibility that our exit from Iraq might make things instantly better, for us and for them.

Which makes you wonder why the fuck we’re still over there now, right?


Grant Miller said...

Two or three years ago, I thought the answer was more troops, etc. Not that I was for the war, but thought if we want things to calm down and go more smoothly, we needed more "boots one the ground."

I now think the opposite is true.

Skylers Dad said...

I would like to test the theory by pulling them all back at least into Kuwait. What could it hurt?

If violence goes down, like we think it will, then the troops are in a relatively safe area for a pullout.

vikkitikkitavi said...

Grant: Shall I assume that all the resources of Grant Miller Media are behind you on this? Because that would be awesome.

SkyDad: I'd like to test it by bugging the fuck out and home, right this fucking second. But we won't, not until we can somehow redefine what's going on into something called "victory."

Michael said...

I think our presence has become the most pressing cause for violence. Our clueless and ham-handed administration has managed to do just about everything to galvanize an insurgency effort.

So let's say we pull out. The reactionary violence dies down. And then, whether it's a hot topic for the US media or not, the lack of a common enemy turns Iraqi tribes against each other. And for all the infrastructure that's been trashed in our wake, you cannot possibly predict that peace is what will rush in to fill the vacuum.

I think we're past the point of that Pentagon report, which mostly restates a position paper funded by the RAND Corporation and co-authored by GHWB, shortly after his presidency. What we've got now, I think, is no-win.

dad said...

Past countries that have been "occupied" have had tribal related violence when the occupiers left. I don't think it matters when our troops leave, there will be violence. Since it doesn't matter when, do it now and reduce the anti-American sentiment in the middle east and the rest of the world and for the best reason of all, save lives.

Anon. Blogger said...

Wait, didn't I hear something about victory back when the US troops took Bagdad? Oh, my mistake, I believe the term was 'mission accomplished'.

But how can the term accomplished be used when there is no defined objective? Was the objective to get WMDs? (uh, no cause there weren't any) Was it to catch and try Hussien? Was it to put the "right" Iraqis in place in government? What constitutes victory, mission accomplished, or even a simple, "We got the job done." ?

True answer: We dunno.

Bushco painted the US into a corner with lies and now can't come up with the right lie to get us out. They have to find a lie that will justify an exit that says "victory", and there isn't one.

So.... Georgie W. will leave the problem for the next President to deal with, so he can exit with his ego in tact.

Mighty costly ego that jerk has, huh? (people's lives and tons of money).

But his ego is worth it. Just ask him.

Johnny Yen said...

Amen. Let's bring them home.

GETkristiLOVE said...

I'm resisting the "pull out" jokes because this is a serious topic. Bring 'em home, all the way home.

I.M. Small said...


"It is our presence there creates
The problem"--now declared
In Britain, as a nation waits
That now becomes prepared
To leave that place
While trying to save face.

Each from his angle understands
Uniquely--very well--
The problem fluttering out of hands,
Debacle, terrible
Is serious flawed,
Because of so much fraud:

Save those as have an interest in
Prolonging the defeat,
These see a kind of "might have been"
From which word of retreat
Implies a route
To numbness absolute.

Annihilation, nullity,
Negation of illusion,
Therefore they strive, communally
To keep, as by profusion
Colluding tunes
As enigmatic runes.

None likes to have revealed to all
But mostly to himself,
The evidence of fraud; will crawl
To some high upper shelf
In consciousness
So to avoid soul´s mess.

Confession of the horror is
A difficulty always,
When lingers like the stench of piss
One´s shame in hidden hallways--
But so things are
When waging unjust war.