posted
Mmm, some good news, even if it isn't much. Looks like they're tired of all the violence. Part of me hopes, however, that they'll simply aid coalition forces, rather than taking the law into their own hands.
posted
One of those happy stories that is also sad. I'm glad the Iraqi people are starting to stand up for themselves instead of being victims.
Posts: 4953 | Registered: Jan 2004
| IP: Logged |
posted
It's not a matter of aiding coalition forces - one armed Iraqi looks much like another and I'd rather avoid the issue of trying to sort out friendlies from hostiles.
That will lead to a massive fubar as either coalition troops slaughter would-be aides or coalition troops get slaughtered by insurgents disguised as aides.
You can't give a cocker spaniel your car keys and expect him to drive himself to the vet - if he asks for the keys, however...
posted
On the contrary, the Iraqi's should take the Law into their own hands. Theoretically (at least propaganda-wise), that is why the US still has troops in Iraq. The only real question is the degree to which they seek to enforce the Law as opposed to seek to impose their own will in the manner of terrorists/gangesters. Americans in America are allowed to make citizen's arrests. Americans in America are allowed to defend themselves against being murdered, kidnapped, etc. Iraqis in Iraq should be allowed to have those same rights.
posted
The only thing I am worried about is this merely turning into civil war. As long as it's handled well, it should be okay.
Posts: 8473 | Registered: Apr 2003
| IP: Logged |
posted
The last time a bouncer had to quell a violent drunk. The last time a security guard stopped a shoplifter. Recently, when a bunch of passengers stopped an out-of-control man from continuing an attack upon a flight attendant. Bailbondsmen and/or bounty hunters working for bailbondsmen... Etc.
It ain't a matter of shouting "I arrest you in the name of the Law." It's a matter of stopping a crime, turning the surviving criminal(s) over to the official legal authorities, and pressing criminal charges: whether your own or those of the original victim(s).
posted
One strategy that we are finding works is to have a coilition team with the Iraqi's platoons it seems that our pressence shames them or inspires them to greater courage.
Either way we are setting them an example and many of the politicians are also showing outstanding courage in the face of the insurgancey which after all can only function to the degree that it can frighten the populace.
It is good to see you applaud the Iraqi people for not backing down, now lets hear a round for the W for the same reason! What you so obviously see as a growing virtue in the Iraqi's is the virtue we love so much in our president.
If only from insurgents opposed to the notion of Democracy as another tool of the evil West to undermine and destroy the Arab world and want to install their own political or religious leader.
And once the forces of Democracy are toppled as the common foe, you can expect to see infighting among the factions to determine who gets the big hat.
The only people to answer that question are the ones capable of standing after the shooting stops.
posted
I don't think that is a given, but if that does happen, it's a lot more complicated than just a civil war.
The Kurds have had their own security apparatus in place for years, and could easily take control of their own territory, plus Kirkuk (which historically is also theirs, despite Saddam's..."redistricting efforts").
Of course right after that happens, while the Shiites fight with Sunni insurgents, the Turks invade Iraqi Kurdistan, and America quickly withdraws from the whole mess and cries foul.
Hopefully that won't happen.
Posts: 21898 | Registered: Nov 2004
| IP: Logged |
Printer-friendly view of this topic
