An Iraqi refugee returns...and other stories


An Iraqi reporter for the New York Times wrote a moving passage about his flight from Baghdad and his recent return. His story is the story of five million other Iraqis who've been displaced. Below is the account of his return:

After spending more than a year in Syria one day my father called me saying: "You can now return, and do not worry. Everything is fine now."

I felt happy for them and for me, but only for a moment.

Later, that feeling began to become a mixture of happiness and wariness. I wanted to return, but at the same time I hesitated. I wanted to know if the situation there was as people said, or if they just exaggerated.

During my travel from Syria to Baghdad I was completely relaxed. There were no worries, no fear of looters and terrorists with Al Qaeda, or Ansar al-Sunna (Protectors of the Sunni), Jaish al-Mohammed (Army of Mohammed) who used to control everything on the expressway between Syria and Baghdad.

Then when we stopped to get some rest near a big restaurant called Bilaad ash-Sham I saw many Iraqi and Syrian buses filled with travelers, and many four-wheel-drive vehicles.
They told me that everything was going fine and that stories that I had heard about the security situation in some Baghdad districts were right.

I reached Baghdad at 6 a.m. The driver dropped me in the Mansour district. My mother was waiting for me there. Sometimes when I was calling her I could not keep back my tears. She always makes me feel like a young child, which is something I like. It covers me with kindness and warmth. She can read my thoughts and feels what’s inside me.

I put my luggage inside my mother’s car and we drove to my neighborhood. While driving I was amazed to see what I had heard about: the huge difference in security, which was much better than when I left.

My mother said: "Drive normally and just slow down when you are near a checkpoint."

It was a really strange feeling to see my neighborhood again. In some ways it was the same, in others different. The main road had become ugly because there are now many damaged buildings and shops, and I noticed the marks of bullets and shrapnel everywhere around.

At the end of the journey when we reached the main entrance of my neighborhood my mother told me "Just slow down and say 'Asalaam alaikum,' (Peace be with you). Do not tell them you were in Syria." She was afraid they would think I was a wanted man who had run away.
At that moment everything I had heard before seemed not right and I became more anxious with each meter I came closer to the checkpoint. Then I turned my head to the left and I saw the biggest cement wall I have ever seen, which encircles my neighborhood.

There were two Iraqi soldiers standing at the checkpoint. One of them stopped me and told me to open the trunk and engine. The other smiled, saying: "It is the day of bombed cars."

He inspected my car with an explosive detector device. The other was just looking at us and it seemed that he recognized my mother’s face because he said: "Hi, auntie."

Now I felt really safe because those people were working properly, not like the security forces in my neighborhood before who were making a secure path during the night for militia members to pass through, targeting everything there.

I think that the Iraqi police and army are working in the right way because there is an American military center inside my neighborhood. But all the people I met said that if the Americans left, those militias would eat our flesh without mercy.

I spent my first night without hearing any kind of shooting and mortar bombing, not like a year earlier when my daughter was asking me about all the sounds around and I was telling her, "Do not panic, baby, that is fireworks."

This morning I heard the man who sells cooking gas knocking on the cylinders shouting "gaz, gaz, gaz" which is something that had not happened for two years in my neighborhood.

This meant that all the things I heard about the improvements are true. Even the people are more friendly and I can say that there is now a kind of mutual trust between the people and the soldiers, not like before when there was no trust between each other.
Now, maybe if we think deeply about it, we will find that each needs the other. People need the soldiers to secure them. At the same time the U.S. troops are now in a safe place, maybe they can have more than one Green Zone.

Will it stay safe or not?

I guess that all depends on the American troops, since we will not have qualified Iraqi forces soon. Although most Iraqi forces are sincere you find some have been infiltrated by groups of gunmen and sectarian people who made the mess all around us.

So we still need the Americans because if they intend to leave, there will be something like a hurricane which will extract everything - people, buildings and even trees. Everything that has happened and all that safety will be past, just like a sweet dream.

This is why there is no way I could vote for Obama. Iraq is in the top two of major issues, and his plan for a complete withdrawal in sixteen months will spell disaster for Mohamed Hussein and countless others. It is way too early to prioritize redeployment over providing security and reconstruction for a the populace that isn't ready yet to do so on its own.

Ex-Guantanamo detainee became a suicide bomber. The U.S. military confirmed that a former Guantanamo detainee became a suicide bomber in Mosul last month. Depending of which side you're coming from, he should have been kept in detention for a whole lot longer, or Guantanamo "radicalized" him and turned him into the suicide bomber he came to be.

Iran stops talking to us because of "tensions". Here's an analogy. Your neighbor lights a brown lunchbag full of dog crap on your front step, then he rings the bell and runs away. Fortunately, you're able to get fingerprint evidence that your neighbor was the culprit. So you call him and say, "Look, bub, I have proof that you pulled that little stunt on my front porch. We need to talk about this." And your neighbor's reply is, "I refuse to talk to you about this because tensions between us make such a conversation impossible! Goodbye." Click.

Such was the response yesterday from Iranian Foreign Minister Hoshyar Zebari. U.S. and Iraqi forces are inserting themselves into Sadr City in part because Iranian-made materiel was being fired into the Green Zone. The audacity of such a response. How dare we try to protect ourselves and others by preventing Iranian-made munitions from getting shot into these areas.

Flush on oil, short on water. American reconstruction efforts haven't gone far enough when it comes to the Baghdad water supply. This is the price Iraqis are paying because we didn't secure this country sooner. Meantime, oil production has reached its interim goal of 2.2 million barrels a day, but hasn't changed much over the last eight months.

Fastest growing cities this side of Dubai. We don't get much news of what's going on in Kurdistan, perhaps because the Kurds are going about their business like everyday Americans. The Christian Science Monitor has a piece on Naz City, a proposed $20 billion master-planned community powered entirely by natural gas. The Kurds have been taking advantage of their autonomy, oil revenues and relative security, going full throttle on an historic building construction bonanza.

Government too slow bringing in "awakened" Sunni fighters. Dr. iRack warns of future problems if the Shiite-dominated government doesn't bring more Sunni and Shiite "Sons of Iraq" into the nation's security forces. Generally, Abu Muqawama is a damn good site on COIN doctrine and events in Iraq.

U.S. Army guy goes Farmer Ted. This blog entry provides some new information on Iraq agriculture. The problem isn't so much the farmers and their expertise, but lack of infrastructure, specificially, reliable electricity and fuel supplies to run generators and irrigation pumps.
--

"So hopefully there is a 527 out there right now willing to ruin John McCain's and/or his family's reputation if it needs to be done."

Comment viewing options

Select your preferred way to display the comments and click "Save settings" to activate your changes.
Heartwarming anecdotes (of dubious authenticity) aside (#93374)
by stillnotking

the fact is that we are spending a trillion or so bucks a year to prop up a government that will not outlive our occupation. Iraq will boil over as soon as we stop sitting on the lid; any other analysis is so foolish as to qualify as genuinely delusional. The Glorious Surge is a political tactic by the Bush Administration to bolster the myth-making efforts of American Republicans: if we'd only stayed a little longer, everything would have been fine.

So congratulations, Republicans. Mission accomplished. You'll have your Vietnam II to wield as a club against the "cut-and-run" Democrats for the next thirty years or so, until you need another one. And all it cost was a few hundred thousand lives -- most of them not even American.

--

The other day I heard that ignorance and apathy are sweeping the country. I didn't know that, but I don't really care.

Vietnam II? I think a better analogy is (#93405)
by Bill White

to say we now own our very own Gaza, writ large.

--

. . . and it looks as though they’ll punish the monkey and let the organ grinder go . . .

Which Iraqi reporter would that be ? (#93350)
by Gramsky

he is described as an 'employee', I can find no other
articles from that author at the papers website.

The writing seems odd and the phrases not only
'western' but simplistic and made as if cut and
pasted from the western media copy or US policy
documents, but then maybe Iraqi arabic uses
the same phrases and cliches, "the security situation",
and advice like "You'll be safe if you slow down at
checkpoints"... why would someone who lived for three
years in Iraq under occupation and checkpoints need
to be told that since to not slow down is to join the
darwin award scheme.

Did a sub-editor rewrite it for a US audience ?.

Funny (#93272)
by Gabriel

You can't vote for Obama because his policies "will spell disaster for Mohamed Hussein and countless others" but you've voted, repeatedly, for the Republicans that created this mess.

--

Standard Disclaimer: I only speak for myself. I may or not agree with others. Ask, if you are curious. If I post about X I may not have an opinion about Y, no matter how closely related you think they are.

The Bush Republicans created it (#93293)
by Bird Dog

The McCain Republicans early and often pointed out the mess that Bush & Co. created, and also pointed out solutions for fixing it. Obama doesn't have a solution for fixing it. His "solution" is to completely reject the current strategy and to fully withdraw troops over a 16-month period, even though the latest NIE warned against that very thing.

--

"So hopefully there is a 527 out there right now willing to ruin John McCain's and/or his family's reputation if it needs to be done."

The McCain Republicans... (#93485)
by Punditus Maximus

...voted for Bush. As well as his policies. And his nominees. In lockstep.

--

It's impossible to debate if people simply hold beliefs that have no grounding in reality.

When the alternative is... (#93599)
by Bird Dog

...a goddawful politician like Kerry, there wasn't much choice to be had. Your party has done a little better this time around.

--

"So hopefully there is a 527 out there right now willing to ruin John McCain's and/or his family's reputation if it needs to be done."

Never listen to what people say. (#93633)
by Punditus Maximus

Look at what they do. Don't even listen to what people say when they explain why they did what they did. Look at what they do. Nearly every single time the McCain supporters had any opportunity whatsoever to exercise any restraint whatsoever on Bush's idiotic policies and personnel decisions, they did everything in their power to support them.

The only exception to this rule was the McCain Amendment -- which could charitably be called ineffectual opposition, a different thing.

Bush fired Rumsfeld after the 2006 midterms. Kerry would have fired him in January 2005. The McCain Republicans did everything in their power to make absolutely certain that from January 2005 until the end of 2006, no changes in US policy toward Iraq would take place.

--

It's impossible to debate if people simply hold beliefs that have no grounding in reality.

Not the sole measure (#93679)
by Bird Dog

When your viewpoint is the minority in the party, there is little that can be done. And on that note, what exactly has Obama ever done that has strayed from the Democratic party line?

--

"So hopefully there is a 527 out there right now willing to ruin John McCain's and/or his family's reputation if it needs to be done."

Obama doesn't have a solution for fixing it (#93377)
by stillnotking

No, and neither does he have a solution for fixing the Native American genocide or undoing the evils of slavery.

Your insinuation that the "McCain Republicans" (huh? who? why haven't we heard of them before now?) could fix Iraq is risible. Iraq already happened, and the United States never had any power beyond active military coercion to influence its political future.

--

The other day I heard that ignorance and apathy are sweeping the country. I didn't know that, but I don't really care.

The COIN strategy is the fix (#93385)
by Bird Dog

We are where we are, and McCain has been advocating, since as early as November 2003, that a proper counterinsurgency campaign be mounted. I would describe the McCain Republicans as The Dissatisfieds (which I wrote in Aug-2006), those GOPers and conservatives who were increasingly disenchanted with the way Bush was handling the war. That you haven't heard of that group is not my concern. It didn't go over very well at Redstate.

--

"So hopefully there is a 527 out there right now willing to ruin John McCain's and/or his family's reputation if it needs to be done."

As always, (#93634)
by Punditus Maximus

nothing of the sort has ever been advocated.

--

It's impossible to debate if people simply hold beliefs that have no grounding in reality.

Trivially provably false (#93678)
by Bird Dog

Go to the link. McCain proposed more troops and the mounting of a counterinsurgency strategy back in November 2003. Counterinsurgency doctrine was well established at that time, a couple of examples being Marines' Small Wars Manual and their implementation of the CAP program in Vietnam.

--

"So hopefully there is a 527 out there right now willing to ruin John McCain's and/or his family's reputation if it needs to be done."

Just b/c I've seen this go round several times (#93680)
by catchy

PM will reply that the troop levels recommended for COIN were still out of range of the troop increase proposed by McCain.

So if you wanna do this again, just jump to that step.

Here is the illogic (#93697)
by Bird Dog

In PM's world, because troop levels aren't at the prescribed levels in the COIN manual, there is no counterinsurgency or counterinsurgency plan. It's an extremist viewpoint and irreversibly illogical. I don't mind being tedious in pointing that out.

--

"So hopefully there is a 527 out there right now willing to ruin John McCain's and/or his family's reputation if it needs to be done."

Typo. (#93744)
by Punditus Maximus

"...aren't at 1/4 the prescribed levels..."

Fixed.

Again, saying that we're doing COIN is like saying that if I mail in 1/4 of my monthly mortgage payment, I'm engaged in a counter-foreclosure strategy. Whether or not I'm doing essentially the correct thing, the absence of sufficient commitment guarantees that I will not get what I want.

--

It's impossible to debate if people simply hold beliefs that have no grounding in reality.

Yep. (#93687)
by Punditus Maximus

I was referring to that basic disagreement.

--

It's impossible to debate if people simply hold beliefs that have no grounding in reality.

COIN requires local people on "our side" (#93400)
by Bill White

Who are these people?

For example: Sadr is our enemy, but he is less pro-Tehran than Maliki.

Anbar? Yes they turned to us when the foreign AQ ineptly tried to integrate themselves into the local tribes (forced intermarriage for example) but once the foreign AQ presence is terminated there remains many fewer underlying reasons for the Anbar Sunni to side with us. Thus we see a slowly rising casualty total coming from Anbar.

--

. . . and it looks as though they’ll punish the monkey and let the organ grinder go . . .

Is Sadr our enemy? (#93436)
by Bird Dog

If he lays down arms and works out a deal for reentering the Iraqi government, then no.

--

"So hopefully there is a 527 out there right now willing to ruin John McCain's and/or his family's reputation if it needs to be done."

We've Got the Supreme (#93431)
by AndrewSshi

Islamic Council of whatever the *$%# they're calling themselves these days. Who are on our side to the extent that they're willing to allow us to to give them fire support to consolidate their power at the expense of everyone else. And most of the Kurdish factions. I think there were Sunni liberals at one time, but they've been mostly killed by the insurgents.

Damn, maybe we are screwed.

AHAAHAHHAHHAAAAHAHAHA! (#93307)
by nilsey

McCain Republicans early and often pointed out the mess that Bush & Co. created

pardon me while i catch my breath.

yeah, now then, were you among the loudest of voices within the republican party criticizing bush?

you've been carrying the water of bush, and now your desired successor, for as long as i have read anything by you.

thanks tacitus for deleting the archives, now we'll never now how loudly you railed against bush back in the day.

you should really thank him for that.

For the record (#93345)
by Bird Dog

I started making noises about changing strategy in April 2004, advocating a counterinsurgency plan along the lines of the CAP program in Vietnam. In August 2004, I wrote a post detailing around 10± areas where I disagreed with how Bush was doing things. I wrote several other posts in the following year supporting various forms of employing a real counterinsurgency plan, the oil spot strategy being one of them, and also taking Bush to task for his goddawful communications skills. All during that time, my support for Bush waned after he made one poor decision after another, from tariffs to the muddle in Iraq, from the treatment of detainees to his unwillingness to reign in spending, from the mismanagement of Katrina to picking Harriet Miers. Despite Bush's many imperfections, I was strongly anti-Kerry because I thought he would've been a terrible president.

When none of those changes in Iraq were made, especially after the Golden Mosque bombing, my support for Bush was pretty well gone and I wrote several times on Redstate that Rumsfeld should be fired, one, to change the direction in Iraq and, two, to prevent an electoral disaster. Several Redstate editors chewed me down for that, but looking back, I think I came out the more prescient.

You can believe me or not, I don't care. You seem more interested in impugning my integrity than dialoguing, so I guess it doesn't matter to you what I say. Your mind's made up. Some of my thoughts over that time are recapped at this link, when another jackass tried to smear me.

--

"So hopefully there is a 527 out there right now willing to ruin John McCain's and/or his family's reputation if it needs to be done."

Many in South Vietnam were on "our side" (#93401)
by Bill White

Who amongst the Iraqis is on "our side" ??

Unless we can answer that it is not COIN it is an occupation.

--

. . . and it looks as though they’ll punish the monkey and let the organ grinder go . . .

The Kurds are on our side. (#93419)
by BlaiseP

They are building a statue to GW Bush.

If we supported the creation of Kurdistan (#93421)
by Bill White

they would be even more on our side.

I have genuine sympathy for the Kurds and I recall reading that the Kurds represent the world's largest ethnic group lacking a nation-state homeland. Somewhat like being #501 on the Fortune 500 list of top companies.

But the "Kurdish question" necessarily involves Turkey, Syria and Iran as well as Iraq.

--

. . . and it looks as though they’ll punish the monkey and let the organ grinder go . . .

Wrong equation (#93409)
by Bird Dog

The issue isn't bringing Iraqis to our side, it's convincing insurgents that it's more costly to use violence against the government than to lay down arms and join the political process. In the interim, we secure the populace, isolate and depopulate the unreconciled violent groups, work to improve the infrastructure and economy, and make the necessary political advancements. Whether you call it an occupation or a duck doesn't really matter, and it doesn't add anything to the conversation.

--

"So hopefully there is a 527 out there right now willing to ruin John McCain's and/or his family's reputation if it needs to be done."

There is no government. (#93486)
by Punditus Maximus

There are men and women who play us off one another, more and less successfully.

But outside the Green Zone, there is no Iraqi government; there are only the shattered remnants of the previous state propped up by clans, militias, and tribal loyalties.

--

It's impossible to debate if people simply hold beliefs that have no grounding in reality.

Join the political process? Fiction . . . (#93415)
by Bill White

that sounds like a content-free sound bite.

WHAT political process? I deny that there is ANY political process in Iraq that favors US interests except the Potemkin Village variety kabuki theater going on in the Green Zone.

Kurds want autonomy and the Sunni & Shia tribes vie for supremacy in a free-for-fall that involves underlying issues having very little to do with the United States of America.

--

. . . and it looks as though they’ll punish the monkey and let the organ grinder go . . .

We've sorta forgotten how politics really works in the USA (#93422)
by BlaiseP

the reality is more conformal to Boyle's Law of Gases. What we see now in Iraq is an equalization of pressure. It will take years for these people to come to terms with each other, and that means some equalization of political forces.

Politicians aren't taken seriously in Iraq unless they have some sort of militia. That's an unfortunate fact of life at present time. Maybe we should have left the Iraqi Army in place, to manage the joint for us after overthrowing Saddam. We could have managed the Army, but maybe not. One thing is for sure, we don't manage anything now, and the militias still run the show. We just happen to be another militia in the landscape.

Look, we are in Iraq, for better or worse, and pretending we don't have our own issues and mandate vis-à-vis the Iraqi government is crazy talk. We're paying these Sons of Iraq. They're our militia now, okay? As much on our payroll as every infantryman and contractor and dishwasher and truck driver and State Department employee.

Now unless we start looking at ourselves as part and parcel of the problem, and quit mooning and weeping all these maudlin tears about how we don't have a mandate there, we're going to be walking around in little circles flapping our hands and looking like crazy people to the Iraqis and everyone else. We've had a continuous US Navy presence in the goddamn Persian Gulf since the end of WW2. We've got massive installations in Qatar and Kuwait. And we're protecting far more than US interests in the process. If you really want to see the doo-doo hit the whirling blades of fate, pull out of the Gulf completely.

If we can all agree that we ARE part and parcel (#93425)
by Bill White

of the problem and that we are merely another faction defending its interests, I am fine with the reality that we cannot just leave.

I will gladly stop crying "maudlin tears about how we don't have a mandate" just as soon as any Republican who talks about America having a mission to bring civilization to the savages is committed to the nut house.

Accepting that we have NO mandate to be there is step one in devising a sensible and effectual policy for staying.

Iran is also a player we need to coordinate with because Iraqi stability is our mutual interest.

--

. . . and it looks as though they’ll punish the monkey and let the organ grinder go . . .

Let us not as Liberals be too hasty to condemn Repubs. (#93432)
by BlaiseP

For several Republicans did exhibit the spinal calcium to question this war from the beginning, notably Chuck Hagel.

Here's my continuing approach to discussion of Iraq, especially with Republicans. It's pointless to say Bush and Rumsfeld were wrong anymore. That dead horse simply doesn't need beating any more, and it's a fundamentally unfair tactic, because I don't know one honest Republican who thinks this war was fought from a sound basis in fact or strategy or tactics.

From the warmonger side of things, McCain, to his lasting credit, said if we fought this war at all, it ought to have been fought with overwhelming force. The Surge may not have produced a perfect outcome, and the Surge wasn't all we did to ameliorate the situation, but consider how many men we lost until we got enough boots on the ground to make a counterinsurgency possible.

From the peacemaker / political side of things, we opponents of the War in Iraq must now reconcile ourselves to things as they are. That's the first step to getting out, because the way out is the way through. If we are to have a presence at all, and I argue there is no reasonable alternative, we ought to go back to first principles and make our objectives clear. How we achieve them is a completely different matter. Those principles ought to be clearly enumerated: we will not tolerate those who seek to overthrow the democratically elected government in Iraq, and that will be true forever. Beyond that, we say nothing. As threats to Iraq's government arise, both internal and external, we crush these threats with extreme prejudice. We're not there to tell Iraq how to run their own affairs, we make that clear, too.

Pretty soon, it will become clear enough. Screw with Iraq, and you'll have the Americans to answer to. I'd make the same case in Afghanistan. We don't care where you are or what country you're in. If you mess with Afghanistan's elected government, we'll fix your little red wagon. If you so much as fart in the wrong key, we'll administer a therapeutic kick to your ass, for your own edification and instruction and make sure your next fart is in the right key. None of this occupation or other such nonsense, we just arrive like a plague of grasshoppers and leave again. Let you sort out what follows, if you manage to survive our visit.

Straight out of B.F. Skinner. You get no warnings. No Empty Threats. No occupation. Just a straightforward ass kicking until we're tired of kicking.

I think you're overlooking the fundamental problem here (#93446)
by stillnotking

There is no legitimate, democratically elected government of Iraq. At least, there is not one that is willing to abide by the rule of law, which amounts to the same thing.

As soon as the US stops breathing down their necks, the Shiites are going to strap on the jackboots. Americans are so used to the idea that "the government" represents some sort of legitimate, constrained consensus on the part of the governed that we've largely forgotten that the exception is not the rule. Politics, in most of the world for most of history, is a game played with no referees and no rules. That's not a climate that produces good guys.

When Shiite repression produces the inevitable Sunni backlash, who are we going to side with?

--

The other day I heard that ignorance and apathy are sweeping the country. I didn't know that, but I don't really care.

The Shiites are by no means united (#93449)
by BlaiseP

and I'm under no illusions about the nature of the Iraqi beast, hence my line about politicians achieving mandate by militias.

What we shouldn't tolerate is the Winner Takes all attitude. I don't know why we set up an American Caesar, we should have. That's what the Iraqis expected.

Even if the Sunni and Shii are scheming and plotting, they're constrained by that Boyle's Law business. They can't over-reach, as Sadr has done repeatedly. SCIRI aka Dawa Party, which is a really nasty bill of goods, once bombed our embassy in Kuwait. As long as Sadr has his own political party in the mix, he can jolly well get used to the idea of a Well-Regulated Militia as our own founding fathers intended that curious amendment to be read. There's no reason on earth for Sadr to have an Unregulated Militia, and Iraq shouldn't tolerate it and neither should we.

Scheming and plotting? (#93503)
by stillnotking

The scheming-and-plotting phase will last a few months, after which a clear winner will emerge (probably a Shiite coalition). That winner will proceed to boot-stomp the losers' faces into the mud with admirable haste, producing either civil war or autocracy depending on how good they are at it, and I say again -- who do we side with? I mean, this time there aren't even any Communists to automatically hate, and they're all Muslims.

"Well-regulated" means checks and balances, Blaise, and as has been aptly observed by numerous folks on the ground, there are no Iraqi Thomas Jeffersons.

--

The other day I heard that ignorance and apathy are sweeping the country. I didn't know that, but I don't really care.

The scheming and plotting has been going on for centuries. (#93512)
by BlaiseP

There's an article I'm thinking about writing, about Iraq in 1920. The precis is this: though all Iraqis revolted against the British, the Shiites were divided and also fought among themselves. The British sided with the Sunni, and installed a Sunni puppet king, Feisal. But Feisal never controlled the feuding Shiites, they were always a problem for everyone: Iran, the British, the Sunnis and each other.

We might be doing the same in Iraq, backing the Sunni. Shiites are widely despised in the Muslim world for their feuding tendencies.

Suit yourself (#93420)
by Bird Dog

The fact still remains that Shiite, Sunni and Kurd factions who joined the government have made political concessions and political progress. It's a long and difficult process because of the hard feelings between the groups. Funny, I thought it was liberals who were all about process and Republicans who demanded results. Now, it's the exact opposite. With Iraq, we have the "are we there yet" liberals.

--

"So hopefully there is a 527 out there right now willing to ruin John McCain's and/or his family's reputation if it needs to be done."

Pay for the war within a balanced budget (#93423)
by Bill White

(more taxes on the top 1% or 2%) and being patient would be easier.

But, our Iraq War has been funded on credit extended to us by the Chinese and a "stay the course" for as long as it takes shall result in the bankruptcy of our nation. And THAT was the precise strategy Osama bin Laden has articulated al Qaeda should use against the West.

In the long run, our Iraqi adventure shall cost us an independent Taiwan, among many other costs. And shall weaken us in our struggle with our real enemies amongst al Qaeda and similar groups.

--

. . . and it looks as though they’ll punish the monkey and let the organ grinder go . . .

Yeah. . . (#93444)
by M Scott Eiland

. . .because the Democrats (and, sadly, most Republicans) had the stomach to stand up for an independent Taiwan (short of an outright Chinese invasion--which would have forced some steel into the spaghetti-spines) *before* Iraq. What news reports were *you* watching in the years before 9/11?

--

Bill, putting aside the rest of it.... (#93442)
by Bernard Guerrero

...(and I have to, because I think you still don't get that national debt's only practical historical purpose was war-finance and that "national bankruptcy" is nearly impossible given that our debts are denominated in a currency we print), I think your Tiawan comment is silly.

A) Taiwan's up to it's eyeballs in investments and tech-transfer with the mainland already.

B) We're no longer exactly in the middle of a grand ideological battle with the dreaded ChiComs anymore, given that they barely qualify as Communists in the first place, sell us stuff, buy our stuff, lend us money, etc. (see A)

C) In the event that the IQs of the leadership's of both the island and the mainland were to suddenly drop by 50% overnight, resulting in a pointless declaration of independence followed by an even more pointless cross-straits invasion (the purpose of which would be unknown, since it would destroy any value Taiwan might have for the mainland in the first place), it would be stopped through the simple expedient of sinking every vessel in the Chinese Navy that ventured within a hundred miles of the place, which remains well within our capabilities.

In other words, they aren't going to be invaded and they aren't all that independent to begin with in any practical sense.

--

The urge to save humanity is almost always a false front for the urge to rule.
- H.L. Mencken

Printing money (#93690)
by Punditus Maximus

M1 (the stuff we can realistically print) is currently at approximately 750 billion. Printing enough money to make a dent in that debt would cause inflation at levels unheard of in modern US history. Of course we cannot go bankrupt as such -- we can, however, so devalue the notion of borrowing from us that we will be unable to do so at anything resembling reasonable terms.

--

It's impossible to debate if people simply hold beliefs that have no grounding in reality.

Obama's solution(s) (#93327)
by Timmy

could you provide some background. JFTR

--

“Let us go forth to lead the land we love, asking His blessing and His help, but knowing that here on earth God’s work must truly be our own.”
John F. Kennedy
January 20, 1961

Admission of errors made in 2002 / 2003 (#93402)
by Bill White

INCLUDING the original decision to invade is a necessary starting point for a "solution"

--

. . . and it looks as though they’ll punish the monkey and let the organ grinder go . . .

From the mists of time... (#93323)
by spartikus

thanks tacitus for deleting the archives

On a whim, I typed in "wayback tacitus.org" into Google after reading this comment. No, it didn't lead to a secretly archived tacitus.org, but it did lead to this post by Robert Farley from Lawyers, Guns and Money in 2005 (I'll exclude the sentence that violates the posting rules):

In short, Bird Dog combined an admirable commitment to GOP talking points with a mind singularly incapable of conceiving of an original thought. His posts were both plentiful and terrible, and eventually caused me to drift away from the site.

And while harsh, this opinion certainly dovetails with my memory of my own view at the time. I clearly remember those days and earlier and I am comfortable in the belief that Charles's "McCain Republicanism" is a recent phenomena - and to be blunt Mr. Bird in those days was not simply dismissive of other points of view, but sneeringly so. There is a bit more humility now as events have born the critics out, but the party line continues. I do believe Charles is utterly sincere. But faith blinds.

he he phewwww (#93312)
by nilsey

"mccain republicans"....

How'd you miss the Republican civil war, nilsey? (#93372)
by stillnotking

I mean, it was so obvious. I remember when McCain organized that march on the White House... man, those were the days. Made me proud to be an American.

--

The other day I heard that ignorance and apathy are sweeping the country. I didn't know that, but I don't really care.

Pitchfork Wielding McCain Republicans (#93381)
by Model 62

McCain's Foreign Policy Team.

Some of those guys look familiar.

Some of the acronyms look familiar, too.

Exactly (#93382)
by stillnotking

No Republican, certainly not McCain, is repudiating the ideological stance that led to the Iraq War. At most, they will throw individual Republicans under the bus as scapegoats. The PNAC/Max Boot/James Woolsey ideology can never fail, it can only be failed.

BD's argument that John McCain represents some sort of clean break from Bush Administration foreign policy is so completely laughable... that it may just work. It's easier, after all, to sell the big lies than the little ones.

Interesting Woolsey quote from that page: "I think both Syria and Iran think that we’re cowards." Isn't it funny how the biggest hawks -- especially the ones who've never seen military service -- are always obsessed over whether people think they're cowards? Putting these guys in charge of the American military is like transplanting the brain of a ninety-eight-pound weakling with daddy issues into the body of a three-hundred-pound MMA fighter.

--

The other day I heard that ignorance and apathy are sweeping the country. I didn't know that, but I don't really care.

Clean break? (#93387)
by Bird Dog

I only posited a clean break as it relates to Iraq. The timeline pretty well displays the major differences that McCain had with Bush on Iraq. After the November 2006 electoral meltdown, it was Bush who came around to McCain's thinking on Iraq, letting Rumsfeld go and adopting the Petraeus COIN plan. On other foreign issues, there's less daylight between McCain and Bush, from what I can see.

--

"So hopefully there is a 527 out there right now willing to ruin John McCain's and/or his family's reputation if it needs to be done."

He might not have been able to make it abroad. (#93271)
by mmghosh

That is also possible. Not all refugees can. I would be very surprised if professionals who have managed to find a stable job/career in the Emirates/Syria or the west would return.

Why would they?

--

Manish Ghosh

hm (#93245)
by nilsey

i was expecting the usual graphs but instead we have a numbe of delightful anecdotes. no school paintings, but still....

does this mean the data in the graphs are pointing in the
wrong direction currently or is your usual surge upodate only forthcoming when the numbers show improvement?

speaking of returning refugees, where does this guy fit in, in terms of a pattern of iraqi refugees returning? any numbers?

interesting that you left out the very last line of the quote by the way.

I shamelessly copy the graphs from... (#93259)
by Bird Dog

...this site, which shows that civilian casualties down from March and that military casualties have gone up for the third consecutive month. Both figures are way below almost every month from Apr-2006 (the month when the Golden Mosque was bombed, which ignited sectarian violence) through Aug-2007 (when al Qaeda was doing its best to convince Democrats that we've already lost). The Basra and Sadr City operations are more kinetic, so it's no surprise that the casualty figures are a little higher. All in all, it looks to me like the surge strategy is still working, but as Petraeus has noted, the situation is still fragile.

As for me doing monthly updates, I haven't done one since early January, which was when I made the determination that we should stick with Option A, and nothing has happened since then that has shaken me from that assessment. Crocker has reported on the political progress, the national government passed an important reconciliation bill, Basra is under the control of the Iraqi government, and so forth. But plenty of challenges remain.

As for numbers on refugees, the link is right there in the post. The number of newly displaced has dropped from 90,000 in Jan-2007 to 10,000 in March 2008. Unfortunately, there isn't much other recent data.

--

"So hopefully there is a 527 out there right now willing to ruin John McCain's and/or his family's reputation if it needs to be done."

one other thing: (#93253)
by nilsey

His story is the story of five million other Iraqis who've been displaced.

so all 5 million are back or on their way are they?

Yeah, We're Due for Some Graphs (#93246)
by Model 62

I think we're missing the March edition, too.

Here: (#93247)
by Pranky

http://www.vetvoice.com/showDiary.do?diaryId=1211

Maybe we can start the 100-year occupation in June?

I've Also Been Wondering (#93250)
by AndrewSshi

About the Anbar thing. The thing to watch will be whether they roll up the perps of the last few attacks quickly or not (well, that would be the thing to watch, but it's probably classified).

There've been other rumors that the Sons of Iraq are starting to have second thoughts about having "flipped." So in combination with the ongoing waste of life in eastern Baghdad, things might be starting to shake apart.

Or who knows, this latest spate of attacks could be something of a one-off. It's hard to figure out these things.

We need to consider whether the Anbar "flip" (#93403)
by Bill White

was because the AQ tactic of using forced intermarriage to secure alliances with local tribes was more offensive to Sunni Anbar tribal leaders than the American presence.

If true, then a truce with Uncle Sam and making common cause to eradicate the foreign AQ presence in Anbar is entirely logical and rational.

But once that foreign AQ presence is eradicated we return to the status quo ante and the Sunni Anbar hatred of the American presence.

--

. . . and it looks as though they’ll punish the monkey and let the organ grinder go . . .

Just another unsanctioned militia (#93294)
by dmbeaster

The interesting wrinkle about the Sons is that like the Mahdi Army, they are an armed militia not within the control of the Iraqi Government. I know we are trying to get them accepted as legitimate, but since that has yet to happen, they are really no different except that it is expedient to pretend they are.

Links

Conservative
Liberal
Moderate/Mixed/Non-Partisan
Non-Political/Reference

Related Sites -

Polisci Applied (Aaron)
Intrepid Liberal Journal (Intrepid Liberal)
Obsidian Wings (Bird Dog)
Open Hand/Open Eye (locutas)
Red State (Bird Dog)
Swords Crossed (brendanm98)
Wagster Speaks (Wagster)
WatchingAmerica (BlaiseP)
The Social Pathologist (TSP)

Foreign Affairs -

Abu Aardvark
'Aqoul
American Footprints
Council on Foreign Relations
CSIS
Democracy Arsenal
Intel Dump
The Fourth Rail
The Head Heeb
War and Piece

Politics -

Ace of Spades HQ
Andrew Sullivan
Balloon Juice
Belgravia Dispatch
Captain's Quarters
Crooked Timber
Curmudgeonly & Skeptical
Daily Kos
Democracy Arsenal
Eschaton
Firedoglake
Glenn Greenwald
Global Guerrillas
Hugh Hewitt
Instapundit
Jawa Report
Lawyers, Guns and Money
Liberals Against Terror
Matt Yglesias
Michael J. Totten
Michelle Malkin
Moon of Alabama
New America
OxBlog
Patterico
Political Animal
Political Wire
Publius Pundit
QandO
Reality Based Community
Talking Points Memo
The Agitator
The Belmont Club
The Corner
Truman Project
Winds of Change.net

War -

Counterterrorism Blog
Iraq the Model
Jihad Watch
Small Wars Journal Blog

Economics and Business -

Angry Bear
Brad DeLong
Daniel Drezner
Mahalanobis
Marginal Revolution
Roubini Global Economics
The Big Picture

Science and Tech -

Bad Astronomy
New Scientist
Real Climate
Science Blogs
Scientific American
The Panda's Thumb

Legal -

Balkinization
Conglomerate
Ideoblog
Jurisdynamics
Law and Letters
Overlawyered
ProfessorBainbridge
ScotusBlog
Talk Left
The Becker-Posner Blog
Volokh Conspiracy

Sports -

Baseball Crank
Baseball Musings
Baseball Reference.com
ESPN.com
NFL.com
Only Baseball Matters
The Sports Economist

Books, Film and Music -

Amazon.com
Internet Movie Database
All Music Guide

News and Aggregators -

Asia Times
Boingboing
CNN
Digg
English Russia
Fark
Los Angeles Times
Memeorandum
MSNBC
Politico
Poynteronline
Slashdot
The New York Times
The Washington Post

References -

Wikipedia
Your Dictionary