What are the chances the Iraqi insurgency will win?

[t3gah]

Since the USA always goes for "We win" or "We left" as the two ways of War I'm going to have to say that there should be another option on the poll that says:

[ ] US government chickens out because of media and public opinion and then declares that it wasn't a war after all. IT was a "conflict".

 

[No*s]

Do we get to BBQ the chickens?

 

[Melody]

Can anyone say "Vietnam - part two?"

Wasn't it Santayana who said, "Those who don't study history, are doomed to repeat it?" Wonder how the Shrub did in his college history classes

Melody

 

[The Voice of Reason]

What makes you think the shrub attended his history classes?

My guess is that the election will be held, voter turnout will be somewhat limited in certain areas (due to the threat of bombings), and the new Iraqi government will be installed. At that moment, we will do everything in our power to proclaim the new government a "democracy" that is to be idolized throughout the Arab world (the truth will be something else altogether).

I think the majority of Iraqis want a stable government - but the minority (the insurgents) will fight as long as they can. I just think that, in the long run, the following scenario will defeat them:
The new Iraqi government will be more than willing to commit any act that they think will put down the insurgency - and it will be UGLY - but eventually, the insurgents will either join the political process or be crushed by a regime that will be every bit as sadistic as Saddam ever was. The new regime will be covert about the atrocities that they commit, but there will a form of secret police that will curl your toes.
But hey - that's my rosy forecast. You don't want to see my "gloom and doom" forecast.

Spinkles - I'm just curious - what have you been wrong on, concerning the war in Iraq?

Dr. Nosophoros - I believe you have it correct - they MUST choose their own form of government - democracy or otherwise.

Painted Wolf and Godless Dave - I think you are exactly right - the American powers that be (i.e. corporate America) will try to rule Iraq in absentia, or at the very least, they will try to milk the country for every penny they can squeeze out of it (can you say Halliburton?).


TVOR

 

[Mr Spinkles]

Spinkles - I'm just curious - what have you been wrong on, concerning the war in Iraq?

I'm still not certain as to the full extent of my wrongness, to be honest TVOR. I was wrong about an awful lot of things: I was wrong that Iraq had an active clandestine WMD program; that chemical and perhaps biological weapons would be used on our troops during the invasion; that Iraqis would be more receptive to democracy and America's presence after booting out the old regime (it looked like I was right about this one when they were tearing down all those statues of Saddam).

I've decided never to trust the media ever again. Hell, I even bought TIME magazine's prediction that there would be intense, prolonged, house-to-house warfare in Baghdad a la Stalingrad :banghead3 .

*edit-- Just to clarify: I do not think I was wrong that Iraq had an active, clandestine WMD program...but I was certainly wrong that they had one at the time of the most recent round of inspections and the invasion that followed. *

 

[The Voice of Reason]

If you look closely at Spinkles, you can see the eyes of youth starting to crinkle around the edges. Not yet "crow's feet", but just the onset of getting some life under his belt.

TVOR

PS - that is the tone of respect you hear in my voice.

 

[Mr Spinkles]

If you look closely at Spinkles, you can see the eyes of youth starting to crinkle around the edges. Not yet "crow's feet", but just the onset of getting some life under his belt.

You know, it's not easy to swallow your pride and admit that those beliefs that you cared so much about are, well, wrong. The barriers that prevent people from reaching a better understanding of something often have less to do with the logical than the psychological.

 

[Godless Dave]

What makes you think the shrub attended his history classes?

My guess is that the election will be held, voter turnout will be somewhat limited in certain areas (due to the threat of bombings), and the new Iraqi government will be installed.

Point of clarification: the elections scheduled for the end of January are not to elect a new government, but to elect a body to write a constitution. The current Allawi government, including the laws dictated by Paul Bremer, will continue to be in place until the new constitution is written and implemented, which is estimated to take at least another year.

 

[Godless Dave]

I'm still not certain as to the full extent of my wrongness, to be honest TVOR. I was wrong about an awful lot of things: I was wrong that Iraq had an active clandestine WMD program; that chemical and perhaps biological weapons would be used on our troops during the invasion; that Iraqis would be more receptive to democracy and America's presence after booting out the old regime

Mr_Spinkles, I want to congratulate you on your ability to discover the truth and your willingness to admit you were wrong.

(it looked like I was right about this one when they were tearing down all those statues of Saddam).

er, you know the statue-demolition was staged, right? It was torn down by the Marines. American TV showed only closeups of the statue coming down and some Iraqis cheering, but British TV showed the empty square around it.

 

[The Voice of Reason]

Point of clarification: the elections scheduled for the end of January are not to elect a new government, but to elect a body to write a constitution. The current Allawi government, including the laws dictated by Paul Bremer, will continue to be in place until the new constitution is written and implemented, which is estimated to take at least another year.

Excellent point, Godless. I don't know why, but in my desire to see us get our troops out of there, I had forgotten that we still have another "round" of elections to go.

Thanks,
TVOR

 

[t3gah]

I just realized what this thread reminded me of.


The movie Armageddon.

There's a scene where 3 people are in this rover type vehicle and they need to fly over this canyon which is on an asteroid floating through space. The first guy (A.J.) asks the second guy (Lav) what the odds are that they will succeed with the craziest stunt ever. The percentage from Lav goes from 50% to 100% with the added comment that he will be the hero or they will be hero's. Or something like that...

Regardless, that comment reminds me of this whole 'bomb them and install our type of new government that they, the people actually want, but really know it, or they do know it, but some don't want it, and some do want it, but we, the democracy and the rest of the world are going to shove it down your throats anyway and you'll like it, well, those of you who want it, but don't really know, and for the others, same words as in the battle of the bulge to you, nuts!' type scenario.

 

[Mr Spinkles]

er, you know the statue-demolition was staged, right? It was torn down by the Marines. American TV showed only closeups of the statue coming down and some Iraqis cheering, but British TV showed the empty square around it.

So you're saying CNN rounded up a hundred or so Iraqis whom they bribed to cheer and throw shoes as a Marine humvee helped them tear down a statue of Saddam?

I don't trust the media, but I'm not sure "staged" accurately describes what happened when American news didn't show the empty square around an event while British news did.

Mr_Spinkles, I want to congratulate you on your ability to discover the truth and your willingness to admit you were wrong.

Thanks Dave. I'm always looking to learn.

 

[Yerda]

If you look closely at Spinkles, you can see the eyes of youth starting to crinkle around the edges. Not yet "crow's feet", but just the onset of getting some life under his belt.

TVOR

PS - that is the tone of respect you hear in my voice.

TVOR not seen you around lately, been hiding from me man?

Anyway good work Mr. Spinkles your looking for the truth as opposed to believing you know it, a trait I shall make compulsory when I'm king of the universe.

And I think the insurgents will win eventually, like they did in India, in Hungary, and in a certain British colonial land discovered fairly recently in international terms.

 

[Godless Dave]

OK, not staged exactly, but not the spontaneous celebration we were supposed to think it was.

And I'm sure most Iraqis were happy to see Saddam go, but they didn't just take our word for it that we would allow them to replace his regime with democracy or any kind of self-rule. They saw what we did in Iran in the 50s, and they remember what the UK did in Iraq in the 20s and 30s. They also know we support the Saudi government, which is about as far from democracy and freedom as you can get.

 

[lousyskater]

i think the insurgents have a large chance at winning the fight. compare it to the revoluionary war. the british army was well stocked with weapons and huge, while the american army was broken up into small groups spread out all over the colonies, which is comperable to what we have and what the insurgents have. the american resistance was extremely underestimated as is the Iraqi insurgents and britain payed for it as we are right now. of course, the circumstances in which each war came about are different, the way they are or were being fought are very similar. our troops may be better equipped, but we're fighting an enemy that is willing to give up their lives to stop us from taking over their country, and we can never defeat their spirit. as long as we're in Iraq, we will continue to lose our troops. democracy may be a good form of government, but forcing it onto another nation is just wrong.

 

[The Voice of Reason]

Lousyskater -

I would have to draw one huge difference between the war in Iraq and the American Revolution - we are not in Iraq for the long haul. We went in on trumped up charges, we have no business being there, and we have overthrown a sovereign (though despotic) government - but we did not go in to conquer and rule Iraq. We will be gone within a relatively short time frame (2 - 5 years), and we have made it clear that we do not intend to rule them. We will slap a little democracy on them, and pour a few tens of billions of dollars into our military-industrial complex, then bail out. Sure, we'll have to sacrifice four or five thousand or so of our young people, but hey, this administration would be the first to tell you that you can't bake a cake without breaking some eggs. :sarcastic

The difference is, the insurgents will not be fighting for independence from US rule - they will, in effect, be fighting a civil war after their new government is seated.

TVOR

 

[Yerda]

The difference is, the insurgents will not be fighting for independence from US rule - they will, in effect, be fighting a civil war after their new government is seated.

Do you think they see it that way though? The Iraqi government might be an extension of western power for them, olive skinned faces for the corporations. I would hazard to say the may not be wrong either.

Aint it strange they will be fighting to liberate themselves from liberation?

 

[The Voice of Reason]

Do you think they see it that way though? The Iraqi government might be an extension of western power for them, olive skinned faces for the corporations. I would hazard to say the may not be wrong either.

Aint it strange they will be fighting to liberate themselves from liberation?

LOL - I do not disagree with you, truthseekingsoul, and I, for one, appreciate the irony of that last statement.
I am sure that many of those insurgents that continue the fight after the new goverment is seated will do so based on this view, while some will fight simply in an attempt to gain power for themselves. Either way, my guess is that over a relatively short period of time, the new Iraqi government will ruthlessly crush anyone that opposes them - and the insurgency will die out.

TVOR