Iraq Is On Track

[Craig Read]

Contrary to the effeminate, Gay gene loving Lie-beral myths that Iraq is a mess, I quote here from someone who has ACTUALLY been there. Gasp ! and he says that it is going as fast as is humanely possible and that progress is steady.

Rebuilding a devastated country takes time. The Lie-berals expect to erase 50 years of Fascism in 3 months and that Iraqi's should be leaving in the same houses as the snot nosed Post Modern Profs in Boston and Berkely replete with manicured lawns and Mexican labor.

Get a life.

=================

Due to our efforts, 40,000 Iraqi police are back to work helping to restore law and order, and assisting the U.S.-led coalition in its hunt for Saddam and his loyalists. It's the beginning of a long haul. Like it or not, building a country from scratch takes time and money. Securing a country such as Iraq will take a professional civil police service, 65,000-75,000 strong, an Iraqi army of hundreds of thousands, and a temporary civil defense force to augment U.S. and coalition forces.

To those who claim that we're not doing enough, fast enough, it helps to put matters in perspective. We're doing a hard job to the best of our abilities, in postwar circumstances, with really scarce resources and a clock ticking above our heads. In my four months there, I oversaw the setting up of 35 police stations in Baghdad. Try setting up 35 stations in New York in four months!

New Yorkers will remember that it took the Giuliani administration eight years to create the safest large city in the world and that was with every resource under the sun. Five months ago in Iraq, we adopted a country of 24 million, with no electricity, water, technology, Internet, telephones or radio communications, etc. There was nothing, and yet the critics are saying that it's taking too long. One would think that they themselves have the answer, or the magic pill that will fix it all, but unfortunately, there isn't one! It's always easier to criticize -- as some Congressional delegations in Iraq are prone to do -- when you have no operational involvement, insight, authority or responsibility. And to those critics who think the answer is the deployment of more U.S. troops, I say: Caution!

More U.S. or coalition troops mean more U.S. and coalition targets, injuries and deaths; and those we do not need. The coalition can't fight someone they can't see and they'll never deter those who are willing to, or more so want to, die. What we need is the ability to identify, locate and capture or kill the enemy that's trying to prevent freedom from growing in Iraq -- and no one can do that better than the Iraqis themselves. The creation of a new Iraqi intelligence service is more critical right now than ever and expediting that, and the recruiting, training and deployment of Iraq's new police and military, is essential. All of this is being done, and at speeds that make our federal and state bureaucracies look like they're standing still. And yet the political criticism is deafening.

History has taught us that there's always a cost for freedom. On 9/11 we learned that we'll pay now or we'll pay later. As one who stood beneath the twin towers and watched people jump from the burning buildings, and also witnessed first-hand the fall of Saddam, I more than most have an understanding of the threat of radical Islam. Let's not forget that this is a war. So for now, the war should continue; and as Jerry Bremer would so proudly say, "Welcome to a free Iraq."

Mr. Kerik, a former chief of the New York Police Department, has just returned from a four-month stint in Baghdad as senior policy adviser to Ambassador Bremer.

Updated September 24, 2003

[Craig Read]

Is this title happy enough ?

Michael O'Hanlon of the left leaning Brookings Inst. a prominent critic of pre-emption and the war in Iraq has admitted that the strategy has worked. O'Hanlon states that far fewer jihadists have made their way into Iraq and that Syria, is apparently behaving very well. Other regimes are starting now to fall into line to preserve themselves.

I still think Iran and Syria should be invaded by the way.

Colonel Warden stated after being on the ground recently in Iraq that the Iraqi people were adamant that they DO NOT want the UN or other foreign troops there.

They want US troops. As well he cited a dramatic fall off in violence in recent weeks and the gains made in seizing arm caches. As well the infrastructure is being rapidly rebuilt, schools are opened [where students are not shaken down as they enter the room], gov't offices are opened, markets are working and the Iraqi's are building their own domestic police and military force.

Not bad for a few months of hard work.

Too bad the media does not get it.

"No one died today in Iraq, things going well....."

I guess that headline is not a 'grabber'.

[nova_satori]

Our house was searched by the Americans. That happened almost ten days ago. I wasn’t home, but my mother called the next day a bit freaked out.

They came at around 12 midnight they were apparently supposed to do a silent entrance and surprise the criminal Ba’athi cell that was in my parents house, unfortunately for them our front gate does a fair amount of rattling so my brother heard that and opened the door and saw a couple of soldiers climbing on our high black front gate. When the silent entrance tactic failed they resorted to shouty entrance mode. So they shouted at him telling him that he should get down on his knees, which he did. He actually was trying to help them open the door, but whatever. Seconds later around 25 soldiers are in the house my brother, father and mother are outside sitting on the ground and in their asshole-ish ways refused to answer any questions about what was happening. My father was asking them what they were looking so that he can help but as usual since you are an Iraqi addressing an American is no use since he doesn’t even acknowledge you as a human being standing in front of him. They (the Americans) have a medic with them and he seems to be the only sane person amongst them, my brother tells me they were kids all of them. Anyway so my brother and father start talking to the medic and he tells them what this is about. They have been “informed” that there are daily meetings the last five days, Sudanese people come into our house at 9am and stay till 3pm, we are a probable Ansar cell. My father is totally baffled, my brother gets it. These are not Sudanese men they are from Basra the “informer” is stupid enough to forget that there is a sizeable population in Basra who are of African origin. And it is not meetings these 2 (yes only two) guys have here, they are carpenters and they were repairing my mom’s kitchen. Way. To. Go. You have great informers.

While my family is waiting outside something strange happens, one of the soldiers comes out, empties his flask in the garden and start telling the medic to give him his, the medic shoos him away. They all think that the soldier is filling his flask with cold water from the cooler. Later it turns out that he emptied my father’s bottle of Johnny Walker’s into his flask and was probably trying to convince the medic to give him his to empty another bottle. Weird shit.

Aaaaanyway, they are looking thru my father’s papers by now and their genius translator comes to the commander of operation [Pax House Bust] and tells him he has found “suspicious documents”. They are passes to various conferences he has attended and bank cards for old closed accounts he used to have and most alarmingly for the person in charge was an invitation my father received a couple of days earlier to a meeting with General Abi Zaid to which he and others were flown to the Bakr Air Base north of Baghdad. Now the guy who was in charge starts trying to cover his ass and asks a lot of pointless questions, one of the more surreal ones was “so if one of your sons is writing for a foreign newspaper why are you still here?”. After this goes on for a while he gets the family out of the house again, closes the door and stays in there for 15 minutes. Comes out with the 20 galactic troopers and tells my father that he should inside check everything “I don’t want any complains filed later on”, my father just opens the front gate and tells him that if he wants to file a complaint he will thank you and bye-bye.

They came, freaked out my mother, pissed off my father, found nothing and left.

After refusing to get one my father finally conceded to get one of those cards that basically say you are a “collaborator”, and my mother will be spending a couple of weeks at her sister’s in Amman

From a Native Iraqi.

[Craig Read]

And your point is ?

The country is being rebuilt, the sooner the Iraqi police and military are made effective the better.

You and Riff and others are entirely negative. You are negative in your view of the world, and willfully blind to the excesses at home and abroad of failed philosophies.

I have posted here many accounts from Iraqi's who want the US to stay to finish the job.

There is a reason why the human flows are one way - from the Middle East to here.

Ever stop to consider why?

[Hugo]

They came, freaked out my mother, pissed off my father, found nothing and left.

And this is worse than the Ba'athists, who would have gang-raped and killed the mother, shot the father and the son (who could count themselves lucky that it was that quick), and then looted and burned the house?

Whatever is going on in Iraq now, is a vast improvement on what was going on before the war.

[Craig Read]

David Kay is talking to reporters today about WMD - there is no doubt that Iraq is on the right track and some Iraqi's have enough confidence in the US that they are beginning to work with officials looking for WMD.

Kay told reporters that investigators had uncovered useful documents about Iraq's WMD programs and are getting increased cooperation from Iraqis.

"I think the American people should be prepared for surprises," said Kay. "I think it's very likely that we will discover remarkable surprises in this enterprise."

But he had cautioned that Saddam had engaged in an amazing active deception program that would be difficult to unravel.

"It's going to take time. The Iraqis had over two decades to develop these weapons, and hiding them was an essential part of their program," Kay said.

[Lost in Manitoba]

This is a really good thread so far. All I gotta say is, it's a matter of your own perspective and your own prejudices. I wasn't for the non-UN war on Iraq, but it's done, and now every major country needs to step up and help stabilize and rebuild.

[Black Dog]

Contrary to the effeminate, Gay gene loving Lie-beral myths that Iraq is a mess...

Y'know, maybe you think lines like this make you seem clever or something, but they really only compromise your position, show that you have no argument save for relentless ad hominems and make you look like a jerk.

Grow up.

[Craig Read]

Well it describes you perfectly - except i left out more obvious words such as ignorant etc.

Iraq is on track. If you are replying to the Post try to say something intelligent.

Ok that won't happen but try at least to form sentences.

[Craig Read]

History has taught us that there's always a cost for freedom. On 9/11 we learned that we'll pay now or we'll pay later. As one who stood beneath the twin towers and watched people jump from the burning buildings, and also witnessed first-hand the fall of Saddam, I more than most have an understanding of the threat of radical Islam. Let's not forget that this is a war. So for now, the war should continue; and as Jerry Bremer would so proudly say, "Welcome to a free Iraq."

From Kerik who spent 3 months rebuilding the Iraqi police force. Of which now there are many thousands aiding US troops.

The lie-beral media was wrong about Afgh. and Iraq - both pre and post war. Both have been successes. The main take away from Iraq is that we need more civilian trained local help and more civilian military for security control.

We don't need the French.

[Lost in Manitoba]

I would say both sides overstated themselves Craig. The Left said it would be a disaster and the sky would fall, while the Right led the media (and the populace) to believe it would be a quick program to go in and rebuild. What we are seeing isn't absolute success nor is it abyssmal failure. It's going to be several years, I believe, before anyone can say the mission is complete.

We don't need the French

That's what I said in high school....

The truth is, however, that the more countries involved means the more vested interest in success. The more countries involved also brings more resources to see the job through.

[d4dev]

By the way, I am of the view that the US ignored the world community, went to war in contempt of nations like France, Germany, Russia, China, India, and the majority of the world and now, when it's claims were proven false and when it realised that it could not win the war on it's own, went begging to nations like Turkey, India, Pakistan and Bangladesh for troops and supplies, and when these nations insisted for a UN mandate, it went begging to the UN for it's mandate. The US is not going to stay a superpower for long, it is going to crumble soon due to it's own selfish and myopic policies.

[d4dev]

And I don't know why Canada should support every foreign policy of the US as if it were it's own. In the world outside North America, the US is often seen as a dog, and Canada it's tail; the US can wag it whenever it wants to.

[Craig Read]

Well there are lots of posts that deal with the UNO rape of Iraqi money during the 1990s and the perfidy of the French, Russians and Germans doing the same. These are hardly paragons of virtue and no self respecting nation would bend a knee to these states or the UNO. As well lots of posts here deal with the moral equivalency shown by the left in allowing 250.000 Iraqi's to be murdered by a madman.

The same could be said btw of what is going on in Chechnya. Yet nary a whimper from the do-gooders about the destruction of Grozny.

Iraq is pure and simple about US national security. This is what many Canadians fail to grasp. All of the left's claims about the destruction of war, the casualties, the tolls, the lust for oil and so on are patently false.

It is about securing US borders, assets and citizens. In that light how can you possibly argue against pre-emption. I urge you to go to the WTC site. View it. Read the postings there. Stare at the destruction. Watch people cry as they do the same. Listen to mothers try to explain to their daughters what happened. Feel the emotion rise as the enormity of what occured hits you full in the face. Then think again about what it all means. And then revisit the thesis of Chretien that greedy self satisified people caused it. You will know it to be nothing more than bunk.

[d4dev]

Why does the US think that it is it's moral responsibility to police the world? In reality, the US only wants to protect it's own self interests. It went to war in Iraq because of the oil. It attacked Cuba and Vietnam because it felt that their well planned socialist economies were a threat to it's free-for-all economy. It continued with the expansion of NATO even after the fall of the USSR to encircle Russia and to threaten China.

[d4dev]

The logic of pre-emptive strike could be better understood if it is applied to countries who are really a threat to the US, China for eg. But the US does not have the guts to do that.

[Hugo]

d4dev,

There's so much wrong with what you've said, I just don't know where to begin.

"Well-planned" socialist economies have always been abject failures. They are and were inefficient, wasteful and unproductive dinosaurs, unable to return decent economic indicators, industrial output, consumer goods or quality of life. The USA was about as threatened by Marxism as my views are by your post.

The USA attacked Cuba and Vietnam because it feared the spread of Soviet and Maoist Communism. In case you're in any doubt as to why, suffice it to say that Soviet Communism murdered, starved or imprisoned 50 million of its own people, enslaved foreign nations it "liberated" (COMECON being basically a formality for the USSR to fleece the rest of the Warsaw Pact nations), and was bent upon expanding its empire wherever possible, by whatever means possible, be that armed insurrection or outright invasion and annexation. It stood for suppression of any kind of freedom and slavery to the state - a real-life evil empire.

The expansion of NATO after 1989 was a recognition that the post-Cold-War world was, if anything, more savage than before (see Kosovo, Chechnya) and mutual protection would still be just as necessary. The new nations were, I believe, former Warsaw Pact nations freed from the Soviet yoke.

China is not a threat to the US anymore. China has begun to enjoy a period of economic growth after moving away from Marxism towards a free market economy, and stands more to gain from peace than for war. China will be a stabilising influence in the Far East, and if the USA can successfully convince the Chinese that NK is a threat to Far Eastern stability and security they may well take care of him for them.

Even if China was a threat, the same rules cannot apply to China. While the PLA is pathetic and could easily be bested by the US military, occupation of a nation of 1.5bn hostile Chinese would be impossible. This has been China's defence since classical times - militarily weak, culturally strong, and able to assimilate conquerors rather than defeat them. You can see what the human and financial costs are of holding Iraq - what do you think they would be in China?

The US does not have a responsibility to police the world and does not want to. It protects its own interests because that is what everyone is doing in the world. That's what governments are elected to do: serve the people. If the US government serves foreigners better than Americans, it isn't doing its job.

Furthermore, if anyone was going to be a policeman of the world, I would much prefer the USA, or the USA and her democratic allies, to anyone else. The USA and other democracies value freedom - freedom of speech, opinion and belief, freedom of association, political freedom, free markets - and this, to me, is infinitely preferable to the semi or outright slavery that Communist or Islamo-fascist nations would hold us in.

You can stand up in the USA and say, "The President/Jesus/any other American cultural icon is a moron" and not only will you not be arrested, you'll probably be a guest on Bill Maher's show or something. I wonder what would happen if you stood up in Tehran and said "Mohammed was a moron"? What about if you stood up in Soviet Moscow and said "Lenin was a moron"?

[theloniusfleabag]

Dear Hugo,

I must object to

"Well-planned" socialist economies have always been abject failures. They are and were inefficient, wasteful and unproductive dinosaurs, unable to return decent economic indicators, industrial output, consumer goods or quality of life.

Many 'heavily socialist' countries enjoy far higher standards of living than 'freer economic' societies. Canada has among the highest human rights standards, as well as Sweden, for example, and both are 'left wing', and still have tremendous personal freedom.

As for Leninist-marxism, I agree, Lenin was 'moron' and used Marism to bring about or justify totalitarianism. I could easily argue why 'communism' could be the only place true democracy could flourish, but that is for another thread.

I am not sure what you mean by 'assimilating conquerors', except perhaps Marco Polo, for the Japanese and Russian conflicts were decided by attrition, not assimilation.

You are right, the USA is somewhat tolerant of criticism internally, (just don't mention the 'Dixie Chicks' lol) but you must realize that communist China is the slave-keeper for the USA, among other countries, so a 'freer-market' move is good for the people in power, but still enslaves the people so that others may profit. The others in this case are Nike shoes and Walt Disney Toys.

[nova_satori]

The USA attacked Cuba and Vietnam because it feared the spread of Soviet and Maoist Communism

Because the hysterial over communsim grasped the nation by the throat.

China is not a threat to the US anymore. China has begun to enjoy a period of economic growth after moving away from Marxism towards a free market economy, and stands more to gain from peace than for war. China will be a stabilising influence in the Far East, and if the USA can successfully convince the Chinese that NK is a threat to Far Eastern stability and security they may well take care of him for them.

I must agree with Hugo. China's militarty threat is non-existant except in ICBM delivery. There is nothing they can do on a convetional level that would frighten the US except for a massive landwar aganist all of its neighbors.

However, China can marginally threaten the US through mercantilism.

I wonder what would happen if you stood up in Tehran and said "Mohammed was a moron"? What about if you stood up in Soviet Moscow and said "Lenin was a moron"?

Depends how powerful you were.

With a secular, strong youth base, you could probably say Muhommad was an idiot and survive in Tehran.

With lots of money and mafia connections, you could say Lenin was an idiot in Moscow.

However, you are ignoring the numerous nations that support free speech.

[Derek]

China needs to get away from the whole, Taiwan thing, then i will be okay with them.

I foresee that in the future china will get away from communism slowly and move more towards a mix of

commocracy (sounds pretty wacked up though) to make their "communism" ideals work they will have to allow more trade, more companies coming in, and will have to show Some support for their citizens.

[nova_satori]

China needs to get away from the whole, Taiwan thing, then i will be okay with them.

That may take a few hundred years.

Here's a fun new poll:

WASHINGTON (Reuters) - Most Americans now believe the Iraq (news - web sites) war was not worth it, according to CBS News/New York Times poll released on Thursday which showed a sharp fall in public confidence in President Bush (news - web sites)'s ability to handle foreign and economic policy issues.

Reuters Photo

 

The poll found new lows for Bush's foreign policy performance, which garnered just a 44 percent approval rating. Among respondents, 50 percent lacked confidence in his ability to handle an international crisis and 53 percent said they now believed the Iraq war was not worth it.

Bush's overall job approval rating was just above 50 percent, almost back to the level before the Sept. 11, 2001, attacks and down sharply from his 89 percent approval rating after the attacks, the poll said.

"Landing on the carrier, declaring the conflict over, this Romanesque sort of victory parade, certainly did raise the stakes," historian James T. Smith told CBS News. "And now those expectations are falling because people are seeing that the Iraq situation is not going according to plan."

The poll found most Americans are critical of Bush's ability to handle both foreign and domestic problems, and a majority said the president does not share their priorities.

Just over a year before the Nov. 2004 election, a solid majority, 56 percent, of Americans thought the country was seriously on the wrong track, the poll found.

The nationwide telephone poll of 981 adults has a margin of sampling error of plus or minus 3 percentage points and was taken from Sunday through Wednesday.

Fifty six percent of Americans lacked confidence in the president's economic decision-making, compared with four months ago when 54 percent voiced confidence, the poll found.

Eyeing the presidential election, voters were split 44 percent to 44 percent between Bush and an unnamed Democratic opponent. But respondents by a 50 percent to 35 percent margin believed Bush would be re-elected.

Almost two-thirds of Americans viewed Bush as a strong leader, but the majority felt his leadership was not focused on priorities that mattered to them.

http://story.news.yahoo.com/news?tmpl=stor.../bush_poll_dc_6

[Craig Read]

So what is your point ? The Liberal media which screams everyday that Iraq and Afghanistan are unwinnable, and then unmanageable will affect people's perceptions.

However your basic idea that the US people are not behind the rebuilding of Iraq is wrong.

Time and Newsweek - both quite left of centre liberal rags - ran indepth reports and I watched an interview with both editors on their stories.

They both stated that the US people are firmly behind the rebuilding of Iraq and that the President must make it very clear, very often why the US is there. If Bush does that, then both stated that the US will have little domestic pressure to pull out.

Contrary to the media I believe that the average Joe and Jane six pack has a more intuitive and realistic assessment of what must be done than the Liberal gad fly's at Harvard or the Krugman's of the world, lost in Keynesian demand management and Marxian economics.

[Hugo]

Many 'heavily socialist' countries enjoy far higher standards of living than 'freer economic' societies. Canada has among the highest human rights standards, as well as Sweden, for example, and both are 'left wing', and still have tremendous personal freedom.

Those are not communist economies, those are mixed economies. My point was, however, not the linking of socialism to absence of political freedom (although historically, they tend to go hand in hand, because socialism goes against the human tide), but that socialism, economically, does not provide. In economic indicators, Canada and Sweden are midgets compared to the capitalist giants of the USA and Japan.

I am not sure what you mean by 'assimilating conquerors', except perhaps Marco Polo, for the Japanese and Russian conflicts were decided by attrition, not assimilation.

No, earlier than that.

Because the hysterial over communsim grasped the nation by the throat.

And so it would, if you knew that there was a vast empire across the ocean that tortured and shot its own people, was currently bent upon massive military and nuclear build-up and had sworn to destroy you.

However, China can marginally threaten the US through mercantilism.

Not yet. Maybe in a half-century or so, if they have some luck, but for now China remains an economic pygmy to the USA, and if they are a source of cheap labour, they can easily be replaced.

[Craig Read]

Socialism is a failure on many levels. What Canada has is welfare capitalism - a melange slanted towards socialist interference and redistribution and very very very selective liberalism including NAFTA which is not Free Trade but sectoral trade.

Canada by imposing higher burdens - like all socialist nations - enjoys a lower standard of living, less freedoms and less income and I would argue, a lower morality, participation rate in politics, and less concern for community, than less socialist nations.

History supports this view. I work in Russia from time to time, and have seen first hand the human and economic devastation of such a perverted system of centralised science and management.

It is disgusting.

[Nuclear]

There are people who go different ways in every country. Here, the PResident does something, the conservatives usually love it, the libs usually hate it. Same thing in Iraq. Some Iraqis know that they are getting a precious gift and are grateful. Others are snobish and don't know any better.