Brad Wardell's views about technology, politics, religion, world affairs, and all sorts of politically incorrect topics.
The long awaited report has some surprises
Published on December 6, 2006 By Draginol In War on Terror

The Iraq Study Group report is finally out.

It's a bit surprising in a few areas. First, it doesn't suggest that the US needs to exit immediately but rather that over the course of the next year the US should transition to a more supporting role of training Iraqi forces. Then, after that, the troops should come home -- ready or not.

It also advocates talks with Iran and Syria.  James Baker makes the case that the US had regular talks with the Soviet Union for 40 years even though their stated objective was to wipe us out.

But the part that really struck me was the analysis of the Iraqi government. They unanimously concluded that the Iraqi government is just incompetent. So incompetent that they have serious concerns of whether it will be capable -- given any amount of time -- to effectively govern the country. They have good intentions but lack the capability to governm.

I have to say I support everything I've read about the report so far.  To me, this 3 year disaster should have ended 2 years ago.  Our goal was to eliminate the regime of Saddam Hussein. That was accomplished 3 years ago. 

Why are we still there?  It's not our job to make sure Iraq is turned into a Jeffersonian democracy. I get the reaosn they want to. I even support a reasonable effort. But 3 years? If the Iraqis can't get their act together soon, then tough. 

The options for the US aren't merely either a Jeffersonian democracy or a terrorist state. The option isn't even something in between.  We toppled a fairly powerful regime in a matter of weeks with few combat deaths. The US should have a policy of knocking down regimes that support terrorism and represent threats to the United States. It should not be our policy to spend year after year trying to rebuild these countries unless it's demonstratably in our best interest.

This time next year, the troops better start coming home -- or at least out of Iraq.


Comments (Page 4)
4 PagesFirst 2 3 4 
on Dec 11, 2006

Wow. A hundred thousand innocent deaths.....really? That many?


Indeed. the US administration is deliberatly using reduced numbers to keep the public opinion more on their sides.

They don't count:

- Bodies found
- People killed by assassination
- Woundeds that eventually die of their wounds.

and they also do not count the attacks that hasn't killed anyone

Amazing. So according to Cik, any deaths due to tribalism in Iraq are also the fault of the United States too.

How about if we stick to the # of people actually killed by US personnel.  Iraqi adults are -- (Wait for it) adults. They are actually capable of deciding NOT to kill other people.

on Dec 11, 2006
Amazing. So according to Cik, any deaths due to tribalism in Iraq are also the fault of the United States too.


Of course Brad, you know that all death of every cause are the fault of the U.S. If it isn't about shooting and bombing its about what we do to the environment and how we made sure AIDS would get out.

To people who have already decided that the terrrorists are merely victims of the US, logic and reality don't matter anymore. Next thing you know they'll be saying that the attacks of 9/11 were an inside job and that the CIA staged the beheading of Nick Berg.... oops, too late.

on Dec 11, 2006
drmiler -- why are you blasting Rightwinger for not reading more? He did read it, he just forgot to post the link


You need to try to "comprehend" what you read. I blasted "Cikomyr" not Rightwinger!
on Dec 11, 2006
Amazing. So according to Cik, any deaths due to tribalism in Iraq are also the fault of the United States too.


Indeed, since their death were cause by the removal of the previous authority.

If you elaborate on the number of people that would have died of hunger or disease BECAUSE of Saddam's regime that would have happened between 2003-2007, that would lead us to a figure about 1/3 of the people that were killed by tribalism fighting or coalition troops or terrorist activity.

How about if we stick to the # of people actually killed by US personnel. Iraqi adults are -- (Wait for it) adults. They are actually capable of deciding NOT to kill other people.


It sound so simple when you say it that way. But I'm pretty sure if we went to see these killers, they would say they want to defend themselves against the other side, talking about the people they knew who were killed.

It's a big vicious circle, where every side kills the other because the other side killed some of them. Which calls for more and more blood over time, and no one even dare to lower their arm, for fear of being attack by the other side.

And all started by AlQaeda Sunni agents that began bombing and attacking Shia civilians.

Which were allowed to do so because the whole country was in chaos, with disbanded armed troops disperced everywhere.

You need to try to "comprehend" what you read. I blasted "Cikomyr" not Rightwinger!


Well, that's the way I understood it, no worry

Of course Brad, you know that all death of every cause are the fault of the U.S. If it isn't about shooting and bombing its about what we do to the environment and how we made sure AIDS would get out.


off course, forgive me. I forgot that the U.S. has the well-being of everyone on the planet as one of their most interest. They would absolutely NEVER do any harm to any innocent (foreign) people for their own interest. They are the world-leader of diplomatic action, environnemental protection & the protection of minorities worldwide, ESPECIALLY inside their own country.<

Quit your Tom Clancy delusion, man. U.S. aren't a virgin state, and they fuck the world a lot.
on Dec 11, 2006

So in other words, you are a straight old "Blame America" kind of guy.  That's your perogative but you'll have to forgive me if I don't accept your premise.

And since who is to blame for the deaths is irrelevant, there's no point in arguing it.

on Dec 12, 2006
Irrational circular reasoning, Cik. You either accept that humans have free will or you don't. If they have free will, they are the RP (responsible party), accountable for their actions. If you believe they are not free to choose, those who choose for them are the RP. In neither circumstance does the US qualify as the RP.
on Dec 13, 2006
So in other words, you are a straight old "Blame America" kind of guy.


For Iraq's mess? Yhea. But you share the responsability with AlQaeda & the other countries around who get their noses into it.

For the World's? Naaa. Well, maybe some part of it, but for the most part ('bout 70%) of the whining done against america, it's just un-founded whining.

But on the other side, America (or it's multinationals) indeed have caused a lot of suffering worldwide. And if some parts of it continues to negate worldwide danger such as global warming, I fear they will lead to humanity's eventual doom.
on Dec 13, 2006
Irrational circular reasoning, Cik


Can you point me the arguments I made that lead you to this conclusion?
on Dec 13, 2006
I think the ISG report is the most rational summary about Iraq that I've seen in the last years. I'm not convinced that removing Saddam really changed much overall (other than his face appearing less often in the news) but that job is done anyway and I don't miss him. The sooner the troops are withdrawn now (or concentrated on really important matters) the better I'd say. Everything else will just lead to more lives and more billions spent for little effect. Iraq isn't going to turn into a noteworthy democracy within the next ten or twenty years anyway. Strike where the enemy is weak and retreat before it gets too ugly, this works in computer games at least.
4 PagesFirst 2 3 4