Archive for February 15th, 2007
Fetus Smithers
Thursday, February 15th, 2007
Fetus Smithers
Originally uploaded by smithersmpls.
Hiya peeps! I’m a girl!
(sent wireless via Treo 650)
Group Ride Theory
Thursday, February 15th, 2007Olaf perfectly encapsulates our philosophy for the rides this year:
The Group Ride as a Socialist Endeavor
Your local slugfest can be a relatively harmonized effort where each rider gets the opportunity to excel, while still ensuring the safety, productivity, and happiness of the entire group.
A rare thing indeed ~ American Socialism.
But, if the individual’s desire to fulfill their own needs on the group ride is in imbalance with the safety, productivity, or happiness of the entire group?
I call that American Individualism.
I am not a fan.
Urthel Tuesday night riding club, coming in April. American Individualists are invited to go race Opus.
Pull Out
Thursday, February 15th, 2007President Bush yesterday:
I concluded that to step back from Baghdad would have disastrous consequences in America. And the reason why I say ‘disastrous consequences’ is, the Iraqi government could collapse and chaos could spread.
Would a U.S. pull out of Iraq result in disastrous consequences? Robert Dreyfuss says not so fast.
In an article posted on Washington Monthly Dreyfuss looks to debunk the common preconceptions about a U.S. withdrawal from Iraq.
The idea that al-Qaeda might take over Iraq is nonsensical.
Dreyfuss writes that, since al-Qaeda is a Sunni organization, they would never be able to mass enough strength to topple both the Shiite and Kurdish elements of the Iraqi population which make up 4/5’s of the country. Dreyfuss also maintains that the Iraqi Sunnis have no tolerance for al-Qaeda and any al-Qaeda groups would be quickly exterminated once the U.S. pulls out. He also is skeptical that the group calling itself “al-Qaeda in Iraq” has any real ties to bin Laden’s network.
The United States is doing little, if anything, to restrain ethnic cleansing, either in Baghdad neighborhoods or Sunni and Shiite enclaves surrounding the capital. Indeed, under its current policy, the United States is arming and training one side in a civil war by bolstering the Shiite-controlled army and police.
He states that if the U.S. pulls out and efforts to create a post occupation compact fail, the outcome will be a Sunni-Shiite stalemate that is no worse than the path that Iraq is already moving towards with U.S. troops in place. He also writes that Sunni Saudi Arabia, Egypt and Jordan along with Shiite Iran would not be interested in risking an entire middle east conflagration by providing proxies in Iraq with heavy weaponry. Dreyfuss writes that only the U.S. can make the situation in Iraq worse by continuing to train and arm the Shiites.
Although this scenario sounds alarming, the reality is that, in the event of an American withdrawal, the Kurds would find it exceedingly difficult either to take Kirkuk or to declare independence. An independent Kurdistan would be landlocked, surrounded by hostile nations, and would possess a weak paramilitary army incapable of matching Iran, Arab Iraq, or Turkey.
Dreyfuss writes that the continued presence of U.S. troops in Iraq creates the conditions that embolden the Kurds to attempt a power grab. If the U.S. ended the occupation of Iraq it would force the Kurds to play ball.
What most Iraqis do seem to want, according to numerous polls, is for American forces to leave. Even within the current, skewed Iraqi political system, a majority of Iraq’s parliament supports a U.S. withdrawal. If we add to the mix the powerful Sunni-led resistance, including former Baathists, Sunni nationalists, and tribes, an overwhelming majority wants to end the occupation.
Give the people what they want. They then have two options. Full scale civil war or some type of political compromise. Dreyfuss states that most Iraqis do not support the extremists on either side. Given the opportunity they may yet be able to keep their country together. But this is not going to take place while American boots are on the ground.
It’s interesting that the Bush Administration took such a overwhelmingly negative few of the threat that Iraq posed to world peace (which turned out to be totally wrong) but such an overwhelmingly optimistic view of what would take place in Iraq once the Saddam regime was toppled (which also turned out to be totally wrong). Based on this record it is highly likely that the current Administration view of what will happen in Iraq once U.S. troops leave is also totally wrong.
So why are we still in Iraq?
