Jump to content

Blix's Assessment Of Iraq


Recommended Posts

Many major wars have been started by asassinating people of high stature and this could follow the pattern. Any little incident can spark massive backlash and the United States is not willing to sacrifice the little stability left in Iraq. I understand that he is a possible threat to the United States but even so he would be even moreso dead.

 

If the United States sovreignty was questioned and they were invaded by another countries army I am sure similar situations would occur. Only they are multiplied by Iraq being such a religous place.

Link to post
Share on other sites
  • Replies 156
  • Created
  • Last Reply

Top Posters In This Topic

All I know is that you cannot destroy a mosque......I liked the suggestion of cutting off the utilites and starving him out.....might be a "grind" but seems to me like the best way to go, expecially considering the circumstances.

 

Or, play some loud rock music.....it drove Noriega out.... :) ......that was Noriega wasn't it....

Link to post
Share on other sites

Volt,

 

I don't know this guy from Adam, but it seems that some of the Iraqis like him a lot. Enough so that many of that our military when presented with a covert plan to kill the guy, nixed the plan. The reason - fear of Iraqi backflash.

 

So you are right. In our eyes, a hero, in their eyes, a martyr.

Link to post
Share on other sites

I think Volt hit on the only realistic solution. Surround the place, cut off supplies and wait! Killing the local version of Billy Graham is not gonna win any hearts and minds over there, although it might win a few back home. Once he is taken into 'protective' custody, start a dialogue with the guy and see if what he (and like minded fellows) is really asking for is so far fetched and unattainable.

 

Seems that maybe we should fight fire with fire. They use clerics to stoke up hatred, we should use some of the friendly clerics to counter them. I hardly see any reference to pro-coalition clerics speaking out. Time for the coalition to replace their publicists?

Link to post
Share on other sites

Seems that maybe we should fight fire with fire. They use clerics to stoke up hatred, we should use some of the friendly clerics to counter them.

Just rang Billy's agent. He's busy. :lol:

Link to post
Share on other sites

First I am not sure that taking out Billy Graham has close to the same impact as would taking out this cleric. Most Christians do not have near worship of a living religious leader and do not think of churches as much more than buildings. I don't know but it is my understanding that this Mosk represents more than a religious building. For Catholics this may be akin to blowing up the Vatican to kill the Pope.

 

Second, as for him being a murderer. I suspect he is but right now he is only an accused murderer. As has been said. Put yourself in their shoes. You have a strong religious belief, you have faith in a leader, a foreign power comes into your country, you don't trust the foreign country or its motives, your trusted leader says the foreign power is trying to corrupt your soul and keep you from going to heaven. Then the foreign power accuses your religious leader of murder and wants him prosecuted. If that won't incite passion what will?

 

Third, I am not sure that the Iraqis see this as murder even if they think this leader was behind it. This is a little bit like in the 1930's Chicago. When a gang boss had another gang boss killed his gang didn't say "Oh no Al Capone is a murderer. I can't support his policies anymore." I think they probably took the position that a rival was bad for business. Just as I suspect many of the faithful followers of this Cleric think that the murdered Cleric was at least a rival and probably in the pockets of Satan (the US). After all he had been in exile in the west for years and the US flew him back after the war. He was telling the Iraqis that the US is going to help. Why would they believe he hadn't been corrupted?

 

Forth, starve him out. I am sure this is an option that will be considered. But it seems to me that this siege will be as effective as the Iranian hostage crisis. I doubt they will miss electricity. Power is still not fully and reliably restored to the entire country. If the really were able to get several hundred militia and provisions into the Mosk they might be able to hold out for a year. With elections in 110 days what impact will having a respected religious leader have upon their elections? Doesn't holding out against the the great powerful Satan increase his power, prestige, and following? How long can desperate people, with adequate provisions, support of some if not most of the community hold out in a siege.

Link to post
Share on other sites

As for using friendly Clerics. I am not sure that the Iraqi people will trust a cleric that is very supportive of the US. Besides I suspect it will be like trying to find conservative republicans that will vote for Hillary Clinton as president. I am sure there are some but not many. :)

Link to post
Share on other sites

CD, am I right in my understanding of your post when I say that the cleric has the support of the people because of his anti coalition stance rather than his simply being a cleric in a country of religious fanatics?

 

If I'm right, then we really do have a problem as this means that he is not revered for his religious status, but rather due to his political views which are clearly more popular than we would like to, or have been led to believe. If it was a question of demanding respect and support primarily because of ones religious status, then using 'friendly' clerics would certainly have an effect also.

Link to post
Share on other sites

For those that want a bit more incite into this young cleric.

 

Q: You've expressed pretty strong feelings about the Americans – why do you hate them so much?

 

A: Hate them? No inshallah I don't hate them. But the Americans are two parts. There is the American people, and then there is the American government. The people of America, we have no problem with, and we like them to be our friends and for us to be theirs, in good and the bad times. There are no problems there.

 

But the American government, with its co-operation with Israel, it's intent on dividing the Middle East, and Arabs and Muslims in particular. And this is a war on Muslims, as many clues attest to, such as declaring war on Afghanistan, and fighting Syria, and Iraq – all of these, what's do they have in common? One element, and that is what? Islam.

From a CBC interview on April 6th.

 

http://www.cbc.ca/news/background/iraq/al_sadr_qa.html

Link to post
Share on other sites
Guest Deuces Wild

I am tired of people wanting to take the approach of "Please Mr. Terrorist, I give up, don't hurt me."

 

We have been hurt and this situation cannot get any worse. Let our military do what they were trained to do and that certainly is not being policemen.

 

Bring in the special ops, lob some smoke bombs into the mosque and take them. Then bring in more troops and overwhelm the militant sections with full force. Continue doing so till this mess is cleaned up.

 

This #%^*! footing around in fear of getting someone upset has not worked.

 

The heck with the Cleric being entitled to a fair trial. He is responsible for the deaths of our troops. The only trial he needs is whether to put a 45 or a 38 to his head and click away. Unfortunately, being the Country we are, we will hold him for trial.

Link to post
Share on other sites
Guest fragged one

 

However, this is a war on all of terrorism as was promised since day one and it is certainly far from over.

Which "Iraqi" terrorists attacked the United States? :blink:
ramzi yousef...
Link to post
Share on other sites

I don't know if he is respected because he is a cleric, or the son of a famous martyred cleric, or just because he is anti-American. My guess is that just like in any country it is multi determined. Some people like Bush because he is conservative, some like him because he is republican, some because he is a business man. All are reasons but the result is the same. Obviously they can be significant differences for the individual but the individual must buy into the whole package or change leaders.

 

I believe War College teaches that you cannot defeat a guerrilla style army with conventional military tactics of going in and blowing stuff up. The American revolution, Vietnam and other wars have taught this lesson. If this were an effective strategy why is Israel still fighting with Palestinians?

 

News reports this morning are that the Clerics picture is being publicly displayed in Southern Iraq. This is seen as auguring bad news since the south is presumed to be Pro-American and is of a different Muslim Sect than the Cleric holding up in a Mosk.

Link to post
Share on other sites
Guest Hurdy

Then bring in more troops and overwhelm the militant sections with full force

The heck with the Cleric being entitled to a fair trial

The only trial he needs is whether to put a 45 or a 38 to his head and click away.

Might as well left Saddam in charge then.

Link to post
Share on other sites

DW,

 

Check out this link.

 

http://www.nytimes.com/2004/04/07/politics/07MILI.html

 

The information is from an unnamed Dept of Defense source, but he states that we had a plan to knock out this guy a little while back and the plan was nixxed due to concerns to Muslim backlash.

 

Given the events that have occurred, are we now saying any or all of the following?

 

1. Backlash be damned, justice needs to be served, American style.

2. We should have knocked this guy off when we had the chance, and this whole damn thing could have been averted.

3. Backlash, schmacklash. We'll take care of business now, and worry about any other problems, if any, later. Time to stop pussyfooting around.

 

The reason I ask is that I am coming to a different conclusion. The events of last week *could* indicate an underlying resentment of the American occupation in *all* Iraqis. That's right I said it. All Iraqis, not just a radical sect. The last survey data is rather old. If this is the case, this just could be the tip of the iceburg, and any small event could spark a mob like contagion.

 

Personally, after seeing the footage from last week, I became afraid for our troops. There are only a little over 100K of them there now. I fully support the idea of sending more troops to Iraq immediately, before it is too late.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Unfortunately, being the Country we are, we will hold him for trial.

If that were only true. One need only look at Gitmo Bay to see thats not always the case. Keyword hold him. Yes I agree. Trial? I suppose whenever they get around to it.

 

This is no longer considered "wartime"... that supposedly ended quite a while back. If the point of the military is to be there in the first place was to take saddam and liberate that country, then that has been accomplished. Are the military now supposed to liberate the country of its citizens too? It is running into a far more confusing situation over there about what to do.

 

One thing I am not confused about is alot of military are being killed over there and more are going to happen if this situation isn't handled the right way.

Link to post
Share on other sites

This is much much more then one man in one Mosque.

 

When two factions of one country that have decidedly hated each other for decades join forces there is a definate problem much larger folks here have taken into consideration. These are not terrorists, these are people who's country was invaded, and while many were happy to see Hussien go, they are obviously not very happy with the "occupying" countries.

 

This will grow, it won't be sqaushed as so many believe. We are no longer fighting a dictator, we have now come to the point where we are turning our guns on the very people we claimed to have liberated. Funny thing is they want liberation from us, they want to decide the destiny of their country. I think we should let them. Let them kill each other rather then our young men and women. Let them go back to hating each other rather then giving them a common enemy.

 

One thing I learned as a small child, if to brothers are in a knock down drag out fist fight, you do not jump in the middle. The two brothers will get up, join together and kick your #%^*!, making you look like the bloody fool you were for butting in.

 

 

http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/4679155/

Link to post
Share on other sites

 

 

 

 

Might as well left Saddam in charge then.

Thats about the conclusion I'v come to myself.

 

Way more fanatic idiots over there than I thought there were I must say.

 

When folks look up to preachers who kill other preachers to gain power,,something is all out of whack.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Rumfield said yesterday that if we need more boots on the ground the army can have them. However, I understood him to say that he has no reason to think that there is a need now.

 

I do hear that the US is trying to outsource more of its military services that are doing security in Iraq to private security firms. The idea being that every soldier or marine not manning a guard post can be out kicking down a door.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Well I posted awhile back about a proposal to put Saddam back in power, I think that should be revisited. At least he will control the population without breeding terrorists or allowing his country to become a terrorist base camp.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Well I posted awhile back about a proposal to put Saddam back in power, I think that should be revisited. At least he will control the population without breeding terrorists or allowing his country to become a terrorist base camp.

I have said many times it takes a dictator to control a country like this.

 

How many graves do we fill with Iraqi's before someone says oh my god look at the "mass graves"?

 

The only difference is we will claim some high moral ground, but in the end it's all the same. They now look at us as oppressors, they will look at anyone who uses force and guns to control them as oppressors. Not all that different from the dictator who used his military might, and guns to keep them under control.

 

 

Has anyone stopped to consider that the so called mass graves in Iraq were from the very same kind of revolt and resistance we now face?

 

The graves being filled now wouldn't look much different, filled with peoples brothers and sisters and fathers and children. Of course ten years from now if you asked the people in the streets where did they all come from, they would tell you the Americans just came in and butchered and tortured everyone.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Bruce,

 

That article is what I was talking about. It really scared the crap out of me.

 

Both sides are totally dug in now. We are not leaving or else it will look (in an election year no less) like we are soft on terrorism. Although I believe that the people attacking our troops in Iraq have nothing to do with Al Quaeda, I think the distinction will be lost on most American people. Bush's primary election hook is that he is strong on the war on terrorism. There is no way we can back out. My hunch is that we will do the opposite. We need to double up now. The 'enemy' is growing larger, and we need more troops there now.

 

On the other side, they are making this a religious war. I realize that Clark and Blix are extremely biased but they might have a point. If these religious leaders can paint America as their common enemy to the Muslim religion, they will grow in strength and potentially create a larger threat to American security than Saddam himself. Even if Saddam had had WMD, this new threat feels much worse to me.

Link to post
Share on other sites

I agree, Rob. Note that 'Old Islam' is attempting to distance itself before it develops into a cultural slaughter. To convince me though, they would have to put some troops in the field themselves. A battallion or two of Saudis would be a good start.

 

Islamic Stand on Terrorism

 

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

 

Greetings All,

 

Throughout history, human society has suffered from terrorism, violence, and extremism. This suffering has increased in this day and age, causing physical and moral damage to many communities and culminating in an international phenomenon which preoccupies the mind and causes concern to everyone seeking peace, security and stability.

 

Islam, undoubtedly, has a clear stand on terrorism, violence, and extremism and on their causes as it abhors such phenomena and combats them, calling for cooperation with others to protect mankind from their dangers and consequences. Given its complex nature, terrorism requires scientific investigation which addresses its roots, causes, consequences and the ways to combat it.

 

In order to clarify the position of Islam on these phenomena and to expound its moderations, goodness and call for dialogue, the idea arose to hold a conference entitled ‘The Stand of Islam on Terrorism, Violence, and Extremism’ at Al-Imam Muhammad Ibn Saud University.

 

 

To view Islamic Stand on Terrorism:

 

http://www.islamstand.org/english/index.htm

 

For correspondence and inquiries:

 

E-Mail: [email protected]

 

 

Regards,

 

Electronic Publisher

 

Link to post
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now

×
×
  • Create New...