Iran and Iraq-problems-outlook-discussion

[Spock]

Originally Posted by Lief Erikson

Many times, the West simply lacks the determination to see a thing through. We aren't willing to take casualties, and thus we become easy prey to Islamic militants who are. This is the public in the West I'm talking about, specifically the populations of Israel, Britain and the US. I expect that kind of feeling pervades the whole of the West though.

Meanwhile, the Islamic militants don't care how many of them die. They're willing to accept very substantial losses. That makes them more dangerous than us.

Well said.

Personally I'm of a mind that neither place will be able to move on without humungus help. IMO in Afganistan, where we've been longer, the new attacks on Nato troops just show how porous the borders are that allow insurgents to go and come back. The Afgans cannot hold the line, it's just a fact of modern warfare vs guerilla war fare-although they did get rid of the Russians, this time it's a whole other ball game.

Iraq is too beset with sectartian rivalry and clan warfare, as it has been for centuries. Sadaaam or a ruthless dictator did/can hold it together but only by brutal means. Their culture just isn't familiar with nor interested in adopting a democratic society-voting is nice but there's much more needed to make the change and it's not getting done.

[The Gaffer]

I think we can agree on that.

However, whilst it is possible for cultures to change rapidly (embracing universal suffrage, for example, which let's not forget has been a relatively recent arrival on the scene in the West), it is folly to attempt to impose it from the outside without civil society and some sort of "cultural infrastructure" being in place to support it.

In the meantime, we have to deal with who we have to deal with.

[Spock]

CAIRO, Egypt - In a new audio message Thursday, the leader of al-Qaida in Iraq called for explosives experts and nuclear scientists to join his group's holy war against the West.
"We are in dire need of you," he said. "The field of jihad (holy war) can satisfy your scientific ambitions, and the large American bases (in Iraq) are good places to test your unconventional weapons, whether biological or dirty, as they call them."

He also issued an amnesty to Iraqis who cooperated with their country's "occupiers," calling on them to "return to your religion and nation" during the Muslim holy month of Ramadan, which Sunnis began observing in Iraq on Saturday and Shiites on Monday.

"We will not attack you as long as you declare your true repentance in front of your tribe and relatives," he said. "The amnesty ends by the end of this holy month."

"I appeal to every holy warrior in the land of Iraq to exert all efforts in this holy month so that God may enable us to capture some of the Western dogs to swap them with our sheik and get him out of his dark prison," the voice on the tape said.

[Lief Erikson]

Here's an interesting report. Apparently Ayatollah Khomeini didn't consider nuclear weapons to be against Islam.
http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/middle_east/5392584.stm

[Gwaimir Windgem]

Originally Posted by Spock

Their culture just isn't familiar with nor interested in adopting a democratic society

You say that as though it were a bad thing.

[Spock]

Originally Posted by Gwaimir Windgem

You say that as though it were a bad thing.

Oh, no, Not At All. It's a major fault of the West, (us too) that they do not seem to realize or acknowledge this when dealing with them.
The same applies when dealing with China....fortunately we haven't gone to war with them-yet.

[Spock]

While I'm not in favor of pulling out, this action seems to have the possibility of calming down fears in the region:

WASHINGTON (Reuters) - The U.S. Congress on Friday moved to block the Bush administration from building permanent U.S. military bases in Iraq or controlling the country's oil sector, as it approved $70 billion for funding the wars in Iraq and Afghanistan.

Democrats and many Republicans say the Iraqi insurgency has been fueled by perceptions that the United States has ambitions for a permanent presence in the country. They have called on Bush to make a policy statement that the United States has no such plans

President Bush has not said either way whether the United States wants permanent bases, but U.S. officials have predicted a lengthy U.S. military presence in Iraq
---------------------------------------
Maybe this will help

[The Gaffer]

Speaking of which, is James Baker's Iraq Study Group going to bail Bush out? They are hinting that they might get Iran and Syria to step in after US troops leave.

http://www.guardian.co.uk/Iraq/Story/0,,1924927,00.html

This feels like a tipping point to me. Quite apart from that radical but probably sensible possible solution, it is the first time we've seen people close to the Administration acknowledge the that the current strategy is failing.

At the same time we have Bush on the TV yesterday trying to shift the blame onto his generals:

If the general comes up with a new strategy, I will fully support it

Or words to that effect. Must be pretty galling for the generals, many of whom warned against invading Iraq in the first place.

[Spock]

Ahmadinejad: Iran's Nuke Capability Up
By NASSER KARIMI (Associated Press Writer)
From Associated Press
October 23, 2006 9:26 AM EDT
TEHRAN, Iran - Iran's nuclear capability has increased tenfold despite Western pressure to roll back its atomic program, President Mahmoud Ahmadinejad said Monday.

He did not elaborate, and the remarks appeared aimed primarily at rallying public support as the U.N. Security Council prepares to consider a draft resolution imposing limited sanctions on Iran because of its refusal to halt its uranium enrichment.

"The enemies, resorting to propaganda, want to block us from achieving (nuclear technology)," Ahmadinejad told a crowd on the southern outskirts of Tehran. "But they should know that today, the capability of our nation has multiplied tenfold over the same period last year."

Ahmadinejad boasted that "the power of our enemies is less than one-tenth of their power in last year."

[Lief Erikson]

And more:

Originally Posted by BBC News

Iranian President Mahmoud Ahmadinejad has told a conference in Tehran questioning the Holocaust that Israel's days are numbered.

"Just as the USSR disappeared, soon the Zionist regime will disappear," he said to the applause of the participants.

[Jonathan]

That's no news. It must be the umpteenth time he's denied the holocaust and called for removal of the "Zionist regime".

[Lief Erikson]

Yeah, I know.

[hectorberlioz]

What do you guys think: Exactly how the heck are Iran and Syria going to help Iraq stabilize in any way? I think the Iraq Study Group is dangerously naive to even suggest that...
Of all the countries, why do we have to invite them for ideas? What about Jordan? Even Egypt would be more helpful.

[The last sane person]

Not really. Iran and Syria have control over the clerics. Control the clerics and shut them up and you have some stability. That and Iran and Syria have troops already there on the ground that are capable of fighting against the insurgents, where as American troops are being thwarted.

[hectorberlioz]

Sane, Iran and Syria are supplying insurgents.

The problem would be, if we said to Syria and Iran "hey guys, help us out", they would be only too able. Then when we "finish", they'll just plop in there and control the sections of Iraq that they want. Presto, all our efforts down the tube.

[captain carrot]

Originally Posted by hectorberlioz

Sane, Iran and Syria are supplying insurgents.

and yet you can't see how they may be of influence?

*falls over*

Politicans huh?

[The last sane person]

yeah, well, you guys through sheer incompetance lost the pie for yourselves, and now those that were shrewd-er and more organized got it for themselves. If you are nice to the, you might be able to get a cut, You fail to see this?

[hectorberlioz]

Originally Posted by hectorberlioz

The problem would be, if we said to Syria and Iran "hey guys, help us out", they would be only TOO able.

In other words, they are the enemy we are fighting.

[The last sane person]

Actually, you are fighting the Syrians. The Iranians are the ones actually keeping Moqtadah Al Sadr in check, and they were also hunting Zarqawi before you killed him.

[hectorberlioz]

Thats because they all want a piece of the action. Iran wants Iraq so they can get at Saudi Arabia. Syria wants to keep itself up-to-date.

*sigh* At least the Kurds should get their own land. They get in the crossfire of stuff they don't deserve. Turkey tries to keep them out, thats why they went to Iraq, and why northern Iraq was almost a Kurdish country unto itself, a small one.