Nice to see Iraq becoming an Islamist state. - Calgarypuck Forums - The Unofficial Calgary Flames Fan Community

Flashpoint · 08-09-2006, 03:31 PM

Wonderful now that women can't drive cars and must wear the hijab in public. Bravo to the US handing one of the few secular countries in the region to violent Islamic extremists.

http://riverbendblog.blogspot.com/

This is the blog of an Iraqi woman living in Baghdad.

Read it, don't read it, agree disagree. I am too angry to care anymore.

FlamesAddiction · 08-09-2006, 05:39 PM

http://z.about.com/d/politicalhumor/...osama_iraq.jpg

Was there really ever any doubt that this would eventually happen? The U.S. has to leave sooner or later, and it is only a matter of time until they install another secular dictator to control the growing fundamentalism in Iraq. The was why I was against the invasion when they first started talking about it.

Of course, there are some people who believe this was the goal all along.

Five-hole · 08-09-2006, 05:46 PM

Goal? What goal?

Money has been made. That's what counts, people!

Lanny_MacDonald · 08-09-2006, 06:44 PM

Be very wary of blogs. Who knows if this is legit or if it is propaganda. If its legit, the Americans have seen their (supposedly) nightmares come true.

FlamesAddiction · 08-09-2006, 06:49 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Lanny_MacDonald

Be very wary of blogs. Who knows if this is legit or if it is propaganda. If its legit, the Americans have seen their (supposedly) nightmares come true.

True, but it is no secret that Islamists are controlling parts of Iraq, and in fact, are even part of Iraq's new government.

FlamesAddiction · 08-09-2006, 07:03 PM

Here's another shining example of a country on the cusp of freedom:

http://observer.guardian.co.uk/world...838222,00.html

icarus · 08-09-2006, 08:52 PM

Exactly how great were the odds all along that Iraq WOULDN'T become Islamist unless being governed by a iron-fisted despot?

greerb · 08-09-2006, 09:10 PM

Nice read, if it is real it is quite a different tale than is what is being told on TV.

I was and still am dead set against the was in Iraq and am glad Canada didn't participate. What was it for? To free a people from a dictatorship? Did they want and do they want to be free? Probably Not. Was Saddam really that much of a threat to the US? Where are the WoMD? Knowing full well that Iran had a neclear program and is a hotbed for terroist (Hezbullah), they should have concentrated on stopping their nuke program in a civilized manner.

oldschoolcalgary · 08-09-2006, 09:26 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by icarus

Exactly how great were the odds all along that Iraq WOULDN'T become Islamist unless being governed by a iron-fisted despot?

Com'on now...don't you remember Rummy and the NeoCons talking about how the coalition would be showered with candy and have parades for them as their liberators?

This despite the fact that many warned that Iraq was really comprised of three separate factions who were prone to separate when released from Saddam's grip?

Unfortunately, these groups were either ignored, marginalized, branded as "Liberals" (now a dirty word in American politics) or worst of all, "with the terrorists"...

Karma's a biyatch!

arsenal · 08-09-2006, 11:06 PM

There is such a thing as a benevolent dictator. Could it happen in Iraq? Yes. Right now, it doesn't look like it is going to happen. As long as they are free from Saddam, and if they move back to a Dictatorship, one can hope that the next one actually treats all people equally. That is if they fall back to a dictaorship.

On a side note, since Japan was one of the last times the US installed a democracy in a country. It took 3 years until the US felt it was safe to remove troops from Japan. The move to a democracy was with the full blessing of the Emporer, whom the Japanese revered as a God. So what the Emporer said, went. Just keep that in mind when you wonder why it is taking so long. Right now in Iraq, there is no one person or set of people that the Iraqi's are able to look to for guidance. It hopefully will happen sooner than later.

FlamesAddiction · 08-09-2006, 11:19 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by arsenal

On a side note, since Japan was one of the last times the US installed a democracy in a country. It took 3 years until the US felt it was safe to remove troops from Japan. The move to a democracy was with the full blessing of the Emporer, whom the Japanese revered as a God. So what the Emporer said, went. Just keep that in mind when you wonder why it is taking so long. Right now in Iraq, there is no one person or set of people that the Iraqi's are able to look to for guidance. It hopefully will happen sooner than later.

Japan didn't need to embrace pluralism for democracy to succeed there. In Iraq however, a true free democracy cannot exist without pluralism due to it being a multicultural society, and the conditions for pluralism simply do not exist - nor can they because part of those conditions would include accepting undemocratic Islamists as an equal partner in building Iraq.

It was a flawed goal from the onset.

arsenal · 08-09-2006, 11:55 PM

Democracy was / is the ultimate goal yes. Right now it doesn't look like it will ever happen. It's going to take a strong leader to step in take over the country. One can only hope that this person is nicer than Saddam.

Flames Draft Watcher · 08-10-2006, 12:13 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by arsenal

Democracy was / is the ultimate goal yes.

Some believe the goal was to establish military bases in the middle east to overlook the key countries that hold a huge percentage of the oil reserves left in the world.

Democracy was a talking point but how can anyone say that was their goal originally when their excuse to go in was WMD? I'm sure they would have loved the great press if they had successfully rescued Iraq and set up a stable democracy, would have given them more leverage to do similar operations in other areas of the world. The US's goals in Iraq were/are not as simple nor idealistic as democracy. Oil, defense contracts, economy of war, protection of Isreal, opening up the country for multi-national corportations to exploit it and help American stockholders get richer, flexing it's muscle to remind the world of it's military fortitude, etc would certainly seem like other probable factors. Of course it makes it a great PR reason for going in and would give a great PR reason in the future to try and set up sympathetic regimes for the US and multi-national corporate interests in other areas of the world.

If Democracy were truly the single overriding goal then the US would be responsible for many nations who are still under totalitarian regimes. It's not a coincedence that Iraq happens to be in the centre of the middle east, one of the biggest oil rich areas in the world. I don't see them jumping to liberate the rest of the world from brutal regimes, only in the countries of strategic importance for the US's interests.

Flash Walken · 08-10-2006, 05:36 AM

Meet The New Boss, Same as the Old Boss

Long live the crusades!

icarus · 08-10-2006, 06:17 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by arsenal

There is such a thing as a benevolent dictator. Could it happen in Iraq? Yes. Right now, it doesn't look like it is going to happen. As long as they are free from Saddam, and if they move back to a Dictatorship, one can hope that the next one actually treats all people equally. That is if they fall back to a dictaorship.

How many dictators can you name who have treated everyone equally? Even the so-called enlightened despots such as Frederick II and Catherine the Great never treated all equally.

Flashpoint · 08-10-2006, 08:17 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Lanny_MacDonald

Be very wary of blogs. Who knows if this is legit or if it is propaganda. If its legit, the Americans have seen their (supposedly) nightmares come true.

I agree 100% that one needs to be wary of blogs. They must always be approached with a critical eye.

Here is a Washington Post link about Riverbend

Quote:

The blog was praised by the New York Times who said her "articulate, even poetic prose packs an emotional punch while exhibiting a journalist's eye for detail."
Her online diary on www.riverbendblog.blogspot.com, which was collected together and issued by Marion Boyars Publishers, was nominated for a major literary prize in Britain.

http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn...080700305.html

Azure · 08-10-2006, 12:16 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by greerb

To free a people from a dictatorship? Did they want and do they want to be free? Probably Not.

I guess the people WANTED to live in fear of Saddam and his murderous ways.....

The blog, believe it or not is fast becoming reality. IMO, the US liberated, and gave power to the group to has immense hatred for the West.

Lanny_MacDonald · 08-10-2006, 12:27 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Azure

I guess the people WANTED to live in fear of Saddam and his murderous ways.....

As opposed to living in fear of sectarian violence and death squads? I'd chose the dictator who would leave you alone if you kept your nose clean over the death squads who kill you for having the worng name.

Quote:

The blog, believe it or not is fast becoming reality. IMO, the US liberated, and gave power to the group to has immense hatred for the West.

Wow, spin yourself into the ground much? Yes, the United States went to Iraq to liberate the people and give power to those who would kill Americans! Yeah, that's it. The Americans had no long-term plans of staying in Iraq. None. Forget about the largest "embassy" in the world (the locals call it the Bush Palace) and the 14 super-bases across Iraq. This was a humanitarian mission bent on spreading democracy to the region! What a joke!

Say, you post that theory on another board? You post it over at T.A.R. site??? I really think you should!!! Just to prove you have the balls to discuss this elsewhere and not spam this board with your "ideas".

RedMan12 · 08-10-2006, 12:39 PM

since when is America in Iraq to reform the country for human rights? As long as their bussiness ventures are fine they could care less.