Well, it’s a river, actually, but the idea is the same. This is a symbol of just how miserably we have failed in Iraq.
Iraq’s politicians were reported yesterday to be drawing up provisional plans to divide Baghdad into Sunni and Shia halves after a week of bloodshed that has left the government’s security plan to pacify the capital in tatters.
The proposal would mean an acceptance that the country could not be held together and would mark a dramatic failure for the American policy of fostering national unity.
The Tigris river, which would become the dividing line between the predominately Sunni districts of west Baghdad and the majority Shia in the east.
Gee, what a great victory. This is what we died and bled for? FSN9, Conrad and all the rest who swore by this war – do you still swear by it? Was it really worth it?
Update:At least everything in our other war is going swimmingly. Thank God for wartime presidents.
1
By Johnny K
I personally thought Iraq should have been divided on day 1 of overthrow. It is not a real nation, it never was. It is a legacy of European imperialism that should not exist nor ever have existed.
I don’t know which way the forces of History are going, and I am doubtful that we will like them. Whatever they are and wherever they go, historians will look back and see that no matter what, we were powerless to stop them. We could have delayed them by not invading, but eventually, the shit would have hit the giant fan.
The dictators in the middle east would have fallen for the same reasons we hope will destroy (or at least transform) the CCP. Then we’d be exactly where we are now (though I concede we’d be there without casualties and with another $300 billion in our bank [[or rather, $300 billion of debt less in China’s banks]])
Protestants and Catholics, Christians both, slaughtered each other from the Reformation until Westphalia in 1648, more than a century of bloodshed. In 2006, the question is now whether can we force the ideals of Westphalian sovereignty upon them now, or whether they are going to have to discover it for themselves “the hard way”
What is happening now was absolutely inevitable. We simply pushed the timetable forward, and at a terrible expense.
If these less liberal people need to live in a more homogenous land, then fine. They’re about to get it. If building a wall can amelioriate the bloodshed and begin the arduous task of statebuilding, my only regret will have been waiting so long to do it.
July 22, 2006 @ 2:07 am | Comment
2
By boo
It must be tough taking up the white man’s burden, Johnny K.
July 22, 2006 @ 4:45 am | Comment
3
By OtherLisa
Johnny…uh…
Words fail me. But I’ll try.
See, the great advantage of letting Saddam fall on his own and letting events in Iraq take their course according to what the Iraqi people decide to do without American involvement is, then, it’s not our fault and they don’t hate us even more throughout the entire Middle East. And then we have some power to negotiate when things get bad. But we don’t have that option any more. Lebanon the democracy is getting blown to bits by weapons supplied by us and an Israeli armed forces paid for by American taxpapers. Doesn’t that feel just swell?
Ugh. Is it 2009 yet?
July 22, 2006 @ 10:37 am | Comment
4
By Bukko in Australia
I thought we invaded Iraq to establish an Islamic state governed by Wahabi sharia principles. That’s what we got, at least.
(Insert emoticon for saracasm here…)
But I’m glad to find out the . merely accelerated the tide of history; that Iraq was never a viable entity and we’re doing the world a favour by destroying this thing that existed since the end of Ottomanity. The Turks will also be happy to know there will be a Kurdish state on their southern border, SO attractive to those restless “mountain Turks” inside the lines on a map artificially created by imperialist Europeans. And when Turks and Kurds resume slaughtering each other, I guess boys will be boys.
Face it, we all die eventually. If America does something that causes lots and lots of people to be killed, we’re just pushing forward the inevitable timetable, eh?
Always good to hear the latest rationalisations from the right. Now on to transforming China! They’ll just sit still for that, surely. No counter-plans for transforming the USA! We have always been at war with Eastasia…
July 22, 2006 @ 10:19 pm | Comment
5
By nausicaa
Hmm…I guess Johnny read “Clash of Civilizations” for the first time and got so excited he creamed his pants.
July 23, 2006 @ 3:28 am | Comment
6
By nausicaa
I guess someone read “Clash of Civilizations” for the first time and got so excited he creamed his pants.
July 23, 2006 @ 3:29 am | Comment
7
By Mike
Actually, I would have ascribed his testimony to “The End of History and the Last Man”. What better neo-con (Francis Fukuyama) defense of the inevitability of liberal democracy?
July 23, 2006 @ 6:20 am | Comment
8
By Mike
Actually, I would have ascribed his testimony to “The End of History and the Last Man”. What better neo-con (Francis Fukuyama) defense of the inevitability of liberal democracy?
July 23, 2006 @ 6:20 am | Comment
9
By OtherLisa
Yeah, except Frances Fukuyama recanted, saying that the neocon philosophy and the invasion of Iraq were terrible mistakes.
July 23, 2006 @ 11:21 am | Comment