Such "staunch allies" as Saudi Arabia and Egypt and Jordan (all of which are not staunch allies, not allies, and not friends but enemies) have tried to make the Americans believe that they, the Americans, have to stay in Iraq to "prevent Iran" from taking over. By this they mean that the Sunnis should be protected from the Shi'a militia, so that outside Sunnis, such as those in Saudi Arabia, Egypt and Jordan, will not have to supply money, materiel, and men themselves. They have determined that this line is the best way to inveigle the Americans into doing what they want. All the Arabs, and indeed even non-Arab Muslims, have been good at this.
Just look at how so many in Washington were snookered by the assurances of plausible Shi'a in exile about how once Saddam Hussein was removed all manner of things would be well, and Iraq would practically be a Light Unto the Muslim Nations. Those Shi'a-in-exile, or some of them, may simply have misremembered the violence and aggression of their own Muslim country, having been away so long, and having allowed themselves to believe that it was all a matter of Saddam Hussein. Did they forget how Nuri es-Said died? Or Qassem? Or the history of coups and counter-coups and massacres and tribal rebellions in Iraq? Apparently, they did, or convinced themselves that they, those most unrepresentative men, were representative of some non-existent Iraq.
And now it is the turn of the Sunni Arabs to snooker the Americans. And by raising the specter of Iran as the sole worry, and insisting that the best way to deal with Iran is to stand up for the Sunnis and Sunni interests in Iraq -- my, how surprising -- they are in fact preventing the Americans from dealing with the most important task involving Iran. That task is not to help the Sunnis in Iraq, or to hold back the Shi'a militia (who will not be held back, and the Shi'a government will not really allow those militia to be destroyed or truly disbanded), but to damage or destroy the nuclear weapons project.
Since the Sunni Arabs calculate that those nuclear weapons are likely to be used first against Israel, and the Sunni Arabs would not at all mind an exchange in which Israel were to be destroyed and in turn would destroy much of Iran, that is not what they wish to have the Americans focus on. No, the Sunni Arabs argue, the way to limit the power of Iran is to do two things. One is to help the Sunni Arabs of Iraq, in their brave and principled stance against the Shi'a domination that merely reflects this hideous one-man-one-vote idea. And the second, of course, is to pressure Israel, to force it to give up still more territory to the Arabs, for (and now a look of the utmost sincerity from Mubarak, from Abdullah of Jordan, from assorted Saudi potentates and powers, is directed at the American official with whom that particular Sunni Arab ruler is speaking), "that is the best way to deprive Iran of its appeal to the Arab street."
In other words, throw Israel to this particular pack of wolves, and let the leaders of that pack howl with delight and claim that "see, we're the ones who managed to achieve the further weakening of Israel, and not that other pack of wolves over there, the ones who live in Teheran.”
It is disgusting that such obvious manipulation should succeed. But the credulity of the people in Washington is limitless. This is because they refuse to sit still and study Islam. How many books on Islam do you think Bush and Rice have managed to read, and what might those books have been? They are unaware, almost certainly, both of the texts (and what the authors of tafsir, or commentators on the Qur'an, have made of those texts) and the teachings of Islam, as demonstrated in the behavior of Muslims over the past 1350 years of Jihad-conquest and subjugation of non-Muslims, and in the current behavior of Muslims toward non-Muslims in the countries where Islam now rules, as well as the behavior of Muslims toward non-Muslim legal and political institutions in the countries still under the control of non-Muslims.
One -- that is one who is a member of the Western ruling classes -- can keep avoiding finding things out, or telling oneself they cannot possibly be true, because then the responsibility to deal with that reality becomes, for some, simply too complicated and troubling. Or one can continue to pretend that one does grasp the key matter at hand, and that all kinds of brilliant strategies exist and are being executed, but are deliberately being kept hidden from the public.
Or one can get out of the way -- or in an election be forced out of the way -- so that those who understand that among the responsibilities of rule is the duty to fully inform oneself about things, and right now, above all other things, about Islam.
Once again an incisive analysis of the Iranian quagmire from Hugh.
One wonders if the US administration and the West in general is really so gullible to swallow all the lies fed to them by the Arabs all the time!
Isn't even one, single, solitary politician of note clued up to what's afoot here?
Would it be possible on this site to separate opinion and news - say by frame partioning? That way, I can read Hugh without scrolling down so much, and anyway, opinion is more static.
From the POTUS speech:
Just as they have, ever since the death of Mohammed...Hugh said
The one-man-one-vote idea can be hideous, based on the one-man and how he uses his one-vote. In the West, with it's history (Magna Carta, the English Bill of Rights, Madion's "The Federalist Papers", the United States Constitution (and Bill of Rights), the French "La Déclaration des droits de l'Homme et du citoyen", etc.) and values (separation of church and state, process of skeptical scientific inquiry, liberty and the pursuit of happiness), one-man-one-vote works out fairly well.
But, per your point, when applied to cultures (in Iraq and Lebanon, for example) with quite different histories and quite different values, the results of one-man-one-vote can be, umm, sub-optimal. The problem is not in the "one-vote", the problem is in the "one-man".
Buying time for the Kurds isn't such a bad thing, is it?
We obviously can't say that's what we're doing--the Turks would be very angry, as would obviously the Iranians the Arabs and the Alawites. In fact, everybody would be severely irritated if we explicitly adopted such a policy.
Instead, we play the stupid Americans, which everyone expects. The ploy works endlessly well, especially in Anbar (Sayonara, Haraj Bros). Like Al Pacino says, They'll never see him coming!
What we need is enough ground-level tactical success (read: a semblance of of progress or calm) to give the President grounds for sticking around a bit longer. The Kurds will do the rest.
I think this whole issue in the middle east is going to be settled by Israel finally telling the US to " look at the birds", can't say i would blame them!!!
In the early days, you had to own property, free of liens, in order to vote or be on a Jury. ‘One-man, one-vote’ was introduced to the United States with Kentucky’s statehood (less than one half of Americans were considered ‘men’ at the time). Democracy became relatively pure in the 1960s.
Plato would argue that democracy will be our downfall. Democracy in Iraq is just delusional.
I would mention that Dick Cheney, Don Rumsfeld, Bob Gates nor President Bush are babes in the woods not seeing exactly what they are buying is a violent whore they can not trust.
Yes people like Bill Clinton, Richard Holbrook or Dick Clark are infinite in making Americans all believe their leaders are as stupid as they are, but there are people who know how the game is played against America and these people understand the game in the trade off they get.
The real point is not Iraq is a problem, but that Iraq, Iran, Syria, Russia, China and Europe are problems to be solved. Now America could quit giving bribes to Arabs and Africans and let them go their murderous way which would create a void to be try and filled by Europe, China and Russia.
Historically, this group does not play well with each other. The first world war which occurred in the 1760's and known in America as the French and Indian War had Russia, Germany, France, England and America all in a war which stretched from Europe into India....just like World War II.
If it were a simple fact that the Eurasians would all blow each other up, it would not be a bad outcome....but the problem is they always drag Americans into their world wars and we end up suffering horridly.
In today's world of nuclear bombs which Iran does have already as they purchased them on the black market off of SS 20 Satan missiles for their Shahabs, America can not just sit back in isolation thinking it can live in peace as these problem children always come and make war on us.
New York City not vaporized is proof Iraq is not a quagmire, a disaster or a mistake as that is exactly what would have happened by now if Iraq had not happened. (The proof is 2 muslims died in prison after 9 11 from radiation poisoning. The terrorists brought them in but were caught before phase 2 could be implemented.)
In taking all of this into account, buying a mideastern whore state who will stab one in the back is the only alternative to trying as President Bush has to upgrade those violent chicken ranches into something which could learn to at least act civilized.
It is hard to prove an event which did not happen, but New York City and Tel Aviv still standing means purchasing allies is the best alternative for now.
George Bush does know this as does Dick Cheney and they are still running the show even if Barak Obama thinks he grew into long pants over the weekend.
Sort of like the golf course action, more business deals done on the fisrt tee than in a board room somewhere, these faces on tv are just that faces, the real deals are going on at the course!!!
first, there goes my eyes again!!
From Federalist #10, attributed to Madison
Theoretic politicians, who have patronized this species of government, have erroneously supposed that by reducing mankind to a perfect equality in their political rights, they would, at the same time, be perfectly equalized and assimilated in their possessions, their opinions, and their passions.
http://www.yale.edu/lawweb/avalon/federal/fed10.htm
I would in no way characterize the government of Jordan as an "enemy" of the USA.
Question to Hugh regarding Islam:
Hugh, in my readings on UBL, when he went to fight the Russians in the early 80's, he offended many by maintaining an 'all-Arab' force of Jihadis. Was this because of the Arab view as non-Arabs are inferior? even though they respected the 'mountain-men' fighting the Russians, they didn't want to rub shoulders too much with them. Also, UBL's posture of sitting for those posed pictures: is that also emulation of 'the prophet' in terms of how he sat? I realize these are slightly off topic, but the bastard always seems to sit in a specific peculiar manner as do other Jihadis.
Seems to me that peaceful little Iran is also a seething stew of ethnic tensions just waiting to rip wide open; are Persians even 50 % of the country at this point?
When you get right down to it. Change in the Middle East will never come without a change in Saudi Outlook.
Everyone seems to be on the same page with Saudi funding being behind the rise and spread of Sunni extremist religious Ideology. While on the other hand, the Royal Family is reputed to love travel, Especially in the Infidel West.
I say, make the Family stay home. The Royal Family represents what? 25% of the population? Force these buffoons to stay home and suffer their own laws. And what do they call those laws over there????
Tell these Bums to go home and leave our Booze and Whores alone. See how fast Shira takes a hike.
Whabbi who????
"Tell these Bums to go home and leave our Booze and Whores alone. See how fast Shira takes a hike."
Yes. What hypocrites they are! They would never do (at least not according to their own laws) in their own nations what they do in the west. It seems they see all western peoples as whores to be used and discarded.
We are being used folks. Our own ideas of freedom and fairness for all people plays right into their hands. We are like sheep to the slaughter to them. Or as Vladimer Putin said immediately following 9/11, "We are as dirt to them." He was speaking of all western people.
The MSM and I believe many Western governments think that there is only one Islam despite the evidence which is constantly being played out in front of them on a daily basis. It is therefore ridiculous to say that we can placate Islam by 'solving' the Isreal/Palestine(mythical non existing country) situation. Who will be satisfied the Sunnis the Sh'ia, the Ba'hais the Ahmmadis?? And if all their external problems go away surely they would continue to slaughter each other as they are doing now.
Dont get me wrong I have no objection to one Islamic Cult sect killing members of another Sect as far as I am concerned that just means one less Cultist to be a suicide bomber in Isreal or the West. What I do worry about is that somehow we believe that if we intervene and stop them killing each other they will love and respect us. These brainwashed illiterate Cultists only know what the Iman tells them.
the magnificant Muslim Manipulating Machine has been pulling the strings of the American puppet for many years.........Time to cut the strings.
Counterjihadi:
I sympathize - "agree" might be too strong a word - with Hugh and, I presume, with you, in the suggestion that American troops should leave Iraq and let the bastards fight it out amongst themselves, but I see no reason why we should have the Kurds particularly in mind in any of this. There are Kurds who have been involved in Islamist terrorist activity, some of which is known to have tried to target America. They are just as dangerous as any other Muslim group. Individual Kurds, based on individual circumstances, may be worthy of consideration, but as a group, they are part of the same worldwide Umma and, being good Muslims, are just as much under a cloud of suspicion for being at risk of corruption by the violence and terror which is innately woven into Islam as any other Islamic group is. The only thing we should be talking about giving to any of these people is a good solid fist in the eye!