radioguy
09-11-2007, 07:46 PM
For Iraqis, General’s Report Offers Bitter Truth
By ALISSA J. RUBIN
Published: September 11, 2007
BAGHDAD, Sept. 11 — Iraqis reflecting on the report to Congress by General David H. Petraeus and Ambassador Ryan Crocker found themselves in a difficult spot: although there is nothing they want more than to have American soldiers leave Iraq, there is nothing they can less afford.
About 20 Iraqis of different sects and ethnicities said in interviews that they viewed the report favorably because it — or at least the parts shown on television in Iraq — portrayed the situation accurately and because it signaled that there would be little change in the status quo.
There is a rueful recognition of their vulnerability and that they must allow foreign troops to help keep order for some time to come. Politicians’ views were more modulated, but only those allied with Shiite cleric Moktada al-Sadr suggested they wanted to see a rapid decline in the American presence, and even they backed away from setting a date.
A city worker in Baquba, the capital of Diyala Province, described his ambivalence in strong terms.
“The withdrawal of the occupation forces is a must because they have caused the destruction of Iraq, they committed massacres against the innocents, they have double-crossed the Iraqis with dreams,” said Ahmad Umar al-Esawi, a Sunni worker. “I want them to withdraw all their troops in one day.”
But, he added, dropping his voice: “There is something that I want to say although I hate to say it. The Americans forces, which are an ugly occupation force, have become something important to us, the Sunnis. We are a minority and we do not having a force to face the militias. If the Americans leave, it will mean a total elimination of the Sunnis in Iraq.
“I know I said I want them to leave, but if we think about it, then I have to say I want them to stay for a while until we end all the suspicions we have of each other and have a strong national government.”
Several people said they were certain that the trend of decreasing violence cited by General Petraeus would reverse itself as soon as the Americans left, unless the troops stayed for years and wrought a deeper change in the government and the culture.
“Violence could erupt at any moment if the Americans leave, the ones who do these terrible things are asleep, not gone,” said Sara al-Zubaidi, 30, whose father is Sunni and whose mother is Shiite. “They are waiting for the opportunity, just waiting for the opportunity to eat one another,” she said.
In contrast interviews with Iraqis three months ago, when when people refused to give a time frame for how long American troops should stay, now some say they want them for a minimum of three years and maybe even five years or more. Ms. Zubaidi thought five years would be the minimum and that the police and army needed to be remade entirely to root out sectarianism.
“They will need five years,” she said. “The first year they need to prepare themselves properly to work with the Iraqi people, then they need a year or two years to start from the ground building the security services and then — ” she lowered her voice and looked around as if she was afraid someone might be listening, then continued — “they need to prepare a government for Iraq that is built not on a sectarian foundation, it must be a secular government. Religion has nothing to do with government, religion is in my heart.”
Prime Minister Nuri Kamal al-Maliki in his speech to Parliament on Monday acknowledged that the country was not ready for the American forces to withdraw and in subdued language voiced the views of many Iraqis.
“We quietly realize that we need more time before our security forces can take over the security dossier throughout Iraq from the multinational forces. They have played an important role in helping and backing our armed forces in fighting terror and outlaws.”
Like many legislators, he favored having any withdrawal tied to the ability of the Iraqi forces to protect civilians.
While most of the Iraqis interviewed blamed the Americans for the country’s deterioration, several echoed members of Congress who blamed the Iraqi government for failing to provide services and for allowing sectarianism into the security forces. However, Iraqis make the point that it was the Americans who in large measure created the government, so they bear the responsibility for fixing it. Several people went further, saying the Americans should start all over again — even if it meant they would remain in Iraq for years.
“The Americans are to blame for the mess,” said Baider, 31, an Iraqi contractor. “They need to reoccupy the country in order to make it safe and strong.”
Link (http://www.nytimes.com/2007/09/11/world/middleeast/11cnd-reax.html?ex=1347163200&en=fdf5cf76d5c3d353&ei=5088&partner=rssnyt&emc=rss)
The part I highlighted in red, displays how people get so wrapped up in hatred and frustration that they speak without thinking things through, and don't stop to ponder the ramifications of their words.
That man reminds me of the anti-war left in America, but with one notable exception. The man in the article managed to get beyond his hatred long enough to see the reality of what would happen if American troops did leave Iraq, and was wise enough admit it. The left on the other hand, just keeps spouting it's political based hatred and either can't see beyond it, or they simply refuse to.
By ALISSA J. RUBIN
Published: September 11, 2007
BAGHDAD, Sept. 11 — Iraqis reflecting on the report to Congress by General David H. Petraeus and Ambassador Ryan Crocker found themselves in a difficult spot: although there is nothing they want more than to have American soldiers leave Iraq, there is nothing they can less afford.
About 20 Iraqis of different sects and ethnicities said in interviews that they viewed the report favorably because it — or at least the parts shown on television in Iraq — portrayed the situation accurately and because it signaled that there would be little change in the status quo.
There is a rueful recognition of their vulnerability and that they must allow foreign troops to help keep order for some time to come. Politicians’ views were more modulated, but only those allied with Shiite cleric Moktada al-Sadr suggested they wanted to see a rapid decline in the American presence, and even they backed away from setting a date.
A city worker in Baquba, the capital of Diyala Province, described his ambivalence in strong terms.
“The withdrawal of the occupation forces is a must because they have caused the destruction of Iraq, they committed massacres against the innocents, they have double-crossed the Iraqis with dreams,” said Ahmad Umar al-Esawi, a Sunni worker. “I want them to withdraw all their troops in one day.”
But, he added, dropping his voice: “There is something that I want to say although I hate to say it. The Americans forces, which are an ugly occupation force, have become something important to us, the Sunnis. We are a minority and we do not having a force to face the militias. If the Americans leave, it will mean a total elimination of the Sunnis in Iraq.
“I know I said I want them to leave, but if we think about it, then I have to say I want them to stay for a while until we end all the suspicions we have of each other and have a strong national government.”
Several people said they were certain that the trend of decreasing violence cited by General Petraeus would reverse itself as soon as the Americans left, unless the troops stayed for years and wrought a deeper change in the government and the culture.
“Violence could erupt at any moment if the Americans leave, the ones who do these terrible things are asleep, not gone,” said Sara al-Zubaidi, 30, whose father is Sunni and whose mother is Shiite. “They are waiting for the opportunity, just waiting for the opportunity to eat one another,” she said.
In contrast interviews with Iraqis three months ago, when when people refused to give a time frame for how long American troops should stay, now some say they want them for a minimum of three years and maybe even five years or more. Ms. Zubaidi thought five years would be the minimum and that the police and army needed to be remade entirely to root out sectarianism.
“They will need five years,” she said. “The first year they need to prepare themselves properly to work with the Iraqi people, then they need a year or two years to start from the ground building the security services and then — ” she lowered her voice and looked around as if she was afraid someone might be listening, then continued — “they need to prepare a government for Iraq that is built not on a sectarian foundation, it must be a secular government. Religion has nothing to do with government, religion is in my heart.”
Prime Minister Nuri Kamal al-Maliki in his speech to Parliament on Monday acknowledged that the country was not ready for the American forces to withdraw and in subdued language voiced the views of many Iraqis.
“We quietly realize that we need more time before our security forces can take over the security dossier throughout Iraq from the multinational forces. They have played an important role in helping and backing our armed forces in fighting terror and outlaws.”
Like many legislators, he favored having any withdrawal tied to the ability of the Iraqi forces to protect civilians.
While most of the Iraqis interviewed blamed the Americans for the country’s deterioration, several echoed members of Congress who blamed the Iraqi government for failing to provide services and for allowing sectarianism into the security forces. However, Iraqis make the point that it was the Americans who in large measure created the government, so they bear the responsibility for fixing it. Several people went further, saying the Americans should start all over again — even if it meant they would remain in Iraq for years.
“The Americans are to blame for the mess,” said Baider, 31, an Iraqi contractor. “They need to reoccupy the country in order to make it safe and strong.”
Link (http://www.nytimes.com/2007/09/11/world/middleeast/11cnd-reax.html?ex=1347163200&en=fdf5cf76d5c3d353&ei=5088&partner=rssnyt&emc=rss)
The part I highlighted in red, displays how people get so wrapped up in hatred and frustration that they speak without thinking things through, and don't stop to ponder the ramifications of their words.
That man reminds me of the anti-war left in America, but with one notable exception. The man in the article managed to get beyond his hatred long enough to see the reality of what would happen if American troops did leave Iraq, and was wise enough admit it. The left on the other hand, just keeps spouting it's political based hatred and either can't see beyond it, or they simply refuse to.