Ten More Years in Iraq

Discussion in 'Current Affairs, News and Analysis' started by hackle, Dec 22, 2004.

Welcome to the Army Rumour Service, ARRSE

The UK's largest and busiest UNofficial military website.

The heart of the site is the forum area, including:

  1. Mr Blair apologised to troops in Basra for their being away from their families and loved ones at Christmas, but sensibly added that he "could not guarantee" that there would not still be British troops in Iraq this time next year.

    Members of a cross-party group of MPs who recently visited Iraq, however, have predicted that British troops will be committed there for another 10 to 15 years.

    http://news.independent.co.uk/uk/politics/story.jsp?story=595356

    Reminds me of that saying that Britain acquired its 19th century Empire "in a fit of absentmindedness".

    However, "10 to 15 years" seems a more useful estimate than "might still be there next Christmas". Nine years virtually to the day after the arrival of IFOR, we still have a reduced force in Bosnia. Iraq is a much larger country.

    Any thoughts?
     
  2. OldSnowy

    OldSnowy LE Moderator Book Reviewer

    And how about the photo of Mr B shaking hands with a (sob) REME WO in the D Tel and Mirror. Oh the shame... Still, everyone else in the picture looks less than happy to be with him, I'm glad to say :)
     
  3. Hackle,

    Agree with you on this one. Balkans cited as example of our contribution to a stable world. My opinion (massively humble) is that we will still be in Middle East (Iraq) for the next decade unless there is an embarrassing Suez style withdrawal because we can't enforce or build this great democratic role model.

    And besides, the next threat is that the Iranian hardliners have already started their effects based planning cycle to create a religious state akin to Iran. The only advantage is that we have helped them achieve it by democratic means (forthcoming vote) rather than through a revolution.

    Crass v C
     
  4. 10 more years 8O 8O 8O

    Read bloody more tours for us poor Medics :cry:

    2 years, 6 months and counting down :p
     
  5. Cheer up. If you have a look at the frontpage of the Independant the same bunch of MPs say it'll be "like Cyprus". :!: :!: :?: :?:
     
  6. Not to worry, chaps.. Blair will pull the boys out of Iraq as soon as the 'free and democratic ' elections are held and the duly authorized government of Iraq ' invites' the Americans and the willing coalition partners to leave..should be sometime in 2006 according to Dubya's timetable for this little bit of peace in the Middle East...
     
  7. And there, past my window, goes the Pig Squadron on a fly-past :roll:
     
  8. Dui lai?.. you doubt the ' official ' pronouncements from the World's Leader??...Didn't Bush claim the job was done as soon as Saddam was toppled.." Mission Accomplished " he said..you don't charter a fighter jet and cool CinC togs for a photo op if you don't mean it.. then.. he said that America would assist Iraq in achieving full democracy.. [ possibly before his term of office was up ]..

    Establish a provisional government - done
    free elections to create an authority to write its own constitution - all set for January..
    further free and democratic elections based on the new constitution and a fully fledged democratic government responible and responsive to the will of the people runs a western friendly country where anyone can buy a McDonald's burger, a pair of GAP jeans and a Britney Spears CD, no matter what their religious afiliation...

    and the Blair Co subsidiary gets a good chunk of the revenues before EBITDNA or whatever the buzzword is...
     
  9. Folks...I'll quote Dubbya:


    :p
     
  10. You must be terribly proud of him :wink:
     
  11. I admit that they aren't following the script as outlined in the original plan..but the timeline is still in place and that's nothing new...

    the bomblast at the US camp was ' old school ' and not unexpected as the election process approaches the deadline, and, its clear, the two recent attacks in Najaf and Karbala, both Shia pilgrimage sites, were clearly aimed at dividing Iraqis before they go to the polls Jan. 30...

    will the violence stop the vote and delay the West's departure?..

    In 2003, Dubya claimed that they would transform the Iraqis into a people capable of democracy just as Germany and Japan were transformed after 1945..at that time Washington envisioned a 5 to 10 year timetable during which a government would be elected under a new constitution drafted by an assembly elected for that purpose [ allowing a year or two to form functioning political parties ] This process to begin as soon as Iraq was fully pacified..

    this year, Bush's brains in the backroom, had to concede that the Iraqis were much too tribal, sectarian and priest-ridden to understand or accept democratic rules..so, it lowered its ambitions from political transformation to merely holding some elections as soon as possible so a government could be formed capable of ruling Iraq - hence the 275 seat ' provisional national assembly ' still scheduled despite the bombs..

    Sunni extremists, Ba'athist operatives and jihadhis are all using maximum violence to stop the election.. most Sunnis oppose the show because it won't give them what they once had, domination over the Shiites and Kurds..Ba'athists have no use for elections as it won't help them get back their elite privileges under a one party dictatorship,,and the Salafi jihadhis can't accept the near certainty of a Shiite majority rule..after all they consider them traitors not fit to live let alone govern...

    Can't stop the process?..Stop the candidates, scare them into withdrawing [ same tactics used by Arafat and, our pal, Vlad Putin ]..yet, they've failed to scare off everyone,.. there are more than 3500 registered, 230 political entities, including 9 multi-party alliances, of which Al Sistani's United Iraqi Alliance is the biggest [ and expected to win the most votes. ] Then there's the Iraqi List under Interim President, Ayad Allawi..47 political parties competing on their own.. the Communists, pan-Arab Nasserists, Assyrian, Chaldean and Coptic Christians and one-personality groups such as the Iraqi Democratric Gathering of Adnan Pachachi and over 150 individual candidates...

    Attacks against any and all of these guys is already underway, and, the insurgents will probably try to eliminate all 3500 but will only snuff a handful and scare off a few more,,most are highly protected. Mr. Allwai is guarded by US protection as are select others.....Mr. Chalabi is guarded by Brit bodyguards and candidates in Shia areas and , under the ' banner' of al-Sistani are safe...

    On the other hand , there won't be any open meetings or public rallies, except maybe in Kurdistan areas...Candidates will have to campaign on radio and TV..but that's already a bitter feud area..Mr. Allwai receives the lion's share of attention [hey, he controls one station directly and the US funds/ backs a second ]

    the bad guys could attack the polling stations themselves..there will be 9000 of them..can't guard them all completely...and, if you try to just cover a select few ' important 'sites.. well the backlash will be loud..and, if the recent efforts by the police and national guard in Mosul is anything to go by.. they're next to useless..

    The big worry is that Iraq will be handed over to Iran with the election results already ' figured out '.there's a strong Iranian influence in the process within the 22 party alliance sponsored by al-Sistani [ who is Persian rather than Arab ]..The Supreme council for the Islamic Revolution in Iraq - the largest of the alliance partners - was based in Iran until 2003..and Muqtada al-Sadr , the bandit-priest leader of the Mahdi militia is certainly armed and funded from Iran...Finally, Hussein Shahristani, the designated leader of the alliance under al-Sistani is a secular Shiite nuclear scientist who fled to Iran in 1991 and worked on the Bushehr project..
    so, Iran gets to strengthen its position, if not gain some heavy influence...but..

    there are many factions within the groups some bitterly opposed to each other.. the Iraqi Imams are envious of the power that their Iranian counterparts wield
    but, the big factor is America's interests...Shias claim that, the ' black turbans', the Iranian factions will come to power come January 30 and their first act will be to demand the US withdraw from Iraq..how can the US and the west refuse to obey the official request of the duly elected legitimate government [ one the world monitored and supervised - just like in the Ukraine ] ...

    Maybe the warning will fall flat.. but, wouldn't that be a perfect opportunity ? a grateful American administration could gracefully withdraw claiming an excellent excuse.. " hey, the process worked " and we're leaving 'cause the work is done and Iraq has an elected government put in place by its own people...

    and, that won't take 10 years...
     
  12. and it will all be one big fuk up
     
  13. "and it will all be one big fuk up"

    I'll second the motion.
    10 more years minimum if the Shiyas don't win and request us out.
    Shiya win and all out cival war, just too many thoats to slit, the revenge syndrom by which ya Arab lives.
    Bush & Blair need out, they never forsaw the consequences of THEIR war.
    I still go with the theory that the US wanted to secure the third largest proven supply of oil, in case their Saudi investment goes tits up on a regiem change as per their Iran policy in 79.
    A fair peace in Palastine would help the entire Mid East, but Isreal will NEVER give up it's 67 gains and jonny arab will NEVER accept Isreals "right" to a state in Palastine.
    john
     
  14. FFS let us run it
     
  15. "and it will all be one big fuk up"

    I'll second the motion.
    10 more years minimum if the Shiyas don't win and request us out.
    Shiya win and all out cival war, just too many thoats to slit, the revenge syndrom by which ya Arab lives.
    Bush & Blair need out, they never forsaw the consequences of THEIR war.
    I still go with the theory that the US wanted to secure the third largest proven supply of oil, in case their Saudi investment goes tits up on a regiem change as per their Iran policy in 79.
    A fair peace in Palastine would help the entire Mid East, but Isreal will NEVER give up it's 67 gains and jonny arab will NEVER accept Isreals "right" to a state in Palastine.
    john