Skip to main content

View Diary: McCain blames Obama for Iraq (160 comments)

Comment Preferences

  •  Yes, the Awakening leaders are anti-insurgent (3+ / 0-)
    Recommended by:
    vcmvo2, Dodgerdog1, JohnB47

    That's what I meant by "work with". They are more on the side of the US and Malaki than they are on the side of the extremists.

    I contend that the devolving of power to local leaders fatally crippled the Maliki government, and any potential successors. No one is in charge of Iraq, and no one can be. Bush put Iraq de facto under the "Articles of Confederation", so to speak, regardless of the actual text of their Constitution.

    Therefore, so long as any local leaders are not controlling the extremists, extremism will flourish. It only takes a relatively small area for Al Qaeda and the like to have a safe haven and bomb-building facilities and so on. The warlord doesn't have to actively aid the extremists, merely be unwilling to confront them.

    Bush and Petraeus designed Iraq to be a failed state. The alternative was admitting defeat and error, and Bush isn't man enough to do it.

    I'm on a mission! http://www.dailykos.com/comments/1233352/51142428#c520 Testing the new site rules.

    by blue aardvark on Tue Jan 07, 2014 at 10:50:16 AM PST

    [ Parent ]

    •  Maliki (2+ / 0-)
      Recommended by:
      blue aardvark, Anne Elk

      Again, I go back to the brutal zero-sum-game of Iraqi politics, and Maliki's own actions since the withdrawal.  The Awakening leaders distrust Maliki more than the Americans not because of their love for the Americans, but because Maliki is using some of the same strategies on the Sunni community that Saddam used on the Shia' community for all those decades. They fear Maliki more than they feared the Americans. Maliki wants a strong central state, but he wants it run by and for his own ethnosectarian group.  This is the curse of Iraq. I don't think things would be more peaceful in the Sunni areas had the US done nothing to empower the tribal leaders. In fact, I suspect they would have been worse.

      “If the misery of the poor be caused not by the laws of nature, but by our institutions, great is our sin.” Charles Darwin

      by ivorybill on Tue Jan 07, 2014 at 10:56:30 AM PST

      [ Parent ]

      •  I will not defend Malaki (1+ / 0-)
        Recommended by:
        JohnB47

        except to note that in a nation composed of rival tribes, each with its own paramilitary forces, building alliances of tribes is also a traditional way of consolidating power.

        If you recall the English War of the Roses, where various nobles formed coalitions and the various candidates for King were reduced almost to pawns as Warwick and Percy et al fought things out among themselves, you can see how feudal systems are susceptible to this sort of instability.

        So yeah Malaki is doing to the Sunni what Saddam did to the Shia and the Kurds. It is possible that this was inevitable, that you could have dropped the Dali Lama into his job and his Holiness would have made similar choices (or just resigned rather than make those sorts of choices).

        I'm on a mission! http://www.dailykos.com/comments/1233352/51142428#c520 Testing the new site rules.

        by blue aardvark on Tue Jan 07, 2014 at 11:04:37 AM PST

        [ Parent ]

Subscribe or Donate to support Daily Kos.

  • Recommended (144)
  • Community (70)
  • Baltimore (64)
  • Bernie Sanders (49)
  • Freddie Gray (38)
  • Civil Rights (37)
  • Elections (26)
  • Hillary Clinton (26)
  • Culture (24)
  • Racism (23)
  • Education (20)
  • Labor (20)
  • Media (19)
  • Law (19)
  • Economy (18)
  • Rescued (17)
  • Science (16)
  • 2016 (15)
  • Politics (15)
  • Environment (13)
  • Click here for the mobile view of the site