No, it’s not a remake of that shopworn 1970 Frank Perry movie. [Thankfully!-ed. I'm with you on that one.] It’s something far more interesting – a new blog from Baghdad called “Neurotic Iraqi Wife.” Catherine Johnson, who tipped me to this site, says “this is probably the best news I’ve heard about what is really going on over there.” And… assuming this blog is not some of the most brilliant intelligence work I have ever read… she has a point. According to the blogger, daily life in Baghdad is starting to resemble Brooklyn in its level of violence. Of course, she may be referring to the Old Brooklyn, but all things change… Brooklyn…. Baghdad… even you and I. Don’t miss this blog. It’s fabulous!
MEANWHILE: The demonstration by Shiites loyal to reactionary religious thug Muqtada Sadr seems to have been a bust, although you wouldn’t know it by most media reports, which trumpet “tens of thousands” of demonstrators in their opening paragraph. That usually means ten to twenty thousand, although the Voice of America writes “thousands.” Who knows? In any case, the number isn’t much in Baghdad, a city of five million. The Washington Post finally admits the truth in the 14th (!) paragraph of their coverage:
Sadr had stayed out of the limelight since leading failed uprisings last year in the southern city of Najaf and in Baghdad’s Sadr City neighborhood. But he has stepped up criticism of the United States in recent weeks, mainly by organizing Saturday’s protest, which fell far short of the 1 million people he hoped would assemble.
Talk about burying the lede! Oh, well, we’re all propagandists in the end, n’est-ce pas?
AND: More signs of life in Baghdad. (ht: PeterUK)
ìreactionary religious thug Muqtada Sadrî
I think it might be more accurate to describe Muqtada Sadr as a former religious thug. He now seems like Iraqís answer to Reverend Al Sharpton. Sadr no longer (at least publicly) advocates violence. Instead, he plays the ìShiite cardî —Sadr and his followers are supposedly victims of the establishment.
This demonstration is actually evidence of how well things are going in Iraq. Nobody was shooting a gun or throwing bombs. Public dissent is a sign of a genuine interest in democratic government. Heck, we Americans have essentially marginalized Al Sharpton and Iím sure that sensible Iraqis are doing the same with Sadr.
Hi everyone!
I was completely charmed by ‘Neurotic Iraqi wife.’
Assuming the blog is real, the idea that an Iraqi woman would now compare moving to Baghdad to moving to Brooklyn—it’s just great.
I’d love to know if it’s true that your ‘average Iraqi’ perceives Things In Baghdad to be better.
Not perfect.
Not even good, necessarily.
Just better. Getting there.
‘Neurotic Iraqi Wife’ put a big smile on my face, that’s for sure.
I have talked to old WW2 soldiers who said they could not believe the change in Europe even two decades after the war, so I hope it does not take 30 years to make Baghdad beautiful.
But it will be a long hard fight for them. It is good to know there are Iraqis like this lady who know that and are up to it.
As for the demonstrators, where have they been? If this is something that most people want in Iraq right now, why wait until now to tell us? It is not like they can not do this every damn day if they want to.
I think Sadr is just showing his ass. I guess we should be happy they demonstrated instead of blowing people up.
Hi Terrye!
quick question
Terrye—-what did the veterans mean when they said they couldn’t believe the change even two decades after the war?
Did they mean that things had improved two years after the war, as ‘Neurotic Wife’ is saying, but even so were lots better still 20 years later?
So, doing the math we find that Sadr’s true support is about 1% of what he himself thinks it is.
Sounds plausible; there’s a lot of that going around.
Neurotic Iraqi Wife I think is real; I’ve been reading her blog for a while and she is delightful.
I must be in the minority, but Muqty scares me. He obviously has been organizing and provided puppets, theater–the whole leftist works–in the demo today. Someone is supporting him and helping him out. Someone besides Iran.
Here’s some photos from DU. They are loving it, of course.
http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=show_topic&forum=104&topic_id=3454485
Catherine:
Hello.
I think what they meant was that the place had been a wreck [literally] the last time they saw it and when they went back it was beautiful.
If you have seen photos of European cities and the end of WW2, it really was quite an achievement to bring them back to life.
PJ:
His [Sadr's] support is Iranian, no doubt. They are after all the original death to America people.
Sadr city is a very poor and very backward enclave of fundamentalists who [when they are not busy burning American flags] spend their time running around like the morality police scaring women. I think the only thing that is keeping him alive is the desire to not see him turn into a martyr. He has a following and they are vocal…but remember this: he lost big time on Jan 30th. And I would not be surprised if a lot of those folks in the street were Iranians and not Iraqis at all. Notice the expensive signs in English. Not bad for people that can not seem to keep the sewage system up and running.
The folks at the DU are self hating fascist loving idiots who are so glad to see the country they hate and are ashamed of {America} trashed that they will willingly suck up to people who would kill them in a heartbeat. They are really that stupid.
There used to be leftists in Iran too. They “helped” get rid of the Shah.
They are all gone now. dead and locked up and run off.
Roger-
You probably won’t bve surprised to find out that Dr. Juan Cole is DEE-LIGHTED by this…and of course slants in in his own inimitable way.
I’m tracking Juan’s predictions for the next year and comparing them to, well, predictions made by my cat, Lone Star on the blog Juan Cole or My Cat? Link is available in my profile. (An explanation of the project is available here: http://juancoleormycat.blogspot.com/2005/04/meet-contestants.html)
Oops, the link above didn’t work:
http://juancoleormycat.blogspot.com/2005/04/meet-contestants.html
George ó Spare my delicate eyes. Did Cole say anything about the Iraqis installing a Sunni, a Kurd and a Shi’ite in their presidential triune, or the participation of the Sunnis in the government?
As for Sadr, I am shocked, SHOCKED, to see a reactionary theocrat injecting himself into the political process. Has anyone told the ACLU about this?
richard:
Yes and it is interesting that Sadr’s army protested the US military presence rather than shooting at it.
So I guess Mookie is the last, best Great White Hope of the defeatists after the dismal failure and disintegration of the Baath/al Qaeda alliance of heroic “Minutemen?”
I also saw a sketchy report somewhere that someone attacked Mookie’s forces a little bit, though it wasn’t clear who or why, exactly. No doubt lackeys of Chimpy McHitlerBurton….
David:
Yes I guess one of his homeboys got shot.
Who knows, he may be next. He has a lot of enemies in Iraq and I don’t mean Americans.
Too bad they did not take that money used to make the nice gloosy pictures of Bush with fangs etc and spend it on a few cans of paint for that ghetto those poor people live in.
Terrye, one effect of having been bombed to industrial rubble is that Germany & Japan rebuilt with ALL NEW STUFF with which to create their economic miracles. Rueful and morbid for a silver lining, but a silver lining nevertheless!
A friend of mine was telling me that her father was in the Battle of the Bulge. In 1970 he went over to Belgium with a bunch of his old army buddies.
She said that her mother was with him and told her later than when he came to this particular bridge he sat down and wept. He told her it is so beautiful now you would never know how many people died here.
I guess the bridge was new. The old one had been blown to hell.
Yeah, I know, Terrye, but I’m a worrier, but the ITM has a post on it and some comments from those who say they were there. I guess it was an assortment of marchers…nothing serious.
Hey, I like the ACLU idea! We can send them over there to sue Muqty and stay out of our hair here, LOL!
A “bust,” huh? I dunno, this looks like a lot of people to me. (Though I am curious what that weird billboard at the top of the picture is.)
But I guess Roger knew enough not to search for any photos of the march. Biases thrive best in ignorance, after all.
It is true, though, that it’s only a fraction of the people who would have turned out if Sistani had called for the protest.
Swopa:
There are 5.7 million people in Baghdad and I have read that there are more than a million in “Sadr” city.
So if there were 20,000 people out there it represents a fraction of the whole population, but 20,000 is a large crowd.
sheesh. There will be a million pilgrims turn out in cities like Najaf and Karbala.
So, if the intent of Sadr was to bring out a million people and drive the infidels from Iraq so that a theocratic government such as the one that exists in the Islamic Republic of Iran could be installed, then yeah I would say it is a bust.
He could always back to Iran and join the morality police and arrest young girls for wearing lipstick and laughing in public.
But I do not see him winning popular support in Iraq. No matter how many posters or how much money the Iranians give him and his followers.
side note:
I jsut read that Sadr got so few votes in the election that he got no seats in the government.
I also read there were other marchers who were calling for the trial of Saddam and an end to terrorism.
Could it be that the NYT and some other media reports gave us a less than accurate report of the day’s events?
“He could always back to Iran and join the morality police and arrest young girls for wearing lipstick and laughing in public.”
Sadly, he doesn’t need to go to Iran to do that.
But hey, just cover your eyes and ears and pretend Iraq is a thriving secular democracy. Life is so much easier that way.
But I do not see him winning popular support in Iraq.
Sadr’s party is running the provincial government in Basra, FWIW — which is why they were able to get away with the atrocity I linked above. But maybe if you chant “purple fingers, purple fingers” to yourself for awhile, you’ll be able to forget what’s really happening.
I just read that Sadr got so few votes in the election that he got no seats in the government.
He’s got an estimated 24 seats in the assembly (out of 275 total) — a few ran as an independent Sadrist party, but most were included in the United Iraqi Alliance slate that won half the overall seats.
From the referenced LAT article:
“About two dozen Sadr loyalists say their recently formed Independent National Bloc”
“Twenty members of the bloc won their seats as part of the United Iraqi Alliance”
In the LAT 20 often equals 2 dozen, although “many” is generally preferred (unless it’s a group that the LAT opposes in which case “few” is generally preferred).
“Saadi said his ultimate loyalty was not to Sadr”
The LAT at its finest.
Really impressive, Swopa, keep shoveling, you’re sure to get to the pony sooner or later.
As Terrye said, the significance here is they’re protesting by means of demonstration, not bullets. I suspect that this demonstration will have about as much effect and influence as anti-war/Bush/American/globalization/nameit demonstrations here–virtually none.
I do think, however, that when the time comes for the Iraqis to take over in full the security of Baghdad, they will have their hands full with the Sadr crowd. Expect the bullets to make a reappearance.
I look forward to a cultural and artistic renaissance in the ME. I would very much like to visit one day.
Buddy, I would hate to contemplate the cloud so dark as to have not one silver lining. 9-11 had a share of silver linings. One was that many of us, from both sides of the political spectrum and including our President, re-examined and re-evaluated long held dogma, adjusted to the new reality and acted accordingly, often with lightening speed (I know for me it happened just about the time the 2nd tower fell). Silver linings abound if you open your mind to them. Perhaps the ability to see them is what makes an optimist.
Here is Ali of Free Iraq describing a meeting of the Iraqi Assembly that he viewed on TV. Ali is the Fadhil brother who disassociated himself from Iraq the Model.
His description makes an excellent counterpoint to Neurotic Iraqi Wife. Please note the overwhelming support that the Mookyite received for his suggestion.
I’m with Swopa. If we’d just left Saddam alone, we wouldn’t have that 24 out of 275 parliament seats to worry about. Saddam would’ve just shoved those people thru the shredder, and me and Swopa wouldn’t've had that peace we like.
It’s always entertaining to be treated to the (hypothetical) intelligence and integrity of Roger’s commenters.
Let’s take Rick Ballard, for instance, who accuses the LA Times of inflating the Sadr seat count from 20 to 24. As soon as you look at the sentences just before and after the one Rick cites as proof, his accusation falls apart:
… the Independent Cadres and Elites Party, which won three seats in the National Assembly and is now part of the Sadr bloc….
Twenty members of the bloc won their seats as part of the United Iraqi Alliance, which sought out Sadr associates for its slate to boost its appeal. One member of the new bloc was elected on the slate of interim Prime Minister Iyad Allawi…
What’s 3 + 20 + 1, Rick? I recognize that may be a little challenging for someone like you, but take your time.
Ahh, but Rick’s got another killer quote: “Saadi said his ultimate loyalty was not to Sadr…” Hmm, let’s take a look at the rest of the sentence:
Saadi said his ultimate loyalty was not to Sadr or to the United Iraqi Alliance that helped him win his seat, but to the thousands of Sadr followers.
Well, I can certainly see how that makes him a non-Sadrist! I guess we should take any congressman who says his or her “ultimate loyalty is to the American people” off the Republican and Democratic party rolls, too.
Nice job of embarrassing yourself there, Rick. Congratulations!
That Rick…let’s CUT OFF HIS HEAD!
Oh, my goodness — now that I look closer, I seem to have uncovered an epidemic of functional illiteracy. I clicked the link to “Neurotic Iraqi Wife,” as Roger suggests, and I promptly find out that it’s not from Baghdad (the blogger is in the United Arab Emirates, waiting to go to Baghdad to join her husband — apparently they lived in London before that). So, not suprisingly, she says awfully little “about what is really going on over there”; most of the posts are about her trip preparations and her family trying to argue her out of going. She does, however, say this:
Rose of Diary from Baghdad is leaving Iraq coming here to the Emirates, my cousin has taken his family out as well, and I know many others are leaving.
I guess for them its not a matter of patriotism anymore, cuz I know they all are patriotic but now its more of a survival game. They have responsibilities, they have helpless children depending on them. The risk of staying is far more destructive than rewarding.
Well, there’s your great news from Baghdad, I guess! Going to Diary from Baghdad, I found more upbeat news:
… I will see the world, And I might have the chance to work and put my daughter in a good school, without the fear of being killed or kidnapped for both of us.
… I will leave my parents alone, which is something that I don’t know how I will handle. I cry every time I imagine myself leaving them alone in these terrible conditions.
Obviously, this “Rose” person must be an insurgent sympathizer who wishes Saddam was back! Because everyone else knows that things in Iraq are no more turbulent than Brooklyn, right?
Speaking of which — contrary to what Roger writes, the “Brooklyn” remark comes not from the “Neurotic Iraqi Wife” at all, but from a deeply buried comment on one of her posts (the commenter attributes it to his cousin).
Which leads me to wonder … did Roger even read the blog at all before linking to it, or did he just recommend it based on some secondhand descriptions? And what about Catherine Johnson? Because they appear to be talking about some other blog entirely.
All right, who trip-tropped over the bridge?
Swopa…JANE FONDA!
Swopa,
Precisely how many members of the Assembly are also members of a party that claims Sadr as its head? Extra points for giving the name of Sadr’s “party”.
Sadr doesn’t even rate Rev. Al status. His bloc has precisely the same weight as the House Progressive Caucus. and will have the same impact in the new Iraqi Assembly as the Progressive Caucus has in the US House. Which is to say, nil.
No seats, no party, no juice. He’s hustling for some go away money, just like he did last time. Sooner or later he’ll be paid in lead rather than silver and you (and the execrable LAT) will need a new hobby horse.
Rick, you (supposedly) erudite RSimon “commenters” undoubtedly can’t be bothered to give a damn, but if you weren’t so hung up on keeping things in proportion, you’d realize that there is, according to the rules of grammar that the rest of the world seems to have no trouble using, there should be a hyphen, which YOU probably call a “dash”, in between the word “go” and the word “away” in the third and thank goodness final paragraph of your “post”. Apparently you don’t realize there’s something bumflug in your confrabulation, but why snarb, when you won’t even frabble?
At least I speled most of the words write.
I wonder if Jane Fonda works on trolls like Frau Blucher does on horses?
Prolly a better bet is that the snarl and smirkers received some sort of sign through the Ko$$ack network that Soros was threatening to cut off Moulitos if he didn’t get his minions out and yammering again. More table setting for the showdown at the Senate corral.
I wish Sistani would utter the Arab equivalent of “Will no one rid me of this meddlesome cleric?” soon. Mooky has become tiresome.
Yeh…I hate to act so silly, but those who disagree with the world-historical, sweeping, millennial effort to free enslaved peoples and end the major source of conflict in the world–before it blows sky-high–ought to try to produce higher-tone critique than mere burbling joyfully over the unavoidable local setbacks.
Of course everyone already knows this is a grindingly difficult project, it takes little genius to find fault in the details of something so big and so active.
And besides, we just had an election that was directly ‘about’ this war. Traditionally, election losers rejoin a war effort–in the rare cases where they’d unjoined to begin with–because a determined, united front is what history teaches is the least costly way to make the enemy quit. Least costly for all.
Anyone who wants the war to hurry, could quit slowing it down. If on the other hand they want to lose the war (probably something to do with the White House) then subverting it is mere politics (albeit pretty damn vile).
All in all it’s pretty much pointless to try teaching them any applicable history at this late date.
…ought to try to produce higher-tone critique than mere burbling joyfully over the unavoidable local setbacks”
Buddy, Hope it’s OK I sent this “big picture” and “a little maturity here, please” comment of yours to my kid who tries debating her NY friends about Iraq. Perhaps telling these anti-war, anti-Bush and anti-matter types to just get over it or to get over themselves would do just as well. But your kind of burbling is just too good not to share.
Thanks, Charlotte…you just made my day!
Buddy:
This has been true for as long as I have been reading blogs – nowhere are trolls tossed with such style as they are here.
Morgan, what Kyda was saying upstream about giving optimism a chance, most commenters who end up being seen as trolls are amost always selling faith-based pessimism. Cynics seem certain that the ‘I-can-never-be-disappointed’ attitude has somehow some sort of intellectual superiority. But taken out to an end, they’d have us still freezing in our caves arguing whether or not fire is just too damn dangerous to fool with. And those folks rubbing sticks together over there, they’re just trying to rip you off. As long as we got these rotten carcasses to gnaw on, we don’t need no stinkin’ bar-b-que!
ugh…’stinkin’ bar-b-que…talk about steppin’ on your punch line….
And you dare criticize me for a missing hymen.
Ahg…rotten carcasses, stinkin’ bar-b-que, Rick Ballard being deflowered…now I’m FULLY nauseous….
Buddy and Rick,
Images of spoilt flesh aside, your “give war and liberty a chance” optimism is still lovely. Is just a tad shocking that such high-minded spirit can be exhibited by a cave dweller and jezebel, that’s all
You should talk, Charlotte!
(hat tip)
Who knew?! Oh, now I feel so dull by comparison. She is the best Charlotte ever!
Will plucking lettuce leaves and plundering the herbs out back count as a suitable act of depravity? Think I’ll be really debauched and go without the pretty garden gloves. Buddy, you need to be careful what you tell some of us
Like I said above, it’s always amusing to visit the alternate universe y’all have going here.
I make a serious of factual comments, am replied to with nothing but unsupported, sneering assertions and insults … and the denizens promptly engage in an orgy of self-congratulation.
It’s hard to pick my favorite bit of windbaggery. Perhaps Rick Ballard (with no apologies or shame over being caught in the blatant distortions of his previous comment — classy, Rick!) showing his ignorance of how Iraq’s clerics and political parties interact? (Hint: No party claims Ayatollah Sistani as its head either, but he’s the most powerful political figure in the country.)
Or perhaps Buddy Larsen’s bloviating about “a determined, united front” being what wins wars? (Hmm, was it being more united than Japan that got them to surrender to us in World War II, or was it the A-bomb? A poser, to be sure!)
I think what I’d have to go with, though, is Buddy’s heartfelt cry that if I’d just pretend like the rest of you that the emperor is wearing clothes, we’d all get through this just fine.
Funny, I remember back when seeing our enemies accurately for what they are was something you guys praised yourselves for. Now, though, it appears the ability to stick your heads in the sand and pretend everything is hunky-dory is even more deeply prized.
Incidentally, I’d still like to know why just about everything Roger said about the “Neurotic Iraqi Wife” blog was wrong besides the URL. Did you really read the blog before recommending it, Roger?
Excellent comeback, Swopa. However, you somehow missed that you’d already won your point. That’s what it means, when nobody contests a point–it’s won. You apparently found an error, a mispeak. I haven’t seen quite where it is, because it’s too detailed and meaningless, and not nearly so much fun as screwing around with fellow windbags. But, wherever the error is, I can assure it’s far bigger in your head than it is anywhere else.
The “united front” was mentioned as a reciprocal to a “dis-united front” (not to prod awake the old nuclear-freezers).
But BTW, Japan in August 1945 still had several million well-armed troops, dug-in and waiting for us, and a huge home inventory of harsh weaponry standing by. Regardless of whether the A-bomb invasion-finesse was right or wrong, even the deposed Japanese High Command admitted that losing Hiroshima and Nagasaki had ended the war, and that ending the watr is all that saved Tokyo and a dozen other cities, plus 1-2 million Japanese lives, from destruction.
That WWII Japanese military was no joke–read up on the Pacific Island Campaign–esp the last, most informative battle (Okinawa). Nothing but nothing other than a united front would’ve won WWII.
If you’d been around then, you’d've hadda keep your mouth shut on these matters. The front was united, and wanted to stay that way, so defeatism and sour carping was rather ostracized, on the basis of not doing harm to our troops under fire.
The manifold criticisms of this or that war issue came out later, properly, after we no longer had our troops under fire.
Sadr’s party is running the provincial government in Basra
“He’s got an estimated 24 seats in the assembly (out of 275 total) — a few ran as an independent Sadrist party, but most were included in the United Iraqi Alliance slate that won half the overall seats.”
“No party claims Ayatollah Sistani as its head either, but he’s the most powerful political figure in the country.”
So Sadr has a party (which can’t be named) which which won 24 seats in the assembly by 1)picking up 3 seats with a splinter party unwilling to use Sadr’s name prior to the election 2)claiming a seat that Allawi’s list won and 3)disguising itself as the UIA which is ruled behind the scenes by the most powerful political figure in the country who has no love whatsoever for Sadr.
Artful incoherence, Swopa. The piece by Ali that I linked gives a rather clear picture of the “strength” of the Sadr blockhead. One guy talking tough with one other clapping weakly. Sound familiar?
Rick, wasn’t there something else? Somebody didn’t read something or something, proved by something somebody else some other time said somebody said somewhere else, or something? I couldn’t follow it, I’m way too into my 43rd re-reading of The Warren Commission Report.
not nearly so much fun as screwing around with fellow windbags
Cut that out, darn it. I’m trying out argumentation using the LAT approved logic manual and it’s working pretty well. Ellision, supposition, unrelated facts connected with gossamer thread – see you take a conclusion, no matter how silly, and then you go and look for data points that are within six degrees of separation from the conclusion and tie them in with suggestive language and then you close with “as any fool can see” which establishes the proper perspective.
Turnabout and all that.
Well, just remember, no need to be factual–just accurate. Or, you know, vice-versa, whatever.
Swopa,
What is your solution to terrorism, Islamism, the Middle East and Everything, if Bush policy, his wars of liberation and nation-building are failing and doomed? Please explain just how pro-war, pro-democracy bloggers and their commenters generally have their “heads in the sand”, as opposed to your enlightened realism or transformational ideas which, if enacted, would encounter no problems or setbacks and would make the world safer and maybe even kinder?
What Would Swopa Do?
LOL, Charlotte…suggest, if running around garden-glove-naked doesn’t help, take a cold shower and “think of England”!
(referring of course to your upstream post–bad timing–not implying a crush on Swopa, gag, for cryin’ out loud)
Buddy,
At least it was a wicked salad. Haven’t read CM since I was thirteen. Maybe it’s time to think of her England, again.
Have you ever ventured into Swopa territory? I shall read it a bit to find the the Answer to World Piece.
Um, CM are my initials. Think I meant CB. She has me so flustered
Thanks, Chartlotte…first thing ya see is “Venezuela, Iran, Syria … who to invade first? Let’s go to the Wheel o’ Liberation!”
Yep, Charlotte, now I’m flustered, too…I worked in Venezuela late 70s/early 80s. Sandinistas and Castro Cubanos were all over, doing contract work as I was. I know what they were doing in the monte. Now I can go over to Swopa’s place and find out how funny those guys really are. I have a tad of first-hand info on Hugo Chavez’s ideas about the Ven constitution and rule of law. It’s becoming ‘whatever Hugo says’–farmers–only a few hundred so far–are starting to lose their property, a hectare at a time, to squatters who are supported by the local constabulary, by direct order of El Jefe Grande. Ven was right in progress, developing a stronger middle class, when along comes a Jimmy Carter-enabled Dictator.
Of course, if GWB doesn’t like Hugo, then Swopa will go to the barricades for Hugo. And stay there until Hugo wants Swopa’s property. Then Swopa will change his mind, and go directly to squealing for a nuke to be dropped on Hugo.
Study how we get into wars. You’ll usually find enough “Venezuela, Iran, Syria … who to invade first? Let’s go to the Wheel o’ Liberation!” folks holding forth, dumbing actual thought, during the lead-up time when we should’ve been serious.
Case-in-point, oh, how that Jimmy Carter Hugo-endorsement will come back to haunt us…along with his give-away of the Panama Canal, which is precisely what has empowered the Hugos. Someday, we may have to fight to defend our interests, and the “Wheel o’ Liberation!” jokesters, who put us in the fight in the first place, will be out in force, all outraged again, mocking with the “Wheel o’ Liberation!” sophisticated comedy all over again. Irony, and dot-connecting, as usual for them, far too taxing.
swopa writes: “Funny, I remember back when seeing our enemies accurately for what they are was something you guys praised yourselves for. Now, though, it appears the ability to stick your heads in the sand and pretend everything is hunky-dory is even more deeply prized.”
I’ve come late to this thread; as I read it, my son, newly returned from Iraq, is sitting just to my left. He and his older brother, also an Iraq veteran, have described their experiences to their mother and myself. Believe me, I have few illusions about the situation there; there’s no sand in my ears.
Among the things they described to me are the mass graves they saw, and the execution chambers of the Saddamite regime, and the rejoicing they witnessed among Iraqis when Qusay and Uday were killed and Saddam captured. The simple truth of the matter is that Saddam was a killer, his sons were certifiable, Iraqis by and large feared and despised him, and they were freed from his tyranny by our army.
Yes, the situation there is extremely serious. There is a real possibility that our attempt to build a more open, more democratic, less tyrannical government may fail; the enemies of freedom are many. Our enemies may well see their fondest wish come true: an Iraq bathed in blood and our forces driven from the country in disgrace. On the other hand, a liberated Iraq has the potential to change the politics of the entire region, from backwardness and tyranny to openness and progress. If the history of the 20th century has taught us anything, it’s this: Our security is best served by expanding the sphere of liberty.
As for what to do, we have no choice but to move forward. We must be absolutely clear about the dangers and risks ahead. We must be absolutely clear about what’s worked in the past and what has not. We must not deceive ourselves with undue optimism or undue pessimism. But I do think that we have a chance to liberate a nation, thereby changing the direction of an entire civilization and increasing our own security. If that’s not worth fighting for, what is?
Brown Line,
An inadequate but sincere ‘thank you’ to your sons for their service. Also, for your observations and sober hopefulness.
Concur, salute to your family, Brown Line–and a great post. And Charlotte, if you’ll lend me an eyre, sorry, I didn’t mean for your link to send me to such wuthering heights of rancor. It’s a low Bill Maher Snark tolerance. Must improve myself, sometime.
Buddy,
This thread is surely over and only my cat atop the printer will see this, but
Why would you feel bad about getting impatient with snarky war critics, when we have men and women fighting and working overseas in dangerous conditions on our behalf? Expressing an inner Heathcliff now and then might be in order! You have nothing to improve upon, unless you notice that I have failed to work in an Eyre ref here. Now that would be uncharitable
Why, thank you, Charlotte, eye’s glad to nose that!
Sure. Don’t men-chin it!
Ha! Mustach you to browse this. Ogden Nash:
In my office on Madison Avenue,
I say to myself, “You’ve ARRIVED, havenue?”
Brown Line — Thanks for your comments. If you look at this thread again, I guess you can see the situation back home rather clearly. As you say, “We must be absolutely clear about the dangers and risks ahead. . . . We must not deceive ourselves with undue optimism or undue pessimism.”
I’ve tried to raise several facts here about what is really going on in Iraq. For example, this is from the article I linked above:
THE students had begun to lay out their picnic in the spring sunshine when the men attacked.
ìThere were dozens of them, armed with guns, and they poured into the park,î Ali al-Azawi, 21, the engineering student who had organised the gathering in Basra, said.
ìThey started shouting at us that we were immoral, that we were meeting boys and girls together and playing music and that this was against Islam.
ìThey began shooting in the air and people screamed. Then, with one order, they began beating us with their sticks and rifle butts.î Two students were said to have been killed.
Standing over them as the blows rained down was the man who gave the order, dressed in dark clerical garb and wearing a black turban. Ali recognised him immediately as a follower of Hojatoleslam Moqtada al-Sadr, the radical Shia cleric. . . .
. . . Students say that there was nothing spontaneous about the attack. Police were guarding the picnic in the park, as is customary at any large public gathering, but allowed the armed men in without any resistance.
One brought a video camera to record the sinful spectacle of the picnic, footage of which was later released to the public as a warning to others.
It showed images of one girl struggling as a gunman ripped her blouse off, leaving her half-naked. ìWe will send these pictures to your parents so they can see how you were dancing naked with men,î a gunman told her. Two students who went to her aid were shot ó one in the leg, the other twice in the stomach. The latter was said to have died of his injuries. Fellow students say that the girl later committed suicide. Another girl who was severely beaten around the head lost her sight.
Far from disavowing the attack, senior al-Sadr loyalists said that they had a duty to stop the studentsí ìdancing, sexy dress and corruptionî.
ìWe beat them because we are authorised by Allah to do so and that is our duty,î Sheik Ahmed al-Basri said after the attack. ìIt is we who should deal with such disobedience and not the police.î
After escaping with two students, Ali reached a police station and asked for help. ìWhat do you expect me to do about it?î a uniformed officer asked.
Ali went to the British military base at al-Maakal and pleaded with the duty officer at the gate. ìYouíre a sovereign country now. We canít help. You have to go to the Iraqi authorities,î the soldier replied.
Obviously, Brown Line, this isn’t what your sons fought for. But you can see the reaction that Roger’s commenters had: they stuck their heads in the sand and pretended the problem doesn’t exist. (Well, except for Rick Ballard, who chose to lie about it, then stick his head in the sand.) You can see up above how many times Buddy Larsen alone desperately tries to change the subject — five? six? I lost count.
See, in their minds, the suffering of the Iraqi people was only relevant before the invasion. Now that the Iraqis have served their political purpose, Roger’s commenters would prefer that they went away and stopped bothering us.
Unfortunately, in the long run of the war against terrorism, that doesn’t help keep us safe. But it’s like a pagan superstition — they figure if they just say “Freedom is on the march” to themselves enough times, we won’t get hit again.
It’s the purest form of the “September 10th mentality” I can imagine. But I suppose it is scary to keep looking the enemy in the face and realize that we’re not doing what we should to defeat them. So they retreat into fantasy and juvenile inside jokes.
Oh, well, at least we tried. Best of luck to your sons, either here or if they have to go back.
Swopa, I can see from the wit at your website (“We Needle, You Explain”) why most any joke at all will always be “inside” to you. What’s really scintillating is the use of the strike-thru to write, then strike, nasty snarks about all us clowns who keep winning more and more presidencies, senate and house seats, governorships and statehouse legislatures, while at the same time spending less and less time, money, and interest watching, listening to, and reading the liberal media and its inane, lugubrious sycophants (check the numbers, you’re corkscrewing straight down).
Brown-Line is probably wondering if you think no anecdote describing an Iraqi grateful for the Liberation can be produced to counter your long scene of horror (he’s undoubtedly heard many glad AND sad stories, first-hand).
What would be entirely laughable on any other topic is your humanitarian concern for the people you so fervently wish had been left standing in the shredder lines, or riding in the midnight trucks out to the mass-gravesites.
And, astoundingly, you accuse your opponents of perfidy? You’d think your superior intellect would’ve avoided such a bare-ass whopper.
Buddy can add side items and asides to the main topic because he can follow them all simultaneously. Just because many of us have to work to keep up doesn’t mean he should stop str-etch-ing our brains! Rick, too, of course.
I see you’re still not offering your compleat vision of what to do about terrorism or, indeed, to what extent of a terrorism problem you think we have. You say, “we’re not doing what we should to defeat them” but offer nothing, nada, zip on what you know will work, instead. You are content to attack commenters on this thread for not carping and complaining more about all the problems which arise, both real and imagined, ignored or distorted, under Bush’s approach.
You apparently read what Brown Line had to say, but choose to ignore his cautious hopes for Iraq and our Middle East policy. And why do you presume the rest of us are simpleton cheerleaders for same? Are we, each and every time we comment, to qualify our support for current policy with “of course, there are daily problems and overall risks and things might not turn out as we hope”. It’s an understood. Salient criticism and constructive critique by smart people in the loop are important and have their place, but support needs to be voiced loudly and clearly without wavering on a daily, per event basis.
What you seem to prize is second-guessing after the fact, the drumbeat of defeatism and relentless, demoralizing negativity. Roger and most of his commenters engage in critique and have concerns, but a sense of proportionality, perspective and maybe even decency keeps us from indulging in Chicken Little alarmism over each and every event, micro-trend or MSM meme and story. As a nation we have committed to a policy and have committed troops to harm’s way in service of that policy, and most of us here are committed to supporting both the vision and our troops. We have faith in our military and this administration, and realize that neither could possibly get it right and control events 100% of the time. The big picture looks pretty promising, though.
The story you cite above is a sad one, another little atrocity committed by brutes we are endeavoring to defeat, or at least to sideline in the future of the region. Are post-Saddam bad events the first Iraqi sad stories you’ve read? I realize the main media didn’t much publicize the thuggery and inhumanity of Saddam’s regime and now they are all too eager to write about any problems to arise since we intervened. But your saying “Now that the Iraqis have served their political purpose, Roger’s commenters would prefer that they went away and stopped bothering us” is sick and gratuitous. Your being upset that the Coalition has given Iraqi authority back to the people (“You’re a sovereign country now. We can’t help. You have to go to the Iraqi authorities,” the soldier replied. Obviously, Brown Line, this isn’t what your sons fought for) is beyond all. Are you not ecstatic that Halliburton hasn’t incorporated Iraq and subjegated its peoples, as we had been assured was the nefarious masterplan?
Now, I need a little Ogden Nash.
Apologies for leaving off “Dear Swopa” above
Swopa: “…we’re not doing what we should to defeat them. So (Roger’s commenters) retreat into fantasy and juvenile inside jokes.”
The Fly (Nash)
God in his wisdom made the fly
And then forgot to tell us why.
Swopa (Gnash)
God in his wisdom made the gadfly
And then forgot to make some wry.
Comments written by Charlotte,
often brand with big letters scarlet…
she catches the libs
then shows ‘em their fibs
and piles up their bodies by car-lot.
(mercy…head hurts…all used up…need warm milk…oysters)
Gee I’m glad you didn’t use all the words that rhyme with ‘Charlotte’…
Oysters help headaches??
Ha! Only the first eleven…yes, hadda avoid the obvious rhyme, alas…also, “you can lead a horticulture, but ya can’t make her think!” Yuk yuk…extwemely juvenile fer sher!
Buddy, Your limerick will go on my resume, but your adage strikes too close to home for gardenerd who posts without thinking—
You certainly don’t have that problem- found out you’re virtually all “study”!
g-a-r-d-e-r-n-e-r-S
g-a-r-d-e-N-e-r-s
That’s a great site, Charlotte. Good place for Rick’s missing hyphen to reappear, they could’ve included “stud-y”. I mean, for those whose egos need it, that is.
…the only problem with limericks is after they’re written you spend the day smitten with rhymes and their gittin’.
Back on serious, read this, for a complex look into the war by a US Army Sgt who happens to be an incredibly talented writer, too, and has found himself right in the belly of the urban counterinsurgency-combat beast.
Loved it! Smart enough to be scared, guts enough to do it. And smart and guts enough to write it. Looks like we’re getting a new generation of writers by way of war. Buddy, you should put this terrific link somewhere higher on the site where more than one person (two if Swopa swoops in) might see it.
Btw, for all your verse and links this time, you’ve more than earned your hyphenated rhyme!
You’re right, that site–that writer–needs circulation…I’ll email him to some of the Blog Bossmen. That “new generation of writers”, what a fine thought, to see a good thing in the minor key spin out of this harsh, needful war. And, thank you (ahem) for awarding that hyphen!