'News and Views of a Frustrated Editor and His Featured Guests '
In the fateful year of 2003 the US and its friends, especially the United kingdom, decided that they would bring democracy to a Middle East by force…..it was a year or choice….and we chose to go to war in the name of democracy…..
The invasion of Iraq was a war of choice, which as predicted in advance brought mayhem to Iraq and increased the threat to Britain and British interests from al-Qaeda. There was no compelling reason for Tony Blair to make that choice for Britain in March 2003.
As the report says, “there was no imminent threat from Saddam Hussein” in March 2003 and “the strategy of containment could have been adapted and continued for some time”. This is in complete contradiction to Tony Blair’s continual assertions at the time that Iraq, equipped with “weapons of mass destruction”, was a grave threat to its neighbours and even to Britain itself – and had to be dealt with imminently.
The UK has had an investigation into why this war was necessary…..the US should have done the same……
For 13 years the closest thing to democracy for Iraq was an election…in the mean time there is factionalism and discord among the three major players in Iraqi politics, Sunni, Shia and Kurd……all that the US and UK has accomplished is the fracturing of Iraq…..
In the glorious year of our Lord, 2003 we as a nation took it upon ourselves to invade then occupy a sovereign nation, Iraq………the invasion was based on a collection of circumstances, right or wrong, that made it imperative that the nation should be invaded and its leader, Saddam, killed. And so it began.
Now the conversation has returned to the proposal for a 3 state solution within the borders of Iraq…..at best it is a pipe dream…..
Since the overthrow of Saddam Hussein in 2003 and breakdown of the Iraqi state, ethno-sectarian partition has become a popular political mantra. The assumption is that a federal state based on three autonomous regions — Sunni Arab, Shiite Arab and Kurd — is the most realistic way to stabilize Iraq and keep its borders intact. This claim has revived alongside the devastation and communal distrust created by the Islamic State (IS) and the territorial, demographic and political changes resulting from the campaign to counter IS.
The problem is that a tripartite Iraqhas little bearing to realities on the ground, particularly in a post-IS context. Sunni Arab, Shiite Arab and Kurdish communities may be religiously and ethnically distinct and concentrated in particular regions, but they have also been dispersed across territories since the IS onslaught and are deeply fragmented. Internal boundaries and the uneven distribution of resources remain disputed between and within groups, creating additional challenges to reordering borders along clear ethno-sectarian fault lines. Instead of three self-sustaining regions, Iraq has become an amalgam of hyper-localized entities seeking self-rule and self-protection, while remaining dependent on Baghdad and prone to proxy conflicts
Source: The myth of a tripartite Iraq
Let’s go back to the democracy thing for Iraq……a great dream but will never work……
Baghdad is on the verge of falling to Islamist rebels, and Americans are somehow surprised. As far as we knew, things were peachy in Iraq until sometime last week. More important than trying to figure out what is happening, however, we are trying to figure out who to blame.
Republicans, who have now completely abandoned the idea that America should present a united front to the world, immediately blamed Obama for pulling out of Iraq. Democrats, who seem perpetually incapable of taking responsibility for anything, rushed to blame Bush for starting the war in the first place. There is plenty of blame to go around, of course. But in this case, they are both wrong; we should blame the British.
So far nothing is working in Iraq…..the US has tried many different approaches to the situation and none are taking hold……is there a reason?
In one form or another, the US has been at war with Iraq since 1990, including a sort-of invasion in 1991 and a full-scale one in 2003. During that quarter-century, Washington imposed several changes of government, spent trillions of dollars, and was involved in the deaths of hundreds of thousands of people. None of those efforts were a success by any conceivable definition of the term Washington has been capable of offering.
Nonetheless, it’s the American Way to believe with all our hearts that every problem is ours to solve and every problem must have a solution, which simply must be found. As a result, the indispensable nation faces a new round of calls for ideas on what “we” should do next in Iraq.
With that in mind, here are five possible “strategies” for that country on which only one thing is guaranteed: none of them will work.
The US and its buddies broke the country of Iraq and now nothing they do will fix the problem they created….
I would remind you that this blog is produced free for the public good and you are welcome to republish or re-use this article or any other material freely anywhere without requesting further permission.
News & Views welcome always published as long as NO bad language or is not related to subject matter.
To keep online information secure, experts recommend keeping your social media accounts private, changing your passwords often, and never answering unsolicited emails or phone calls asking for your personal information. Need help and guidance visit https://acepchelp.wordpress.com and leave a comment or send a private message on Telegram @Aceone31