Bush didn't understand what Iraqis wanted

[Big]

The government chosen according to religious doctrines:



Iraq's Shiite-dominated government is heavily influenced by two powerful clerics, and its decisions are often heavily laced with Shiite religious doctrine. Some call the country a thinly veiled theocracy like the one in neighboring Iran, where many members of Iraq's Shiite power structure took refuge during Saddam Hussein's rule.

www.nytimes.com/aponline/world/AP-Iraq-Allawi.html?_r=1&oref=slogin

[Big]

Shiites wanted to take the power away from Sunnis and establish their own rules. Democracy was just the tool that made it logical for Americans because Shiites are the majority in Iraq and Democracy favors majority rule.

All that happened is that one religious group replaced another.

[matclone]

I was watching an interview of former ambassador to Austria Swanni (not another religious sect in Iraq) Hunt the other night, and she said there were a lot of women in positions of leadership in Iraq, but when the Bush administration got everyone together to plan a government, out of the 400 Iraqi leaders chosen, only 7 were women. She also said the women tended to be more moderate. I don't know, but I've heard this before: that Iraq was a more secular society under Hussain. But quite often now, people discuss their society as being competing religious factions (to some this fits the scary Muslim profile).

Oh, I just remembered too I heard an Imam (Muslim religious leader) on the radio a couple months ago, and he said that before the war, the people generally got along--kind of like Catholics and Protestants do here (I don't remember if he used that analogy or if it's mine). I believe he said that inter-religious marriages were not unusual.

[Big]

Bush gave Iraqis the freedom to kill each other.

[ground3pound]

big said:

Bush gave Iraqis the freedom to kill each other.

Partial true...now we are trying to stop / prevent them from killing each other and people like you are against it.

[ground3pound]

matclone said:

Oh, I just remembered too I heard an Imam (Muslim religious leader) on the radio a couple months ago, and he said that before the war, the people generally got along--kind of like Catholics and Protestants do here (I don't remember if he used that analogy or if it's mine). I believe he said that inter-religious marriages were not unusual.

Can you explain why this has changed?

[matclone]

I'll try. I believe he said their social fabric has been destroyed by the war. The web of institutions and people that made up a civil society no longer exist. Try an analogy: suppose our courts of law, our schools, our newspapers, and our local pro sports team were destroyed or were in disarray (could not meaningfully function). That which held us together as a society, that helped us respect one another, is gone. Some new social structure would have to take its place, and that structure could come from our religious leaders.

[ground3pound]

Thanks for the logical and honest response. I wish there was more dialog like this around here.

I feel most Iraqis want a peaceful and cooperative county where Sunnis, Shiites and Kurds could coexist and help the entire country prosper.

However, a minority a religious extremist have used violence to destroy the progress of a cooperative and peaceful nation. They don't want to share the power. They want everyone to live according to their extremist ideals. They are targeting the institutions that you mentioned to create chaos. That's the definition of insurgents.

That's why we must support the fight against the minority insurgence. If we leave, they average unarmed and law abiding Iraqi will be at the mercy of the violent radical sects and ALL hell will break loose.

[Big]

Its simple. Fighting for power wasn't allowed. Saddam had the power. You give them freedom to fight and how can they marry each other when their families are vying for power according to religious sects?

[Big]

I feel most Iraqis want a peaceful and cooperative county where Sunnis, Shiites and Kurds could coexist and help the entire country prosper.

Wrong! They all hate each other. They NEVER WANTED to live together. British bombed them in 1920s to make them accept present Iraq.

[matclone]

Groundpound, your assessment sounds quite reasonable. I would question, however, whether we are in a good position to fight what you call the minority insurgents. Ambassador Hunt (mentioned above) suggested that we sought counsel with the more extreme factions when helping form the government.

[ground3pound]

I don't know the details of exactly how we set up the new government, but I pretty sure it was an international effort and I don't recall anyone claiming that was shady.

Anyway...I just register on the new site.

I'll see you guys there.

[Big]

Iraqis are like 3 wild dogs on tight leashes. You set them loose and they rip each other's throats. Saddam was the leash.

[Donkey]

matclone said:

I'll try. I believe he said their social fabric has been destroyed by the war. The web of institutions and people that made up a civil society no longer exist. Try an analogy: suppose our courts of law, our schools, our newspapers, and our local pro sports team were destroyed or were in disarray (could not meaningfully function). That which held us together as a society, that helped us respect one another, is gone. Some new social structure would have to take its place, and that structure could come from our religious leaders.

Correct me if I'm wrong, but I believe you are referring to Sadaam Hussein.