All the nonsense you folks post on SI will soon come to an end. Iraq is soon going to be Bush's flashpoint. Bush wants to cut and run to get re selected. At this moment, neither can he cut and run, not can he get re selected. What a pathetic US President.
Iraq violence shows it's not ready for self-rule
Wednesday, April 07, 2004 - IT has been an ugly week in Iraq. One in which it has become abundantly clear that the former fiefdom of Saddam Hussein is not ready for self-government and the United States, faced with violent resistance, can't walk away.
The Bush administration needs to suspend its arbitrary plan to turn governing power over to the Iraqis by June 30. To do so in the wake of Tuesday's violent clashes with insurgents in Fallujah and Shiite rebels in Baghdad and southern Iraq, in which at least a dozen Marines reportedly died, would be to invite anarchy and perhaps civil war.
Tuesday's battles were extensions of last week's savage exhibition in Fallujah and uprisings by backers of militant Shiite cleric Muqtada al-Sadr in six cities. At least 614 U.S. troops have died in Iraq since the war began, including more than 20 in the first six days of April.
The situation has so deteriorated that Gen. John P. Abizaid, the senior commander in the Middle East, and U.S. commanders in Iraq are drawing up contingency plans to send more American troops to the war-wracked nation.
Inherent in our regime-changing invasion of Iraq is the responsibility that the United States re-establish a degree of stability before leaving. Indeed, given our democratic objectives and dethroning of a brutal dictator, we hoped to leave Iraq in much better shape than we found it.
The gruesome events of this past week clearly indicate, however, that a year later Iraq is nowhere near ready for self-government, let alone democracy.
To turn political control over to a hand-picked governing council that many Iraqis consider illegitimate would encourage chaos and essentially create a political vacuum.
Nine Americans, including four civilians working for a security company, were killed in the Sunni Triangle last Wednesday. Violent mobs in Fallujah created some of the most disturbing scenes of the past year by dragging burned bodies of the employees through the streets and hanging two from a bridge across the Euphrates River.
On Sunday, armed Shiite followers of al-Sadr took to the streets in a violent upheaval that resulted in the deaths of nine coalition soldiers, including eight Americans, and the wounding of dozens more. Arrest warrants for al-Sadr were issued Monday by an Iraqi judge at the U.S. behest.
All of which has revived doubts about America's policy and preparedness in Iraq. Two California Democratic members of Congress, Minority Leader Nancy Pelosi and Rep. Howard Berman, have questioned whether we have enough resources and forces there. Berman insists we should have more troops in Iraq to fight terrorism and secure the Sunni Triangle. And Pelosi said increased hostility and failure of Iraqi security forces "requires re-examination of our resources there."
And Sunday, Republican Sen. Dick Lugar of Indiana, head of the Senate Foreign Relations Committee, said transferring power in less than three months "may be" too soon, adding, "I think it's probably time to have that debate." He shared the assessment that security is in shambles in parts of Iraq and that local police forces are not prepared to take over from American forces.
Although President Bush said Monday he won't delay the return of self-rule to Iraq, it's clear that the situation is so volatile that he shouldn't automatically dismiss that prospect. Nor should he dismiss the prospect of sending more troops to quell uprisings and eliminate resistance.
The U.S. military and political presence in Iraq is apt to last a lot longer than the Bush administration and U.S. citizens prefer.
theargusonline.com |
