100s of Saddams
Anthony Shadid in the Washington POst writes about the fractured auithority in Iraq where, on a local level, the rule of the bullet is the only thing that seems to apply.
Before we invaded Iraq, American liberals noted that taking out Saddam would be the easy part, but that replacing him with something humane was virtually impossible. We predicted Civil War and anarchy and our voices were ignored and, worse, portrayed in the media as voices of the deranged.
Our fears have come to light as it appears that Iraq is now effectively in the grips of 100s of Saddams - leaders with no respect for human rights intent on only shoring up their own base of power and killing anyone they perceive as blocking their way.
Before we invaded Iraq, American liberals noted that taking out Saddam would be the easy part, but that replacing him with something humane was virtually impossible. We predicted Civil War and anarchy and our voices were ignored and, worse, portrayed in the media as voices of the deranged.
Our fears have come to light as it appears that Iraq is now effectively in the grips of 100s of Saddams - leaders with no respect for human rights intent on only shoring up their own base of power and killing anyone they perceive as blocking their way.
posted by Macswain at
11:07 AM
2 Comments:
well let's pick one of those 100's of saddams, make him the dictator, and get the hell out.
Alternatively, give the real saddam the country back, and pay relocation expenses for whoever wants out fearing reprisal. Even if that means paying half the shiite population, I doubt that's as much as we're spending now.
By
Anonymous, at 3:15 PM
Before we invaded Iraq, American liberals noted that taking out Saddam would be the easy part, but that replacing him with something humane was virtually impossible.
Oh, I'd love to see those quotes. I'd also love to hear the rationale that says a humane Iraqi government is an impossibility. That sounds racist to me.
By
Pablo, at 3:13 AM
Post a Comment
<< Home