Gumby, I'm with ya. The contempt for the rule of law that this administration exhibits is unprecedented. Just look at the CIA outing, the telecom immunity they want, the going over the heads of even the Secret FISA court... Neither the courts nor our representatives have any say in how this country is currently run. Just write a signing statement and Bush opts to "make it so".
Sam, there is precious little "way forward" in Iraq. The violence may diminish due to ethnic cleansing and sheer exhaustion, but Iraq is not a coherent country and we can't force it to be one by applauding and wishing hard and putting cheap ribbon-shaped magnets on the ol' SUV. What we HAVE done that is concrete, however, is thrown out our own adherance to the Geneva Conventions, thrown out habeas corpus, thrown out our own nominal restrictions on domestic spying, etc. For what? WHAT was the proven threat of Iraq? I care as little for the posturing of Democrats as I do for the posturing of Republicans. Looking at past players' foolish statements does not excuse the current players of equal or greater actual foolishness.
Now the republicans are trotting out the same old players (Chalabi, Richard Perle) to spread some magic pixie dust on the debacle. Ha! According to them, we are "heroes in error". Will Perle stop at Iraq? No! He has his sights set on Iran and Syria for an
equally salubrious Iraq treatment.. and the neocons generally are now agitating to take on Pakistan, a real nuclear entity.
The fun has just begun as far as they are concerned!
samclem, there are a lot of peoples suffering and we don't have the same impetus of intervention. The Marsh Arabs are a retroactive fig leaf, and really I recall no instance of Bush having even mentioned their existence.
After the occupation, the Marsh Arabs were actually rather contrary to the British and Italian forces in their area:
Portrait of a Rebellion -- In These Times
Their leader was wanted in the killing of a police officer:
Former member in the Iraqi governing council wanted in a killing case
Al-Muhammadawi supporters condemned the warrant of arrest against him and doubted the objectivity of lawyers appointed by the Americans. A statement issued by the federation of the Iraqi tribes and published in the Iraqi daily " al-Sabah" said that " the occupation is the one who formed these courts to undermine the dignity of the Iraqis." It added " we stand in support of Sheikh al-Muhammadawi and deplore the illegal courts of the occupation."
Al-Muhammadawi is viewed as an alley for Ahmad Chalabi who used to be the favorite man for the Americans in Iraq but his relations with Washington deteriorated recently.
Informed Comment
Sheikh al-Muhammadawi, from the powerful Al-Bu Muhammad tribe, a sort of aristocracy among the looked-down-upon Marsh Arabs, organized his people into the Iraqi Hizbullah. He and his fighters took Amara on April 7, two days before the fall of West Baghdad, and the Americans and British rewarded him by putting him in charge there. Paul Bremer put him on the Interim Governing Council.
In the past year, a lot of Marsh Arab slum dwellers have gone over to Muqtada al-Sadr and become Sadrists and Mahdi Army. A minority appear instead to have joined the Supreme Council for Islamic Revolution in Iraq and its paramilitary Badr Corps. There is tension within the Marsh Arabs, not only between Sadrists and SCIRI (Iraqi Hizbullah as an independent movement seems in decline), but also among various clans that feud with one another. In summer of 2003, two Marsh Arab tribes came into Basra, the Ghamchi and the Basun, and began feuding with one another. At one point they fought a 4-hour gun battle because one group had killed a water buffalo belonging to the other.
When the Americans besieged Fallujah and then came after Muqtada al-Sadr, Sheikh al-Muhammadawi angrily resigned from the Interim Governing Council and deeply criticized the Americans. This move reflected the fact that most of his tribesmen had become Sadrists (indeed, the whole city council of Amara followed Muqtada).
How can we pretend to foist a modern "egalitarian" democracy on people who have not gone through any political or societal 'evolution' beyond tribalism? It's not only an inconceivable luxury, but a fool's errand. In Iraq, half of marriages still take place between first or second cousins. And really, how far are we ourselves, when you think about it, from tribalism?
What you have to consider is that the tribal system, with all its corruption and nepotism, has been the human organizational standard for 99.9% of human existence. It is still quite prevalent even in modern 'democracies'; you need only witness the Bush/Kennedy intergenerational dynasties as evidence. The Gores. The Stevens of Alaska. The Dalys in Chicago. The Rockefellers, the Lodges. The Ghandis of India, the Bhuttos of Pakistan, the Perons, the Duvaliers, the Aquinos, etc., etc. It goes beyond party affiliation and beyond our concepts of right and left. I live in Italy, and a more feudal, FAKE democracy would be hard to find, though the ties are slightly less obvious along familial lines, notwithstanding the constant political presence of Mussolini's grand-daughter.
The US itself has found it hard to shake its tribal inclinations, in which there is to be found comfort, protection, contacts, power and security. How can we pretend to preach abstinence from this, and in many cases certain death, to others?
letsretire:
Every time our pilots went up they were at risk. .. in an area they allowed us to patrol as a condition of us stopping the beating they were receiving
I am without words here.
I wasn't convinced at first, but Gumby's batterer example is correctly invoked.
the American people are sheep and until something effects them directly and painful, they are content to eat their happy meals, download their itunes, watch American idol, and stress about the careers and kids?
Correct. At this point in time, this is exactly correct.
the state of Marsh Arab concern at the time:
QUESTION: I had no idea this was going on in Iraq at the time. I had never even heard of this ecocide before this event. How did the international community allow this to happen? My question is how will the upcoming election affect the redevelopment of the marshes if Bush or Kerry gets elected?
CURTIS RICHARDSON: The last part of the question is very interesting because the United States to this point has only put $4 million into the restoration of the marshes. The Canadians have put in $3 million, the Italians are putting in $10 million, but the USAID program for actual marsh restoration is very limited. Ambassador L. Paul Bremer and others have gone to the marshes, but other needs were considered so great that they have not been given attention.
My personal opinion is that they could have stabilized the small villages of the lower third of Iraq with simple seeds and some aquaculture and some other basic things that probably could have been done for $50 or 100 million dollars to start off. But this was not done.
What will happen it the future I do not know; that's an open question. The program that I am being funded by and the USAID runs out in December, so what will happen then I do not know.
QUESTION: Is it feasible in any way that the marshes could be brought back to where they used to be when Mr. Wheeler photographed them during the 1970s? We also must bear in mind that the marshes are sitting on a reserve of 1 billion barrels of oil, known as Majnun Oil field.
The Marsh Arabs of Iraq: The Legacy of Saddam Hussein and an Agenda for Restoration and Justice
The marshes at this point (2004) had been destroyed for over ten years. Not clear what amount of the population was interested in returning to the previous habitat, even assuming it could have been rehabilitated.
In the meantime, we are willingly pulverizing entire Appalachian mountain chains to get at the 3- or 4-foot-wide coal seams within, and in so doing 'passively' evicting mountain dwellers through pollution and destruction and ruin in our very own country. Spare me the new-found republican/'conservative' eco-social concern...
when innocent people and our troops are not put in harm's way.
