February 27, 2006

Baghdad Burning: Volatile Days. Read up the latest posts from Riverbend , please.
posted by Chyren 18 years ago
  • I have to say that when I read about this four or five days ago, I thought "Civil war, here it is". Sincerely hope I am wrong.
  • Let me put it this way: the people of Iraq don't deserve a civil war; the dickheads running the show in Washington do.
  • the people of Iraq don't deserve a civil war If the Sunnis hate the Shi'a enough to kill them, and vice-versa, then they absolutely deserve a civil war.
  • Define what you mean but "Sunnis" and "Shi'a". Tarring them all with the same brush, are you?
  • " It does not feel like civil war because Sunnis and Shia have been showing solidarity these last few days in a big way. I don’t mean the clerics or the religious zealots or the politicians- but the average person." They don't deserve a civil war after what they have been through.
  • So just how does this guy post to a blog if his power is out and his phone lines are down? Please don't tell me Baghdad is a wifi hot spot...
  • Duh! He goes to StarBucks.
  • Define what you mean but "Sunnis" and "Shi'a". Do you seriously need a definition? If so, try wikipedia. This is sectarian violence, just like we've seen in countless other places around the world. It was given new life by the power vacuum the US created when they ousted Hussein, but it's always been there, and always will be.
  • Do you really need to be told that lumping the whole population of Iraq into two groups, and say that ergo they deserve civil war is simplistic, reductionistic, and dishonest? Perhaps you do, what do I know?
  • Well YOU obviously do skrik, you're the one calling for Civil War USA v.2.0.
  • Well, do me, then. Please!
  • Oh, and COMMA SPLICE!!!
  • In most of these sectarian violence situations, the small minority that actively take up arms and fight are only allowed to do so by the tacit approval of the majority on both sides, while another small minority actively strives for peace. I see no reason to believe why Iraq is any different.
  • What an asshole.
  • > it's always been there, and always will be. this isn't very hopeful. i think history gives us plenty of examples of tolerance breaking out among formerly sectarian enemies.
  • Right, after they finally grow tired of looking at the dead.
  • My point is that anyone whose religion or branch of religion is more important to them than peaceful coexistence with their neighbours deserves the war that results from that skewed thinking. And Chyren, we need to work on your people skills.
  • Don't try to act like you're one of us, you goddam reptilian.
  • "...Chyren, we need to work on your people skills." You first.
  • How 'bout you add something constructive to the thread, and I'll be happy to discuss it civily.
  • I can't wrap my head around "deserve a civil war". What does that mean? Is it supposed to be positive, like "You deserve some ice cream", or negative, like "You deserve to stand in the corner"? The word "deserve" is pretty isomorphic with the word "earned", and I can't figure out what it means to say a group of people earned a civil war.
  • Given that the You Ess is already 250-Billion deep in this, a civil war is probably not mmmmmm ideal. So this is discouraging: Yesterday they were showing Sunni and Shia clerics praying together in a mosque and while it looked encouraging, I couldn’t help but feel angry. Why don’t they simply tell their militias to step down- to stop attacking mosques and husseiniyas- to stop terrorizing people? It’s so deceptive and empty on television- like a peaceful vision from another land. The Iraqi government is pretending dismay, but it's doing nothing to curb the violence and the bloodshed beyond a curfew. And where are the Americans in all of this? They are sitting back and letting things happen- sometimes flying a helicopter here or there- but generally not getting involved. Particularly when they won't even acknowledge anything's going on.
  • RalphTheDog - Riverbend is a woman. Public electricity in Baghdad has been unavailable during large chunks of the day since the invasion, but they do generally have power for some hours each day - and many have generators to take over when the utilities aren't working. Also, note that she indicated that the phones hadn't been working, not that they weren't working when she posted. You ought to read the archives on her blog. Interesting picture of life under the occupation.
  • "add something constructive to the thread, and I'll be happy to discuss it civily.." I have it in my mind that I've read you being a neocon or Republican apologist before. I could be wrong. But you see, I've found that discussion with neocon apologists or Bush supporters is a waste of time, because, and I don't say this lightly, every single Republican Bush supporter I've spoken to has been an idiot. I don't mean that I don't like them because they don't agree with me, I mean that their mental accuity is sub-par. They're usually very uninformed, often ill-educated, but mostly opinionated. I've had the most complex and erudite discussions with such individuals, I've been able to marshal logical, historical and factual rebuttals and counterpoints to most arguments, because literally every position proposed by Bush supporters is either distorted, taken from Repub talking points or Fox News, or just plain wrong. I've found that nothing penetrates the miasma of ignorance and false sense of right-ness these people seem to have. The worst trait they all seem to possess, and I notice a lot of the ones with this problem profess to be Christians, is their severe lack of anything approaching empathy; an inability to relate to anyone outside of their own social network. This profound retardation is possibly a product of lack of experience, insularity or fear, I'm not really sure, but it is the main shared characteristic of these neocon Bush apologists. Somone who can seriously suggest that any country, filled with millions of individuals the majority of which have never partaken of violence at all, 'deserves a civil war', particularly when the civil war is pushed along by that person's own nation due to an illegal invasion, is clearly a person with retarded growth in terms of their humanity and ability to care about other people, people who are different from them. I see no point in having 'civil' discussions with fascists. People who make remarks that 'so & so deserve a civil war' are morons with no grasp of the meaning of what they're saying, no concept of basic humanity or even the remotest grasp of the impact of such a situation on the individual trapped in it. This is emotional retardation. No intellectual discourse can remedy or resolve it.
  • If Rocket88 is a fascist, so am I. If he is a moron, then I am worse.
  • I don't know if he is a fascist or a moron. Those statements just sound like they come from one, perhaps he is having a bad day or is trying social engineering. When someone says something like "if the Sunnis hate the Shi'a enough to kill them... then they absolutely deserve a civil war" then I tend to make assumptions along those lines about them. Maybe he didn't express himself clearly. But when he says "anyone whose religion ... is more important to them than peaceful coexistence with their neighbours deserves the war that results from that skewed thinking" I automatically think of America, and wonder why he didn't see the irony.
  • On the plus side, I'm sure he's Good Christian™.
  • Where do I start? I'm not a neocon nor a Rupublican apologist, nor am I a Christian. There's almost nothing the current US administration has done that I approve of (save maybe the Afghanistan invasion). I'm a centrist...a Bill Clinton Democrat would be the closest label, I guess. Since most political threads here are dominated by views from the far left, I can understand how I could be misconstrued as a righty, especially if one were to see things in black and white terms. I'm also a Canadian, so my own nation is not to blame for unleashing this mess. As for the current situation, as I said before I don't see the 'silent majority' of Iraqis as completely blameless and innocent. They're human beings, and are just as petty, hateful, and intolerant of differences as any others. As long as they continue to see the other side as 'wrong' and 'to blame' and teach those prejudiced views to their children, they will reap the results. They may not 'deserve' the war, but they are part of the problem that is causing it.
  • If the Sunnis hate the Shi'a enough to kill them, and vice-versa, then they absolutely deserve a civil war. I think it assumes a one-to-one relationship that doesn't really exist in the real world, although if the sentiment is "intolerant angry people deserve to shoot each other" then I might agree, although it's one of those "We shouldn't let people inhale paint" kind of arguments. Also keep in mind that the majority of poll respondents disagree with the Iraq invasion . . now . . but it's still a steamroller of corporate media allowing this corrupt administration to do . .. well, pretty much everything they're doing.
  • Oh fuck, Monkeyfilter has just devolved into Metafilter. Almost.
  • Seems to me that Sunni vs. Shi'a is only part of the issue. The Healing Iraq blogger posted a fascinating 4-part history of tribal influences on the Iraqis (scroll down to June 10 for part 1.) The Sunni and Shi'a factions apparently originated from competing tribes, and the tribal values of "loyalty (to one's tribe), militancy, and honour" seem to me to be influential in the current conflicts. His description of the first two goes a long way in explaining the unforgiving nature of the schism: "Just as each tribesman expects the whole tribe to protect him and guarantee his rights at time of need, the tribe also expects unequivocal support from each tribesman. It's a symbiotic relation. This complex also includes values such as Sheikhdom, tribal superiority, blood feuds, etc. Secondly, the individual tribesman in order to achieve a higher status and personal glory among his peers is expected to demonstrate great courage and valiance in battles, should be a gallant chivalrous warrior, and the larger the booty he gains from battle the greater he is respected within the tribe. Tribal society despises the cowardly and weak, they also despise craftsmen because they don't live by the sword." He also says: "Iraqis therefore have been conditioned (for centuries) by this ongoing 'clash of cultures' to follow two different (and often antithetical) sets of social values; urban values derived from their own ways of life and history as the cradle of civilisation, and tribal values imposed upon them by the Bedouin influence. Urban Iraqis cannot remain totally unaffected by the spread of tribal values and eventually they have to pick up from them in order to defend themselves and adapt to their new environment, the newly settled tribes on the other hand cannot indefinately retain their Bedouin culture which was only suitable for desert life and have to reshape it in order to coexist with the original inhabitants. This has resulted in a form of duality or 'cultural ambivalence' in the Iraqi personality which is easily recognised by Westerners and they may therefore incorrectly describe Iraqis as being 'two-faced', when in fact Iraqis are unaware of their inconsistent behaviour and have had no choice in it. This duality is also evident on different scales in other Arab countries such as Syria, Palestine, Libya, Algeria, and to a lesser extent in Egypt."
  • Erm, can you paraphrase that for us slow types? . . wow, there's a fascism scale.
  • That was the executive summary. But the Hatfield & McCoy feud is as close as I can get in US terms.
  • sorry, that was for the pdf file Nomen Nescio posted.
  • I fail to understand how quid's being a fascist or a moron is dependent upon rocket's being a fascist or a moron. I think that quid is a fascist and a moron independent of rocket altogether.
  • I think the USA does deserve a civil war, for precisely those reasons. And I won't be sorry for a second if we get it. Every person in this country has the opportunity not to be an idiot, but by and large they are self-centered, non-voting, amoral, television swilling subhumans. While I will feel sorry for myself, and everyone like me who tries to be informed and semi-active, we didn't do enough, we allowed ourselves to be complacent against stupidity and unethical behavior, hoping that some other check would finally come into play, and we deserve what we get. We should have marched on Washington, stormed the halls of congress when they were voting on the War Powers bill, demanded the public review of all the intelligence information that contradicted the party line but "would jeapordize national security". Now its too late. In fact, we all deserve what we are going to get. Our congressmen are corrupt and inept, our President is a neanderthal who practices cowboy diplomacy, and we can't even secure our borders against itinerants, let alone people who mean us harm. I am all out of outrage and sympathy for my countrymen, and all I feel for the Iraqi's is that its tragic, and its our fault, but they need to be better than us. We deserve whatever they inflict on us after this, for propping up Hussein when he came to power, to demolishing their country when we decided he wasn't in our best interest any more. The chickens will come home to roost? Recession and our currency worthless? Deserved and brought about by our own shortsighted actions. Military actions against us? Yeah, we've committed an illegal act of war and will probably do so again. Nobody HERE is innocent. About the only people I can see as innocent are the Iraqi's who never had the opportunity to be involved in self-rule. We did. And we botched it up. The only thing that will make me happy now is seeing Bush, Cheney, Rice, Powell and Rumsfeld tried and convicted for war-crimes. Hell, I used to be center-left, now I sound like some far-left radical. No worse than the neo-cons I suppose.
  • "I'm not a neocon ... nor am I a Christian...I'm also a Canadian" Well, you have my unreserved apologies, then. Canadians are the salt of the earth and never are fascists. "...Since most political threads here are dominated by views from the far left, I can understand how I could be misconstrued as a righty, especially if one were to see things in black and white terms." Yeah. I can think of nothing more black & white than the line about the Sunni and Shia blah blah deserve a civil war, though. It also occurs to me that seeing the discussions here as 'dominated by views from the far left' is itself a rather black & white viewpoint. I have never seen discussions here in those terms, rather more in terms of sensible/not sensible. The first step in undermining another person's viewpoint is to pigeonhole them in one particular camp, which I think is a big mistake, then you get into partisan bickering. Unless that's what one wants. Look, quidnunc (appears to have) spoken up for you, so you must love elephants and be a Jolly Decent Sort Of A Chap. But here's a little free advice to you, you might like to avoid saying things like "so & so deserve a civil war" in the middle of a serious conversation, unless you want to sound like a bit of a bastard.
  • I think that quid is a fascist and a moron independent of rocket altogether. Oh, bernockle! How simple you are - how like a tiny little child, who goes running to his and/or her parents to say something delightfully, innocently childish - and yet, at the same time, so somethnig incredibly stupid that you just want to bite the aforementioned child on the face and give it rabies! No, I'm afraid that I decided a long time ago to forgo independent thought altogether, and allow market forces to guide my thinking. To that end, I've arranged through a fairly complex scheme to tie my opinions to rocket88's: every one of rocket's thoughts is now convertible to 0.768 of mine. This means that you have to wait for rocket88 to write two and one-half full paragraphs before you can
  • quidnunc (appears to have) spoken up for you, so you must love elephants and be a Jolly Decent Sort Of A Chap I just don't believe that people whom, through their commentary on this site, I like and respect, namely yourself and rocket88, have opinions so vastly different as to make all dialogue impossible. Furthermore he, thee and me have been criticised in the past and present for one specific line or another; none of us would assume that one single formula of words is enough to make a person deserving of anyone's undying contempt.
  • I have sex with puppies.
  • DIE NAZI DIE
  • "...none of us would assume that one single formula of words is enough to make a person deserving of anyone's undying contempt." Oh, no. Not undying. It would only last for a little while.
  • Sure, my first comment in this thread was short and without explanation. Could it be interpreted as being anti-Muslim? Possibly, but it wasn't meant that way. (Some of my best friends...blah blah blah) That being said...just because the US are the "bad guys" in this conflict doesn't make all, (or even most) Iraqis "the good guys". Different groups really hate each other over there, and, moreso than is done in my part of the world, tend to express that hatred by blowing each other up. This civil war was inevitable. The US unleashed it by getting rid of the one guy who, through his brutality, was able to suppress it. And I have it on good authority that quid concurs.
  • Oh he does more than concur, you know that. But you don't see me going on and on about it.
  • And I'm pretty sure Chyren and I agree on many more things than we disagree. He's on my list of MILMs (Monkey's I'd Like to Meet). We could get drunk & stoned, put on some Zappa records, and talk about what a moron that quidnunc fellow is.
  • Good not turning into metafilter then. Phew
  • So . . . about this civil war - what defines it as such? Is it just that the term shows up in news reports? Can't you just hear Rummy's brain trying to crunch out some administration-friendly phrase for the fighting?
  • Hey, seriously, can someone explain what deserving a civil war means? I'm not joking, it doesn't make any sense. "hey man, we want a civil war." "no way, eh! you don't deserve it!" "what about us, can we have a civil war?" "alright, you guys deserve it. you can have a civil war." Honestly, I cannot find what information is being conveyed by saying they deserve a civil war, or by saying they don't. Other people obviously have, because feathers have gotten ruffled. But I cannot glom anything from it. (and since when do people not know rocket88? He's one of the known personalities. Who are you going to fail to recognize next? Fes? quidnunc? Nostrildamus?)
  • I meant deserve as in the 'reap what you sow' and 'people get the government they deserve' meaning.
  • Yeah, me too. And for the record, I did not say that the US as a whole (some of my best friends... if I had any friends) deserves a civil war.
  • iraq demographics, from the cia world factbook: Population: 26,074,906 (July 2005 est.) Age structure: 0-14 years: 40% (male 5,293,709/female 5,130,826) 15-64 years: 57% (male 7,530,619/female 7,338,109) 65 years and over: 3% (male 367,832/female 413,811) (2005 est.) Ethnic groups: Arab 75%-80%, Kurdish 15%-20%, Turkoman, Assyrian or other 5% Religions: Muslim 97% (Shi'a 60%-65%, Sunni 32%-37%), Christian or other 3% now, who exactly deserves the civil war? who is reaping what they have sowed?
  • and talk about what a moron that quidnunc fellow is. posted by rocket88 at 08:14PM UTC on February 27, 2006 Not to belabor the point, but why does everyone always forget the quid is a fascist, too? Sure, he wears his imbecility on his sleeve, but the man is a known fascist!
  • Playa Hatas.
  • I still don't get it. If I said: Man, Brazil deserves to have a prison built. what would that mean? That I think they're good at law enforcement, so they need a prison built? That they're criminals, so they need a prison built? That their economy is bad, so they deserve an economic boost by having a prison built? That their current prison is delapidated, and they need a new one? The statement by itself makes no sense, even in a "get what they deserve" sense. It can be positive, negative, neutral, racist, sensitive, whatever. You need to already know exactly where your are coming from to get where you are coming from. Similarily, saying they "deserve a civil war" makes no sense. or rather, it makes any sense you project on to it, it just doesn't contain any sense. It could be positive, negative, neutral, racist, sensative, whatever. What are the specific actions you are focusing on when you say they have sowed a civil war? What is the specific benefit or detriment from a civil war that they should reap?
  • Alls I know is that I totally deserve a giant glass of rum. That really is a fascinating blog, Chyren. Lots to absorb. Thanks for the link!
  • Skrik deserves a definition. Quid deserves a box of commas. Petebest deserves a paraphrase and new pants. Mord (and the free world) deserves to see Bush, Cheney, Rice, Powell and Rumsfeld tried and convicted for war-crimes. MCT doesn't deserve to own a dog. RandomAction deserves to be able to relax when he reads a post. Mr. Knickerbocker deserves to have specific answers to specific questions. Chryren deserves a new post and some r-e-s-p-e-c-t. No one deserves a war, civil or un. MonkeyFilter: "We shouldn't let people inhale paint" MonkeyFilter: enough to make a person deserving of anyone's undying contempt D@mmit! I deserve better taglines than these.
  • The thing about civil wars is, they involve everybody in a country, even the people who don't deserve it. If 50% of Religion/Ethnicity X pick a fight with 50% of Religion/Ethnicity Y, who retaliate, what happens to the 50% of the population who were just minding their business? They sure as heck didn't do anything to deserve the civil war, but how are they going to avoid getting wrapped up in it?
  • Hey, why don't I deserve my dam Rum?
  • 'cause I already had it.
  • so, who exactly is this tracicle guy?
  • To venture a positive note, from what I have read today it seems Iraqis at the more powerful levels are trying to quell this. May be false hope, but I tend to agree with the apparent American position to stay out of the way and let things fall where they may. Obviously, this uprising wasn't anticipated. What's new? Things could blow up again tomorrow.
  • so, who exactly is this tracicle guy? Over here, sippin' on gin and juice.
  • When the avalanche has started its too late for the pebbles to vote. /Kosh
  • Obviously, this uprising wasn't anticipated. Wait, was that ironic? It's so hard to tell these days.
  • Not to belabor the point, but why does everyone always forget the quid is a fascist, too? Normal fascists woulda had Simon Wiesenthal bugging them. I get Captain Bird-Jizz here. No respect, I tells ya. No respect.
  • How dare you venture a positive note? Oh, wait - positive notes are good. Nevermind.
  • It's not looking as good as I initially thought. I really hope they can keep it together. Oh, well, democracy at gun-point. Please sir, may I have some more?
  • mmmmmmwhat?
  • "It's not looking as good as I initially thought." Well, that's a surprise.
  • OK, I guess I'm not on the guest list. I stupidly thought we were trying to do something worthwhile. It's a swamp, so what now? What do you strategists recommend? Thought not.
  • H-Dawg -- genuinely shocking article.
  • Fighting displaces tens of thousands, mostly women and children.
  • *tries, and fails, to recall just how long the US kept calling the Korean War a 'police action'*
  • wasn't it "always"? . . . /dumb
  • Thanks, h-dogg, I was wondering when she'd be posting again.
  • Gunmen kidnap 10-20 people in the middle of the fucking day at a shopping mall. Victory? Defeat? Hey asshole, you're NOT PAYING ATTENTION. (George W. that is, not you, obv.) Goddamn that's some fucked up shit going on. Great work, Sean Hannity! You're a fuckin' genius! Rush Limbaugh, and all the professors down at FOX News, that's a fine buncha work you've pooped out there! IDIOTS.
  • The next six months will be crucial!!!!!
  • > She's leaving home... Just saw that, EdArzakh. What a terrible terrible thing.
  • *sigh*
  • What a horribly depressing entry. It's far more gloomy than the dark clouds lingering past the windows atop my safe haven here on the 50th floor...
  • Man, if I wasn't depressed before I am now. As if we needed another argument showing how bringing religion into civil discourse can cause nothing but trouble...
  • What Shall We Talk About, You and I? Warning: this is even more depressing.
  • Great news. I was just about to post that.
  • Good news, indeed. I would often check back on her page and wonder if there would be a future entry or not...