GoFuckYourself.com - Adult Webmaster Forum - View Single Post - US helicopter opened fire on civilian crowd

theking · 09-12-2004, 11:19 PM

Quote:

Originally posted by rickholio
I can't help but think that the US has done to itself in Iraq what Bin Laden wanted to do to it in Afghanistan.

A crash-course for those of you who don't know what bin Laden's game is...

bin Laden's overarching goal is the re-unification of the muslim world. Back in the day (around the turn of the last millenium), the moorish caliphate stretched from what are now portugal to india. Moorish society represented the pinnacle of culture, science and trade, and was very tolerant of other religions (jew, christian, muslim and hindi lived together with relative peace). It was to muslims a golden age of enlightenment, and certainly something desirous to return to.

To simplify, various things happened to this empire (as do happen to all empires) and the caliphate degenerated until the 1800/1900s where it was finally conquered and dismantled by european interests (france taking algeria, england in iraq, etc) which for a great deal of time broke the spirit of muslims by keeping them separated and fractuous, playing nationalist interests against religous. Yet every good muslim remembers the good old days when they were on top, and quite a number I suspect still yearn for a return to that golden age.

Enter bin Laden and the Mujahedeen, fighting against the latest incarnation of over 200 years of 'crusades'... but this time it was different, this time the muslim didn't fight valiantly and lose... it fought valiantly AND WON. Against a superpower. Muslims, by means of bin Laden and "the foundation of the jihad" (al-Qaeda al-Jihadi), realized that they were not a permanently conquered people.

Now, say you're a muslim extremist in 1988 with grand plans of ressurecting the caliphate. There's a number of factors in the way of reunification... not the least of which that a number of muslim live in rather secular countries now (iraq, jordan, syria etc), or are controlled by corrupt governments which are beholden to non-muslims (eygpt, saud, UAE etc). So, you start sending some of your most trusted comrades-in-arms these countries, hopefully with the help and backing of local people who agree with your point of view, and forment uprisings or aid resistance groups... like, say, trying to waylay the egyptian head of state while he's driving around ethiopia.

This goes on for a few years and the mujahedeen (now starting to be known tenatively as 'al-Qaeda' after the list of names of the mujahedeen members) doesn't gain a lot of traction. At the same time israel becomes more and more of a thorn in the collective muslim side. bin Laden's no dummy, he knows that the reason egypt, saudi arabia, israel and so on can supress uprisings effeciently is due to massive foreign subsidies by the "far enemy", the US.

So he takes a gamble, sends a few guys over and they make a very public show of force, hoping that the yanks will tuck tail and run. This, of course, didn't happen... but that was anticipated. bin Laden's back-up plan was to bog down american forces in a long scale guerilla war much like they successfully fought with Russia... however, miscalculating americans deep fear of actual combat, he was outmanoevered when the US opted for a tactic of air superiority and subverting northern warlords to do all the dirty work. If it remained there, it could be said today that the afghanistan war was a successful campaign which broke the back of the mujahedeen and quashed the dream of reunification for now.

Except, of course, it DIDN'T remain there. In a move that must have seemed to bin Laden as though Mohammed himself put the peices into place, not one, but TWO massive opportunities presented themselves in Iraq.

One, the brutally effective secular government of Saddam Hussein was overthrown, and Ali Sistani and Moqtada al-Sadr have risen to prominence as local heirophants. Both are Ayatollahs, both command a great deal of respect and loyalty amongst iraqis and other muslims, and neither of them are playing ball with the current puppet regime or the americans. With this stroke of unmitigated good fortune, the chances of an islamic revolution in Iraq are high. He must have giggled like a mental patient when he heard about it.

Two, the americans bogged themselves down into the ugly guerilla war that bin Laden was seeking in afghanistan. While not 100% optimal for his purposes, it serves as an outstanding showcase for his message: The west will kill your children and rape your women, they want you all dead, if you don't rise up to defend yourselves you'll be slaves forever and you CAN rise up AND WIN... remember Afghanistan. The message is obviously getting out, and has been rather effective. Additionally, the US has had to commit billions of dollars and thousands of lives, and face growing ostricizism from the rest of the world for its unilateral stance.

Which brings us to today, with the US embedded into a war that will be very difficult to 'win'. The irony of the situation is that removing the secular baathist government has made it far more likely that islamic revolution will win the public's support there than democracy, thus making the whole area even LESS west-friendly, and at high costs of diplomatic capital, treasure and lives.

In short, people should think carefully about what they break. You never know what's going to end up replacing it... and in that part of the world, it's got a habit of being uglier than what was there to begin with.

Interesting post...but I do not agree with some of your conclusions. To my thinking the US invasion of Iraq was a forward thinking extention on the war against "terrorism". Out side of the fact that Iraq is strategically located to confront other potential enemy nations in the AO...it is an effort to develop a Democratic Republic in the midst of the mid east and create a "jewel"...if you will...in the mid east...in an effort to change the face of the mid east over the next several decades.

From the beginning I have had doubts that our mission will be successful...because from the beginning I opined that it would take a minimum of a decade and probably several to develop a stable Democracy in Iraq...and if history repeats itself the American people will do what they did during the Vietnam era and take to the streets in mass demanding the withdrawal of our military forces...before the mission is accomplished. I suspect this scenario will ultimately be the case.

I blame the politicians for micro managing our military...much as they did during the Vietnam conflict. If they would simply step aside and allow our military to do their job...as it should be done...in the short run there would be a large number of Iraq's killed...but in the long run...this act would save Iraqi lives...as it would shorten the conflict and a reasonably secure Iraq would be the result. In addition...it would prolong the American people taking to the streets...demanding the withdrawal of our forces...which in turn would provide more time to accomplish the ultimate mission...which is to establish a reasonably stable Democratic Republic in Iraq.

I am a supporter of the effort...but I am becoming more and more frustrated with our politicians micro management of the military. This was a major problem during the Vietnam conflict and is becoming more and more of a problem in the current conflict.