.comment-link {margin-left:.6em;}

Cry Me A Riverbend II

Thursday, December 30, 2004

My Discussion Over At "Calling It Like Is"

Abbas Kadhim is an Iraqi Berkley doctoral candidate in the department of Near Eastern Studies.

I recall or have inferred that he is (at least by heritage) a Shia Muslim. He's no fan of President Bush's, but despite what you may gather from our current discussion, it is not really easy to tell from his blog what he thinks about about the MNF's deposing of Saddam. Maybe he's as confused as I am.

Anyway, Abbas has referenced an article, here, from "The Guardian" columnist, Naomi Klein, who (like Khalid Jarrar) believes elections will provoke a civil war. She also says that the MNF should get out immediately, and (by the way) pay reparations to the Iraqis.

(And after the REAL civil war is over, who shall we make the check out to? A re-installed Saddam? Zarqawi? Some Islamofacist beast who -- as the Taliban did -- turns men over to the torturers for trimming their beards and outlaws birds from the market because they sing?)

This idea that elections will be the cause of a civil war is an interesting new angle for the Unrealists. It is sort of akin to the one that says the troops that deposed Saddam and allowed Shiya to freely practice their faith are a provocation to the Saddamist dead-enders (like Khalid) and Saddam-wanna-be's like Muqtada al-Sadir (well of course they are!)

Abbas says:

I never liked Saddam and even fought against him, but here and important point you need to remember: Saddam gave the UN hundreds of thousands of documents, even when he was given an impossible deadline. The U.S. government dismissed what he provided, just hours after he produced it. They even did not wait until someone looked at it.That is why the rest of the world did not want to side with President Bush. He wanted war no matter what. He was wrong, and this is the genesis of today's catastrophe.

The truth is while I really like Abbas' blog and his writing, I'm getting very weary of this tact "I hated Saddam but I'm indignant at how he was mistreated by Dubya in the run-up to the war". There's something about it I just find hard to buy-off on. I might be more patient of it coming from a reasonable voice like Abbas' if I had not heard it ad nausem from maniacs like Raed and Khalid Jarrar.

Anyway, our discussion in in the comments section. Check it out.

The following is what I've asked Shirin in the comments section. Any Unrealist may consider it an open letter himself/herself:

I don't know what to say to you Shirin. You say Iraq is occupied, so the MNF is holding elections. You say the elections are not free without third-party monitoring. There are third-parties monitoring them but the UN won't because they don't think it's "safe". Of course, MNF and Iraqis are no less safe than the UN would be. So what do you want?

You have implied that there is no Zarqawi, that there are no Arabs that did well under Saddam and would like his regime returned. Then who are they and what would placate them?

Do you want the MNF to leave right away? You seem to be denying that you believe there will be no civil war if that happens, so what do want?

I can't decide whether you live in fairlyland or an endless conspiracy theory but if you ever make it to reality you're welcome to bunk at my house.

Quit hiding behind snide sarcasm (a common stance of the Unrealists) and come out and say what you want to see happen in Iraq. Just come out and say it.

Forget about whining about how Saddam was screwed because I'm not going to cry over Saddam or any of his cronies or supporters (dead or alive).

This is today. January 1st, 2005. What do you think should happen?


This is the answer Shirin gave:

Like the overwhelming majority of Iraqis I want the American occupation of Iraq to end, and the sooner the better. I want them to get out of Iraq lock, stock, barrel, bombs, tanks and helicopters. I want them to take their imported "Iraqis" with them. I want them to pay reparations for what they have done to Iraq

Now Shirin had previously accused me of misconstruing meaning of his words so I responded:

Great! Now I know. Now there's no danger of misconstuing your intentions. You want civil war. Great idea. So much better than elections.You also believe that the Iraqis who fled Iraq from Saddam Hussein should be sent into permanent exile.Let's get on to those reparations. Who should we cut the check to? The current government? Or to one of the two dozen warlords who will be in power two weeks from now? Maybe should release Saddam, Chemical Ali, Dr. Germ, and Dr. Anthrax from from their cells and give the checks to them.

How about the Kurds? Why don't we split the money between Turkey, Iran, Syria, and Saudia Arabia since those powers will definitely be moving into the country as the only way to secure their borders and prevent chaocracy from developing next to them.Maybe we could cut the checks separately to each Iraqi....hmmm...of course we can save money by holding off a year since about a third of them will be dead by that time.

Pick one of these or choose your own method. Don't bother posting that I'm misrepresenting you because I'm not representing you at all. I would really like to know how you expect things to play out after the MNF leaves.

Shirin's response was:

What do you think you accomplish with these kinds of games? Do you really think this is a good argument technique? Well, it isn't. What it is is a good way to bring a discussion to a screeching halt.If you are going to play these kinds of games, I am finished with you.

It always ends this way. When I plumb for details the Unrealists either go silent or get snippy and then dance some more. Shirin got snippy and then went silent.

But I'm still seeking answers to these questions so any Unrealists who would like to take a better shot at this than Shirin are urged to enter their comments here.


  • Hey,

    When are you going to learn you can't argue with idiots.

    In the meantime, read this from my favorite writer,author,thinker.

    Victor Hanson

    This is my post

    Papa Ray
    West Texas

    By Blogger Papa Ray, at 7:48 AM  

  • "This is my post"

    Speaking man to man, 'Nice post!'

    I can't help it Papa Ray. If I gave up, I would...um...give up.

    Thanks for the link to that article. Not all poltical liberals are stuck in 35 year-old thought patterns. Christopher Hitchens and George Packer come immediately to mind as leftists who back the liberation of Iraq because they believe **it is the liberal thing to do!**

    Hanson doesn't come out and say so, but it seems to me that knee-jerk anti-Yankeeism is the primary (perhaps sole) engine for current mainstream liberal thinking.

    And as for the Europeans...I direct you to this article.

    By Blogger CMAR II, at 11:19 AM  

Post a Comment

Links to this post:

Create a Link

<< Home