Democracy in Iraq

Posted By Grim

I want to bring your attention to something remarkable that General Bergner said in this week's roundtable with him (transcript here).  The whole thing is worth reading, and touches on military operations, Iran, and numerous other topics.  What I asked him about, however, was reconciliation.  We know from Dr. Kilcullen and others that the Surge is mainly a military plan to buy space for political progress.  It's been noted that the Iraqi central government has been on vacation, and we've talked about whether that is a sign of no progress, or a necessary space for some backchannel arguments.  What signs of progress, I asked, has General Bergner seen?

GEN. BERGNER:  Well, we have seen steady developments at the local level. And if you just went back over the last four weeks and kind of walked around west and northern areas of Baghdad, you would find that in Ramadi, they completed the Ramadi Covenant, which was a tribal-led but government-of-Iraq-involved and coalition -- or security-force-involved commitment to stop the violence and to work together. In Taji, about three weeks ago the sheikhs of Taji got together. They all signed a map, put their name next to the town that they represent. In Khalis, northwest of Baghdad, a similar commitment, I think by some 16 sheikhs representing 70-some others. And then in Baqubah, we've talked before about the tribal sheikhs and the provincial government and their security forces having reached some agreements on how they're going to work together and stop the violence.

So I could take you through Baghdad, as well. We've seen similar -- similar arrangements being grouped together in Amiriyah. We see similar ones in Ghazalia. The Ghazalia volunteers are now part of this local security force that's working with Iraqi and coalition forces. And then if I took you to south of Baghdad, in General Rick Lynch's area of operations in MND-Center, I could show you different groupings of 100 here, 400 there, where different individuals from the community have stepped forward and said, we want to stop help the violence, we want to work toward some sort of accommodation.

So there is a steady development at the local level as security improves and people feel like they can step forward and take that on. So we are encouraged by that. And you know overall in Anbar what that -- how that has profoundly changed. We've talked about that several times. And that's probably the most striking example of a place which just eight or 10 months ago nobody could have foreseen the change there. So, lots of momentum.

Much of it is enabled by the tactical momentum that the surge of operations is providing. But again, much work still to do. Still some very difficult ways ahead.

GRIM: I'd like to ask a quick follow-up about that. Under Saddam and, you know, for what amounts to living memory in Iraq, Iraq has been kind of a top-down society where the central government set the tone. What you're talking about is a lot of local efforts that are going to be kind of brought to bear -- I don't want to say against central government, but on the central government. Do you think that the nature of Iraqi society is changing in this regard, that it's becoming more of a bottom-up society, a locally driven society?

GEN. BERGNER: You know, that's a very good question, it's an interesting one, because on one level, it has been a centrally governed country, without question, but in this country the tribe, the family have always been the most powerful bond that the Iraqi people have felt. And so you have kind of a duality of centrally directed but, if you ask the people who they trust and who they want to work with, it's at the family, tribal and community level. So both of those exist and both of them are very real parts of the nature of Iraqi society.

What I hope you got a sense of in my initial comments was both of those are working, and if you looked at Baqubah as a pretty vivid example, that's a place where the local tribes and security forces are coming to these kinds of arrangements. And once they've gotten to that point, the Iraqi government, the central government, is coming in to connect and figure out so how do we provide this public distribution support that you need, because, as you said, that is a centrally directed food distribution program; how do we help improve the availability of fuel, because, as you said, that is a centrally controlled fuel distribution system still. So both of those are at work here, and that's really why it's so important to get them connected because you really need -- you need that confidence at the local level being reinforced and supported. They need to know their central government is going to actually do something for them.

What the general points to here are local, often tribal attempts to urge the central government in the direction of reconciliation, and to commit to reconciliation in their own areas.  This is what we would call a grassroots movement, if we saw it in America.  Such movements, properly organized, can become powerful even against entrenched interests willing to use violence against them -- we can look at the start of unions in America, for example.

If that proves to be the case, a grassroots movement of this type would provide very strong and stable foundation for a national political reconciliation.  It is, obviously, too soon to assert that is what will happen; but it is soon enough to notice that there is movement in that direction, in many areas across Iraq.

Things are changing in Iraq.  We're seeing the first waves of the gravity well we're building there, a well whose pull extends far beyond the borders of Iraq itself.  It's already strong enough to begin to exert its pull on the United Nations, which is suddenly willing to hedge its bets on success; and Sens. Durbin and Levin, who want to hedge theirs.  I'll say they are all welcome to do so.  If we can ask political reconciliation of the Iraqis, we can ask it of ourselves.  Anyone who wants to join us now in trying to help build success in Iraq, and stand against those who fight by murder and war crimes, is welcome aboard.  I don't care why they come, what their motives are, so long as they are willing to join the fight.

What we are seeing out of the Surge is a hint that success is possible -- including the least likely form of success, the kind many even on the right wrote off:  a democratic sea change in Iraqi society.  Watching the local communities and tribes start to bring about the reality they want, leading rather than following the central government, is inspiring. 

I hope it is not intoxicating.  I'm aware of my own biases, that I strongly desire to see the Iraqis pass through the fire to find a new hope and better life.  It's important to remember that these are early indications, reasons to hope and things to watch.  But they are there, all the same.

TrackBack

TrackBack URL for this entry:
http://www.typepad.com/t/trackback/2819/20711032

Listed below are links to weblogs that reference Democracy in Iraq:

» Iraq From the Bottom Up: from Pajamas Media
BG Kevin Bergner describes how the Surge is being accompanied by the organizations of grassroots governance structures which, if not the familiar form of democracy, are nevertheless intended to go halfway towards reaching out to the central government.... [Read More]

Comments

[jordan]

Haditha charges dropped, Dems saying we're winning. All this positive news is kind of disorienting. Sen. Bob Casey even sees something approximating military victory in areas where insurgents have been eradicated and locals are pulling themselves together to negotiate and govern. I'm stunned.

After months and months of being trashed as losers, can soldiers now believe that real-grown ups have taken charge of the Democrat playground -- people who just remembered politics should stop at the water's edge?

Hopefully, these representatives realize it is partly their stances and comments that have opened the door to all the badmouthing and negative coverage of the military the past couple of years. Maybe they suddenly woke up and forsee a Democrat administration later needing to rely on the armed forces, and don't want there to be bitter memories of treachery and betrayal getting in the way.

[rgrmom82]

"forsee a Democrat administration later needing to rely on the armed forces, and don't want there to be bitter memories of treachery and betrayal getting in the way".

Posted by: jordan | August 09, 2007 at 01:30 PM

Good luck with that. It's not a democracy till the Mullahs stop treating their women like dogs and every one gets a vote. Take away people's choices and they get mean in a hurry.

Dems will never stop bad mouthing anything in uniform till some jihadi creeps up on them in the middle of the night. Because their sooooo above all "nnthat".

[rgrmom82]

Besides who said Iraq has to have a democracy? I could care less what political system they end up with as long as they stop breeding terrorists.

[Grim]

It isn't our style of democracy without women having basic rights and so forth, but it is an old style of democracy. We speak of ancient Athens, for example, as being "radically democratic" at times during the Classical period; but they had no rights for women, slaves, or foreigners.

These are democratic changes, whether or not they lead to a Western-style democracy. I'm not interested in turning Iraq into, say, Ohio; but I would like to see a democratic Iraq. It's not the main thing, it's certainly not the only thing, but it would be a good thing.

[Soldier's Mom]

Grim:

Thanks for always giving me some truth to read instead of the trash put out by the MSM. As for the democracy -- even our style of democracy wasn't like it is now when it started. Women didn't have rights when we formed this country -- neither did my ancestors, the Native Americans, but giving them a democratic government that is stable would certainly be a huge step in the right direction.

[liyak]

Politics=killing,after all!History is filled with it.

[Lands’nGrooves]

rgrmom82,

“Besides who said Iraq has to have a democracy? I could care less what political system they end up with as long as they stop breeding terrorists.”

You mean besides Pres. Bush, Condi Rice, Rumsfield, Tony Blair, Etc. I happen to agree with them. The overwhelming majority of terrorist are from countries that are other than democratic.

~

liyak,

Breast milk leads to heroin addiction using your logic.

[jordan]

I see what you're saying Grim, and hope it comes about, but have to agree with rgrmom on that point - democracy, autocracy, dictatorship, whatever. As long as they're not a safe haven for terrorists and civic and economic life can continue as normal. Iraq should be able to carve out a place for itself among the community of nations, and be viewed by the U.S. much the same as we view Egypt or Jordan.

The Iraqi Constitution made accomodations for women, and women representatives, but that doesn't seem to match up with their social and tribal culture. The grassroots movement in local governance is heartening, and maybe that mindset (this is our baby, we have to take charge) will filter up. The courage is indeed at the grassroots level, as evidenced by Michael Yon's piece on the mayor of Baquba standing up to the officials in Baghdad.

It's often reported from the locals that they get nothing from the central government, or they're promised funds but never receive them. Is there a U.S. effort to pressure the Iraqi government to use it's own funds to finance it's own reconstruction?

Is the central government actually moving ahead on governing and administering the country, i.e., with a capable civil service, taxation, computer systems and networks, etc...? In order to get the localities and villages to start seeing the Baghdad government as their "friend", the government has to start acting like one.

[Grim]

"Is there a U.S. effort to pressure the Iraqi government to use it's own funds to finance it's own reconstruction?"

Yes, that's something that I hear from military officials at the Roundtables from time to time. They're keenly interested in the Iraqi central government's disbursement of funds to localities, and to supporting projects in the field.

It's also true that the central government has lagged in this regard. It's something that our people, both military and civilian, are interested in and trying to help fix.

[Arch]

What is a Liyak?

a. Small Inuit vessel propelled with a double blade paddle,
b. Long haired, humped back bovine (Bos Grunniens) predisposed to mendacity
c. Deciduous flowering member of the olive family (Syringa Vulgaris)
d. Semi-literate poster (Trollus Vulgaris) whose punctuation "up with which I will not put." (My apologies to Sir Winston Churchill.)

[Lands’nGrooves]

OK, let me go about this way. What countries do the majority of terrorist come from AND what are their corresponding types of governments? Does anyone NOT believe that democracy equals no/less terrorism?

It’s disheartening to hear people just throw their hands up and declare that they don’t care if Iraq is a democracy as long if… A democratic Iraq is just one battle in the long war and is to be the beginning of stability for that region, i.e. extinguish the causes of terrorism. I don’t see how one can separate Iraqi democracy from the overall goal of making the ME less of a breeding ground for violent Islamic fanaticism. Conversely, is it not obvious the types of governments and the countries were terrorism flourishes?

Late.

Tim

[Rich Casebolt]

I have to come down on the side of LnG on this one.

Settling for stability was what we tried in the last century, supporting strongmen and/or proxies against those determined to be our enemies.

Been there, done that ... isn't enough.

We are now in the early hours of this struggle between tyranny and freedom. Amid the violence, some question whether the people of the Middle East want their freedom, and whether the forces of moderation can prevail. For 60 years, these doubts guided our policies in the Middle East. And then, on a bright September morning, it became clear that the calm we saw in the Middle East was only a mirage. Years of pursuing stability to promote peace had left us with neither. So we changed our policies, and committed America's influence in the world to advancing freedom and democracy as the great alternatives to repression and radicalism.

... President Bush, 11 September 2006 (with emphasis added)

However, it is more than just democracy ...

... it is rights-respecting governance that must be established in nations like Iraq, to end their dysfunction.

While that governance may not at first ... or ever ... look exactly like the governance we live within, to be sustainable IMO it must have or develop the following attributes:

> Representation chosen by the people (the democracy part).

> Structural protections of the rights to life, liberty, and the pursuit of happiness; i.e. individual freedom ... including the protection of free enterprise to work, both in concert with, and independently of, the central control structures (to replace the people's despair with a sustained hope for their futures).

> Checks and balances that inhibit either a totalitarian few, or mob rule, to hijack the government and dismantle the characteristics listed earlier (the most significant attribute when it comes to preventing Gulf War III).

> A governance that, while respectfully acknowledging the influence of Islam in the society, encourages the replacement of blind obedience to clerics with the acceptance by individuals of BOTH their authority and responsibility before God and their nation, to act in accordance with their own conscience and understanding of what they believe in (to prevent the clerics from hijacking the people, and using them to hijack the nation to institute totalitarian rule).

Anything less than the above, IMO, and -- sooner or later -- we'll be sending another generation's sheepdogs back there to clean it up.

I'd really like, if we can, to avoid that ...

Let us stand up
Let us stand strong
So that not so many folded colors
Have to pass from the hands of a grateful nation
To a young wife, or to a mother
Let's reserve the flags to cover our brave people with honor
When elderly and weathered
They pass from our grateful nation to rejoin their mothers
And fight no more forever

[dianainsa]

Arch, I am torn between (b) and (d).
p.s. I think I love you!

[exhelodrvr]

rgrmom82,
"It's not a democracy till the Mullahs stop treating their women like dogs and every one gets a vote."

Those are separate issues.

[chiropetra]

"Does anyone NOT believe
that democracy equals
no/less terrorism?"

Bader-Meinhof, Japanese Red Army, Weathermen, SLA, etc., Arum, etc., etc.

We need to separate our knee-jerk responses from the realities.

We need to recognize that there's democracy and then there's democracy. Someone mentioned the Athenian example, and America of a hundred years ago. Both appropriate examples. Another parallel might be the Iroquois Confederacy.

Understand that not having a 20th Century Democracy doesn't mean having a Saddam Hussein dictatorship.

What we're likely to get is more like big-city machine politics where the people in power stay in power by keeping their major constituencies happy. In this case the constituencies are going to be mostly tribal.

That may not be simon-pure democracy, but it's workable and a lot better than what Iraqis had before.

[Grim]

"...What we're likely to get is more like big-city machine politics..."

You make a good point, but there is a critical difference: tribes are natural. Because they are based on blood ties, their authority is broadly accepted by their members. A big-city machine is artificial, but the tribal leader occupies his position in much the same way that a silverback gorrilla occupies his. It is recognized by its members as legitimate in the same way that we think of the family as having natural authority over how its children should be raised, or what faith to practice.

The result is that cooperation with the tribal systems in Iraq absolutely needs to be the basis for any government. If you can build a central government that is founded on tribal support, it will stand. If you can't, it won't. That's why these grassroots movements among tribes across and around Iraq is so encouraging. It is the kind of foundation on which a real, stable government can stand.

[madconductor]

I think this has been an excellent post and some excellent commenting. I have particularly enjoyed Rich Casebolt pick of one of President Bush's comments on why we do these things. That goal changing sentence has been completley ignored by most of the left.

I sometimes felt like Rangermom before the surge happened. Now it looks better - I'm much more optimistic and thankful our guys have held their line and
keep pushing the envelope.

And thanks for helping keep all this in a good perspective with animated comments, Grim.

I thought a liyak was just short for lying yak. Not that there's anything wrong with that.

[Marzouq]

Dr. Kilcullen is a very good man to have on the Coalition Team. I venture to wager he and Petreaus have a very good working relationship and they are both profiting in knowledge and expertice.

It has taken too long to understand the tibal and ethnic intricacies of the Middle East. Petreaus and the Brits were way ahead of the curve but not being listened to by the higher ups in the pentagon.

I think about the dissapionting pompous ass Bremer, what a bummer. There is some serious weeding out needed in State and the Pentagon! There is too much reliance on firepower and too little reliance on brain power. There is too much centralization of authority and too little delegation of leadership. We have to be best at adapting, improvising and overcoming; and can be! We are capable of producing faster and more effective OODA Loops!

I have much hope. Not only will less Coalition life be lost, less treasure will be lost too. America is being weakened militarily and financially from our adventures. I am for the idea of planting ourselves in Iraq the center if the ME. I am just frustrated with the "trial and error". I was frustrated with the Rumsfeld screwup of not preparing for COIN when Sadam even TOLD him and President Bush that Baghdad will be turned into Stalinidad!

Don't get me wrong, I like that swaggering cowboy CinC we have and I like Rummy too. Rumsfeld was on the right track when he began his transformation with his stated goal of makin the Army mor like the USMC, the USMC more like Specops, and Specops more like CIA.

I'm a bit tired, but sure as Hell not giving up or quitting. I am just a bit frustrated with the Govt. waste in this war, the possible overestimation of alQ (I think they may be just a buch of cyber punks sounding bigger than they are).

The troops I have most faith in are Specops, Marines, Rangers. They are in the shit! They have it the toughest, are the toughtst and they are pretty damn smart! I convey my love and admiration to you.

I "admire" U.S. Armour corps for demonstrating use of tanks in urban combat. However, I suggest they read the latest revision of FMFM-1A. Same for Pilots.

Salaam eleikum!

[jordan]

I take your point Rich, and may simply be speaking as part of a deployed soldier's family. Democratization does seem to be taking, and the people are "getting it". I hope they're matched by similiar dynamics up top. In any case, no one can say Petraeus's surge isn't working. The wild card now will be Amb. Ryan Crocker's report on how Iraq's leadership and political institutions are doing.

Another thing is expanding our military and it's capabilities against other threats apart from Iraq and terrorism. Many leaders say they support this, but no one has yet presented a plan or legislation to achieve it. China's growing, and Russia is falling back into it's old patterns.

Case in point, Wednesday two Tu-95/BEAR long range aircraft flew over Guam, "exchanging smiles" with U.S. pilots who scrambled to check them out. The LRA chief said it's a return to the tradition of their long range aviation flying far out into the ocean. Hmmm.

[Cincinnati_Bob]

Grim, I wouldn't be interested in turning anything into Ohio. ;-)

Well, I'd say that I've been looking forward to a time when Iraqi's reach what I would call critical mass and turn in the bad guys one and all so that every square inch of Iraq is a roach motel.

Then all will be well. I trust Iraq has a good sense of family however the men, women, and children fit into that scheme, and I trust no-one of that group is overly oppressed. I see many picture of happy Iraq children with soccer balls, etc. I assume they are not being overly tortured.

Let's take an honest view of what goes on in the USA regards these matters. Many women in hostile situations. Many children in abusive situations. Many foster home children at the mercy of pedophiles. American children drugged on ridilin because of a lack of common sense.
Personally, I think Iraq would be a net positive over what's happening here.

[Cincinnati_Bob]

I think Liyak is Ok. He/She just isn't capable of thinking too far beyond 'war bad, peace good' or 'politicians are all opportunist sociopaths', etc.

Liyak, keep plugging away dude[tte]
But consider facts such as:

- Not everyone wants world peace. Many do not.
- Life isn't fair. It wasn't designed to be.
- Opportunists (ie. Aholes) affect other people more than nice people do because of what they are, what they want, and what they're willing to do to get it.
- Pretty much everyone is directed by what their personal agenda is. Getting laid Friday night, acquiring that yacht or table saw or necklace, etc etc etc.
It's pretty much sex, money and power for those who have the ability or position to affect the rest of us minions.
- There is a reason this place is called Earth, and not Heaven.

[Grimmy]

Grim

To main post and your following comments:
Amen.

[Lands’nGrooves]

Yea, I can see you point, these groups definetly compare to AQ. I feel so put in my place. MAn, WTF!

Baader-Meinhof Group was responsible for 34 deaths including many secondary targets such as chauffeurs and bodyguards — and many injuries in its almost 30 years of existence.

Japanese Red Army claimed to have about 40 members at its height and was at one time one of the best-known armed leftist groups in the world.

The Symbionese Liberation Army (S.L.A.) committed bank robberies, two murders and other acts of violence between 1973 and 1975.

[chiropetra]

"Yea, I can see you point,
these groups definetly
compare to AQ. I feel so put
in my place."

You should. Your statement that democracy means no/less terrorism is simply wrong. All the groups I mentioned, and many more I didn't, arose in democratic societies with well-established rule of law, rights of individuals and most of the other trappings.

In spite of that, terrorist groups sprang up in their midst.

And let's not forget that in a number of those cases the fact we didn't have 9/11 type casualties was not from lack of trying. Arum's Sarin gas in a subway, for example. What restrained most of those terror groups was lack of expertise and opportunity, not a lack of will.

Democracy is a wonderful thing, I think. American-style democracy is especially nice, I think.

But democracy isn't magic. It doesn't cure all ills. And we need to recognize that there are other kinds of democracy besides American style.

[rgrmom82]

One can try to separate culture and politics but
each is formed by the other.

No culture that degrades and devalues females ever evolves in "peace".

[rgrmom82]

Rich, the bit above in italics...appropriates a quote form a native american indian. Chief Joseph of the Nez Perce Western Montana being chased and hounded through the rockies while his people were dying. "I will fight no more forever" were his words of surrender to the great white father. Do credit the quote, doll.

[rgrmom82]

Bet you wonder how I knew that. Pulled it right of of my sweat lodge....:):)

[David M]

Trackbacked by The Thunder Run - Web Reconnaissance for 08/10/2007
A short recon of what’s out there that might draw your attention, updated throughout the day...so check back often.

[Immolate]

I don't think that Bush's rejection of the real politik of the latter 20th century was a calculation based on not trusting something that didn't work. I think it was a rejection of something that was wrong, and that his embrace of building a democracy in Iraq is an attempt to do the right thing. Anything else that he and we could have done after winning the war against Iraq would have been cynical and cruel. We did, and we're doing, the only morally decent thing that can be done.

[Lands’nGrooves]

chiropetra,

Are you intentionally being obstinate or is this a lack of communication?

Your examples of terrorist organizations to not even begin to compare to AQ, who is responsible for the majority of the bloodshed in Iraq. Of course there have been terrorists in countries with democratic governments. But to bring them up in this conversation about democracy in Iraq is beyond ridiculous.

Notice in my one statement, (the one you conveniently chose to respond to but none of the others), “Does anyone NOT believe that democracy equals no/less terrorism?” I deliberately inserted the word “less” to avoid the kind of debate we are engaging presently.

Please answer my question “What countries do the majority of terrorist come from AND what are their corresponding types of governments?” That’s REAL terrorists, AQ, the scum we are engaged in the War on Terror, not some two bit, hippie, radical mod squad of a couple dozen members who robbed a few banks back in the 70’s.

Your mindset is especially appreciated by such statements as “Democracy is a wonderful thing, I think. American-style democracy is especially nice, I think.” You freakin’ THINK democracy is a good thing? Good grief, you’re unsure of such a thing?

As for “But democracy isn't magic. It doesn't cure all ills. And we need to recognize that there are other kinds of democracy besides American style.”

Well, no it’s not magic & doesn’t cure ALL ills but it is a wonderful thing and it does cure many ills including many that the Iraqis are now experiencing. I hope they will be able to enjoy the freedoms we have. Nobody that I’m aware of has said that it has to be just like our democracy.

[Rich Casebolt]

rgrmom ... you are correct re: the words of Chief Joseph, and I will acknowledge his wisdom here.

His words are fitting to use, in the context, in the same way people have incorporated the words of Francis Scott Key into other works.

(BTW, here's the complete work those italics came from ... I still haven't got the instrumental and recording aspects down enough to put it all together yet. Dang job and other things keep getting in the way ...)

********************************

Chiropetra ... it is a matter of degree.

There are orders of magnitude of severity between the Eurotrash/hippie/cult terrorism of earlier years, and the institutionalized Islamofascist variety.

While I agree that terrorist movements can spring up among democracies, the limited effect of the non-Islamofascist terrorist efforts upon civilization speaks volumes about how attributes of rights-respecting governance ...

... from the alternatives available for people within them for living free and pursuing happiness, to the structural protection of life and liberty via the rule of an objective body of law rather than the whims of a dictator or the dictates of imams ...

... poison the ground when it comes to the growth of terrorism and the threat of totalitarian expansionism.

The problem regimes and groups we face today, OTOH ... most of them maintaining a far higher strength for decades than their non-Islamofascist counterparts ever had at their peak ... overwhelmingly come from nations where rights-respecting governance is absent; supplanted by theocracy and/or thug regimes who want nothing of rights-respecting governance.

While there are exceptions, there is truth in what LnG ... and I ... are asserting.

Until someone comes up with something better than rights-respecting governance, we need to work for its adoption by every nation on the planet.

Some, though, need it sooner than others.

[Soldier's Mom]

rgrmom: Are you by any chance Native American? I am! My Mother was full-blood Lenape. A sweat lodge is a spiritual place for us -- it is used for healing and connecting with the spirits of those who have gone before. As for Chief Joseph, he isn't from Western Montana -- he was born in Oregon and lived in Washington -- Montana is where they ended their trek. Here is a little info on him:

Chief Joseph: In-mut-too-yah-lat-lat (Thunder coming up over the land from the water) Born - 1845 in Wallowa Valley in Oregon; Died - September 21,1904 on Colville Reservation in Washington; Buried at Colville Reservation in Nespelim, Washington.

The full quote is: "Hear me my chiefs. I am tired; my heart is sick and sad. From where the sun now stands I will fight no more forever."

Just my little tid bit of history for a Friday! :-)

[chiropetra]

Final post on the subject.

Let's start with where we're in agreement. We both believe that a successful society has to provide a certain level of security for its members. We agree on the importance of the rule of law. And we recognize that a government based on some form of democracy is probably the best outcome (although not the only acceptable outcome) for Iraq.

(And LnG's snark to the contrary, I happen to believe deeply in American style democracy. The difference between us, I think, is that I'm keenly aware no one died and made me God so I'm not as willing to deal in absolutes.)

However beliefs, no matter how deeply held, aren't any substitute for facts. Kurt Vonnegut was wrong. "Live by the foma (harmless untruths) that make you happy" sooner or later becomes a recipe for disaster, especially in the world we're moving into.

Which brings us to the differences between the reality (as I see it, NODAMMG, remember?)and the feel-good propositions we have unthinkingly absorbed from our society.

First, the point is that terrorist movements can arise in democracies just as well as places like Iraq. To maintain that democracy somehow inoculates a society against serious terrorism is simply incorrect and potentially lethal -- as a lot of folks in Oklahoma City discovered.

For that matter, consider Ulster, which was, in the 1970s, simultaneously ruled directly by a democratic national government in London and home to a vicious terrorist movement. If the IRA, UVF and their ilk didn't invent kneecapping with an electric drill they certainly perfected the art.

The notion that a society must respect women in the modern American sense before it can be a democracy is equally counter factual. Consider modern Japan or 19th Century America.

Similarly, few among us would argue that America before 1860 wasn't a democracy, even if we did have slavery.

Second, don't confuse our luck with the terrorists' goals. We were very lucky with those 'hippie trash Eurocult terrorists' you denigrate. Consider what happened in Oklahoma City with a couple of nutcases and a truck full of fertilizer. Or again, the Ayum religious cult with Sarin in the subway.

(As an aside we're damn lucky that the sickos among us who want to kill a bunch of people -- think of them as freelance terrorists -- tend to stick to guns. Guns kill one or two at a time. Bombs are a lot more lethal. If you want to talk about might-have-beens, consider that the Columbine High School killers took bombs with them that could have mowed down students by the score. If those things had detonated the massacre would have been far worse.)

That the body count wasn't as high from those groups as it is in Iraq is due to a different set of circumstances, not the magic effects of democracy. Winning a war without enough force to take control of what you've won is a serious mistake.

Here the parallels with post-WWII Germany are instructive. Hitler left behind elaborate plans for a Saddam-style guerrilla war against the victorious allies. The fighters called themselves 'werewolves' instead of 'jihadists' but they were just as fanatic. The campaign was a dismal failure because the Allies flooded Germany with troops and nipped it in the bud.

Third, you're not only factually incorrect, I don't think you understand where your obviously deeply held beliefs lead.

Ending the violence and establishing a viable Iraqi government is possible in a few years. Introducing the sort of deep-seated cultural change you equate with democracy will take decades.

"Staying the course" then becomes a matter of decades butting heads against people who will increasingly resent our interference.

People like Nancy Pelosi and Harry Reid will love a definition of success that depends on building that kind of democracy. It makes their case nicely. If you want to hand them their victory on a silver platter, well...

Thank you. I've had my say and I'll shut up now. Honest.

[Davod]

"Here the parallels with post-WWII Germany are instructive. Hitler left behind elaborate plans for a Saddam-style guerrilla war against the victorious allies. The fighters called themselves 'werewolves' instead of 'jihadists' but they were just as fanatic. The campaign was a dismal failure because the Allies flooded Germany with troops and nipped it in the bud."

Numbers were part of the equation, but remember, the Allies had millions of men under arms so numbers were not an issue.

The Allies took a hard line including firing squads for Werewolves.

[Cincinnati_Bob]

rgrmom.. Isn't the sweat lodge called a Hogan?

Anyway for the record; I look forward to the day when women are no longer considered 2nd class citizens anywhere.

The world will be a better place.

[Rich Casebolt]

First, the point is that terrorist movements can arise in democracies just as well as places like Iraq. To maintain that democracy somehow inoculates a society against serious terrorism is simply incorrect and potentially lethal -- as a lot of folks in Oklahoma City discovered.

Chiropetra, neither does the rule of law and the presence of law-enforcement agencies immunize "We the People" from murderers in our midst ... but they do discourage the practice to the point that it does not dominate the society, let alone expand.

In a rights-respecting democracy, terrorist movements are swiftly opposed, and either driven deep underground to the point of insignificance to the nation as a whole, or eradicated altogether ... except in the case of a civil war, like Ulster, which is quite different from the international battlefield of the GWOT.

The structural protection of human rights in these nations do not allow such governments to SUSTAIN terrorist groups ... let alone harness them for expanding a government's desire to expand their influence and control, as the patron states of Islamofascist terrorism have been wont to do.

Even the IRA, as long-lasting as it was, did not enjoy the support of any government ... certainly not to anywhere near the degree that the Islamofascist terror movements have enjoyed the support of Iran, the Taliban, and Saddam & Sons ... and unlike these movements, there was no interest in expanding their control beyond Ulster.

And the IRA ... a movement as close to being "freedom fighters" in terms of motivation as any group who employed terror tactics, was eventually turned away from terrorism by a rights-respecting democracy.

That the body count wasn't as high from those groups as it is in Iraq is due to a different set of circumstances, not the magic effects of democracy.

I must disagree ... the reason the body count is so high in Iraq is precisely because:

1> The terrorists and thugs are being SUSTAINED by non-rights-respecting entities ... Syria, Iran, and the Al Quada organization, among others. That sustenance gives them staying power that the OKC bombers and the Japanese cultists simply did not have, especially once the first blow was struck against "We the People".

2> The national government of Iraq lacks the governmental integrity, strength, and respect from its people to effectively enforce respect for the rights of her people.

In the cases you cite, the movements did not have enough freedom-of-movement (without being exposed and arrested), or outside support, to be sustainable ... for the nations they were located within were primed to stop them at the first sign of trouble ... just as no one in their right mind could hijack a plane today, because the passengers, in rememberance of 911, would immediately mob the hijacker, even at the risk of their lives.

Winning a war without enough force to take control of what you've won is a serious mistake.

So is putting down too large of a "bootprint", reinforcing the propaganda that we are occupiers bent on raping and pillaging Iraq ... neither desiring nor needing the support of the local populace ... in an asymetrical war where sheer numbers are more of a guarantee of available targets for the enemy to practice with, than a guarantee of victory.

Ask the Russians about that re: Afghanistan.

We avoided their mistakes ... and have been able to sustain our forces in Afghanistan and Iraq with nowhere near the casualties suffered by the Russians, succesfully engaging enemies whose forces included some who were part of bloodying the nose of the Bear.

Undertstand that in WWII, we ground the people to powder before we occupied.

In Iraq, we chose not to do that, remembering what places like Dresden and Hiroshima looked like ... a compassionate thing to do, especially compared to the easy way out for us: remote-control conversion of sand to glass via neutron fluence over the space of a few hours.

Problem was, we did swing too far the other way (in part, in "preemptive" response to the knee-jerk antiwar sentiments that permeate American media and politics), away from intensively confronting and defeating the enemy in the midst of the innocent -- what I call precision-guided ruthlessness -- then staying around long enough to assure they weren't coming back.

That has changed -- in fact, this change is the centerpiece of the Surge -- clear-and-hold.

And the Iraqi people are now coming around, and taking responsibility for their nation, one area at a time ... instead of sitting back and let Americans do their fighting -- and dying -- for them, in an asymetrical war where dropping-the-dime can be as historically significant as dropping-the-Bomb.

Had we invoked the Powell Doctrine, would that be happening even now ... or would we be producing the sequel to the Soviet retreat from Afghanistan?

Third, you're not only factually incorrect, I don't think you understand where your obviously deeply held beliefs lead ... Ending the violence and establishing a viable Iraqi government is possible in a few years. Introducing the sort of deep-seated cultural change you equate with democracy will take decades.

That is the fundamental mistake of 20th-century geopolitics ...

... assuming that global civilization can continue to coexist, in its present, relatively-peaceful-and-prosperous state, "on the cheap" ... not dealing decisively with dysfunctional nations whose lack of rights-respecting governance facilitates totalitarian expansionism from within them.

Stopping short of a basic framework of sustainable rights-respecting governance -- at least on the same order as the compromised framework we developed at the founding of our own nation -- will leave Iraq vulnerable to being hijacked by another set of totalitarians, to once again be leveraged for expanding their influence and control.

Given the speed today at which resources and technology can be applied with lethal effect, against a highly-interconnected global civilization that must remain open (i.e. vulnerable) to function, that is a risk we can ill afford to take. Keep in mind it took 1930's Germany, in an era far less technically advanced, to go from beaten-down (like today's Iraq) to blitzkreig. That kind of transformation would be far faster today.

Failure is not an option ... if we are going to avoid having to fight Gulf War III ... or worse yet, end up with our backs against the wall in a nation-on-nation World War, against an enemy who lacks the compassion to avoid the aforementioned application of neutron fluence upon their neighbors, then America.

"Staying the course" then becomes a matter of decades butting heads against people who will increasingly resent our interference.

The people in Anbar and Diyalah, through their actions, speak otherwise.

Their actions are only the most recent example that shows us how those who are not corrupted by fanaticism, greed, and meglomania ... that vast majority of humanity whose desire is the UNIVERSAL human yearning to live free and pursue happiness ... have joined, and will join, us in that head-butting, against the thugs and fanatics -- and with surprising speed, push their way through to peace, freedom, and even fulfillment of their desire for our departure, once their own institutions can assure their safety and freedom ... and by extension, do their part in assuring ours.

Just as Eastern Europeans did in the 1980's ... at the start of that decade, no one dreamed that the Berlin Wall would be coming down ... and the Best and Brightest continually denigrated the President at that time for trying to "change the rules" regarding the primary conflict of his day.

Just as these same Best and Brightest are doing to today's President, because he is changing the rules ... and they don't think the rules can -- or should -- be changed, even when history shows that the old rules do not sustain peace and freedom.

Just as with Reagan, the history of the 21st Century will show these Best and Brightest for the dim bulbs they still are ... and have been since the heady days of their youth in Woodstock Nation and its derivatives.

People like Nancy Pelosi and Harry Reid will love a definition of success that depends on building that kind of democracy. It makes their case nicely. If you want to hand them their victory on a silver platter, well...

Whether it plays into their political gamesmanship or not, the truth doesn't change ... without the establishement of rights-respecting governance there, Iraq is vulnerable to being hijacked AGAIN for totalitarian expansion through terrorism or other means.

And that means, sooner or later, we will have to go back ... in fact, if our nation listens to Nancy and Harry here, we could very easily end up with our backs against the wall in that nation-on-nation World War mentioned above ... and eventually, a death toll on both sides that will make the casualties in Iraq to date look like a bad 4th-of-July weekend on our highways.

However, I would recommend you read the recent news accounts where their Democrat colleagues ... even Hillary! ... are acknwoledging the success I describe above in Iraq today.

Eventually, even Nancy and Harry ... the political weasels they are ... may change with surprising speed, as well.

If their change is anything less than a sincere repentance from the conventional wisdom of the last century, though, they will see that the rules have changed in other ways ... for, unlike their predecessors -- who did not pay a price for their INACTION that left Southeast and Southwest Asia to rot in the hands of totalitarians for decades -- they will be held to account by people like me, for their folly.

There is one rule, though, that doesn't change.

That butting-of-heads we talked about above is the central conflict in EVERY WAR EVER FOUGHT ... the one who wants to win the most, and leaves the field of battle last, wins.

The question is ... how much do you value your civilization?

Your turn.

[chiropetra]

"Your turn"

Pass. This has gone past the point of diminishing returns.

You've had your say. I've had mine. And the future will tell us which one is right.

[rgrmom82]

Actually, Rich I am part NA. On paternal Grampa's side. I also grew up in the Rockies and the w. USA, so one of the first stories I learned was that one. I know exactly where they started and where they ended up. I didn't want to bore anyone with my tedious NA trivia knowledge so I was synopsizing. ;0 I not only know what a sweat lodge is, I grew up about fourty miles from a res. I was being funny not disrespectfull. I love it when people forget that American democracy is partially based on Iraqois and other Eastern native american tribal systems.

Nothing evolves in a vacuum.

[Rich Casebolt]

Nothing evolves in a vacuum.

So true, rgrmom.

In fact, I think Americans could "evolve" a little more ourselves, by watching what ordinary Iraqis are doing from the bottom-up through the eyes of Michael Yon and others.

We are so conditioned to think that the same rent-a-government of political and expert elites who "put a man on the moon" are the only hope for solving the problems of "We the People" ... when in fact, like the Iraqis vis a vis their own elites, we need to work around them, as much as with them, to achieve the next advances in our civilization.

And lately, my thoughts have been turning to the irony that we rant and rave about the influence of self-centered "special interests" here ... while allowing the two greatest special-interest groups -- the institutionalized political parties, whose primary interest (i.e. what they depend upon for their livelihood) is maintaining and expanding their power -- to continue to stand without challenge.

Then, we see some of these party weasels exhibit the unmitigated gall to tell us that, because the Iraqi legislators act in ways similar to themselves, our operations in the Iraqi theater of the GWOT are "failing" ... even as the local levels of Iraqi society work around -- and with -- their legislators AND the Coalition to pacify some of the most violent areas of Iraq.

You could say that these modern-day Neros fiddle ... even as the torches that could burn our civilization down remain lit ... and discourage the common man from bringing extinguishers and digging firebreaks.

The person who figures out a way to coalesce support around good Men and Women as national leaders -- WITHOUT creating an institutional party that then makes the primary focus of these leaders the sustenance of that institution -- will be a genius whose name will be deserving of the same honor we give to names like Bell, Edison, and Wright.

And, citizens -- be they elected leader or just leader -by-example -- who restore the local/state/national balance-of-focus to problem-solving, will be deserving of the same honor we give to names like Franklin, Madison, and Jefferson.

[Soldier's Mom]

rgrmom - I KNEW you weren't being disrespectful. And a hogan can be a sweat lodge, but it is actually a Navajo dwelling. The last sweat I attended was Lakota and the sweat lodge was long sticks with blankets over them. Maybe we should let some of our ancestors loose on Congress -- when they were allowed to fight fair they usually won!! :-)

[jordan]

Very interesting analogy, Rich, between today's situation and the Berlin Wall. If the wall is terrorism, perhaps the forces of freedom and promises of prosperity will act to suffocate terrorism coming from the Middle East. Like Bush, Reagan was ridiculed -- until the wall came down and, in quick succession, the Soviet bloc dismantled. We tend to forget that that transitional period was fraught with dangers and highly unstable.

But we've also learned that a population has to have an ingrained historical and cultural awareness of the fact that they are "We the people", or that they should be We the people. They have to first have the basic understanding that democracy is their right, and they have a right to bring it about. Otherwise, as we saw in Iraq, the people will sit on the fence or simply hop on the stronger horse.

Writers have said we underestimated the degree to which totalitarian rule had traumatized the people, to the point where they were too fearful to seize the reins or go against the strong man rule they' were used to. There has to be some basis, some widely held and agreed framework among the people, for democracy to take root, and hold.

We had a century of Enlightenment thought and were buttressed by the Age of Reason when our country was forming. The Iraqis had either strongman rule or sharia as governing models -- but they're learning.