Iraqis Want Us To Leave And Hold A Large Demonstration To Prove It!

[DistressedAmerican]

Link:
http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/7430272/

-Snip-
Thousands protest U.S. on Baghdad anniversary
Demonstrators demand end to presence of foreign troops

The Associated Press

Updated: 6:06 a.m. ET April 9, 2005

BAGHDAD, Iraq - Tens of thousands of Shiites marked the anniversary of the fall of Baghdad with a protest against American troops at the same square where jubilant crowds toppled a statue of Saddam Hussein two years ago.

The protesters back radical Shiite cleric Muqtada al-Sadr, whose Mahdi Army militiamen led uprisings last year against U.S. troops before signing truces with U.S.-led forces.

Held in the shadow of the Sheraton and Palestine hotels — home to foreign journalists and contractors — the protest reflected frustration both with the U.S. government, which is slowly handing security responsibilities to Iraqi forces, and anger toward the Sunni Arab-led insurgency.

“This huge gathering shows that the Iraqi people have the strength and faith to protect their country and liberate it from the occupiers,” said protester Ahmed Abed, a 26-year-old who sells spare car parts.

U.S. officials have said they won’t set a timetable for withdrawal, promising to stay until Iraqi forces are able to secure the country.

-End Snip-

[shadowknows69]

1. uh...we might not have a choice anymore

tens of thousands of people. looks like a sginificant insurgency to me. they could make a lot of our soldiers leave the hard way if a spark sets off that powder keg. bad times. ;(

[DistressedAmerican]

2. What I Find Spooky Is That This Is A Shiite Protest.

I thought THEY were on our side?

Bush you lying, neo-imperialist, monkey!

Old but still very much applicable:

[Swamp Rat]

3. More like goats on the march!

:D

... bedtime...

[necso]

4. Al-Sadr's

followers (and al-Sadr himself) and the Sunni Arabs don't have much stake in the current government. Of course, these groups want us out -- they wish to "correct" this situation.

Other groups, those who have a stake in the current government -- and therefore control the future government (to some degree, anyway), can be expected to feel somewhat differently, even if they don't speak out. (Who wants to side openly with occupiers and infidels -- at least where they can't provide adequate protection?)

If we pull out, then there will remain the pressing issue of the (current and future) government there. There is a good chance that existing armed groups will continue their armed struggle for a place (at least) in the government (if not control, autonomy, or whatever) -- and that new groups might join them.

In all too many cases, it comes down to who is willing to kill whom in these circumstances. And certain folks over there have demonstrated that they are willing to kill practically anybody to acheive their ends. Of course, one can argue that the objective of these fighters to simply to get us out. But is this really the case?

I would say "no".

[DistressedAmerican]

5. We've Been Trying To "Involve" Al Sadr In The Government

For over a year now. These folks do not want to play ball with us. Nor should they!

[Igel]

37. Al-Sadr had the chance to stand for elections; some people that

he supported and who supported him won. Not as many as you'd expect.

If the elections were really rigged, you'd expect him to have gotten none.

He had an open rebellion going on; but the floor was wiped with many of his fighters. It was better to declare a hudna and regroup. Maybe he thinks he's regrouped. Maybe he thinks he can pull a Ukraine or Lebanon.

Dunno.

[mmonk]

8. I heard some American soldiers

that have served over there on a talk show say its time to let the baby walk so to speak. They said its time to start withdrawal. They said the people don't want us there anymore except a very few. So it's harder to really say.

[necso]

12. I'm all in favor of a pullout.

(It would probably have to be staged because of logistics.)

But then, I think that a mess is going to follow whenever we pull out.

There are those that believe that we can build (in time) a strong enough government, with loyal and strong enough armed forces, to see them through any ensuing troubles. (And there are those who think that everything will be great once we pull out.)

I wish that I could believe this, because it is apparently the path that we are headed down.

But I don't. The interests of the various groups there are too much in conflict and too much power is held (in this new government) by the Kurds (and very little by the Sunni Arabs), who can be expected to push for their own interests (Kirkuk, etc), which conflict with the national interests -- and with the interests of other groups. It would be expecting statesmanship (enlightened self-interest, "vision", etc) of the first order to hope that these groups will entirely peacefully work out their differences (once we're gone).

And there are neighboring states with ethnic, religious and political (etc) interests in Iraq. In the absence of US forces, it would be a relatively simple matter for any of these states (who have the power) to intervene in Iraq in the name of whatever. (The Turks, for example, view the idea of a de facto Kurdish state with concern, and they are concerned about the rights of Turkmen -- to say nothing of those northern oil fields.)

Soldiers could be expected to serve disproportionately in areas where they are needed (and resented by the locals), so the average soldier's experience might be skewed in the direction of the populace wanting us out.

But, sadly perhaps, what the locals want is only a small part of the overall equation.

And I think that it is understandable that many responsible people think that building a functioning government (etc) there is no more than what we owe the Iraqis. But I don't think that way. It is the "what is" and the "what will be" that occupy my mind.

And if we are planning along these hopeful lines, then, I think, we would be better off throwing out the current governments and creating one that has better (and fairer, etc) representation of the various groups, even if this is less "democratic".

But I think that it is hopeless -- and I am never one for pursuing a hopeless course (while disregarding the likely outcomes) in the name of whatever "theory" or "ideal".

It's what happens that matters. The rest is bullshit. And if one can't influence reality in the direction that you want (need) it to go, then one has no business screwing with it.

And I admit that this is essentially a religious thing with me -- the oftentimes cruel and grim religion of realism.

And I could always be wrong... I'm just some dude voicing his opinion -- just like everyone else.

[mmonk]

19. They said the following;

that the insurgency is larger than reported and that it couldn't be so without support of the local populations, and that many people trying to make things work by joining the armed forces and such are at a disadvantage as long as they are seen as collaborating with the occupation. They said the insurgency is (despite what the media says) Iraqi, not foreign and they base it on the fact there are very few foreign fighters in detention centers, they are full of Iraqis. They said we are more or less pulling back and sitting and are targets. They said when we are proactive, we are seen as bullying (no win type situation). They say they (troops) for the most part are not trained for rebuilding, construction, police work, utility work, and so on. Soldiers also say it's not going to be pretty either way (staying or leaving) and it will be a messy process but believe the Iraqis will hammer something out that will eventually work. They say the thing is unwinnable in any military sense of the word. They say all pretexts for the war were lies. One also said some don't want to compare this with Vietnam and say how it's different but that if it walks like a duck, talks like a duck, then it is a duck. I wish all of America could have heard it. They also said the stickers and such supporting the troops are nice and all but it would be better if people supported them by urging the politicians to fund the VA better and make the armed forces stick to their claims concerning benefits. They said they are not there for George bush or anyone else, but only to protect and defend each other. They said they have no voice in this and that the campaign for the presidency was only about a president that was for the war and one that was for it but said it was done wrong.

[necso]

20. From what little I know about the actual situation

there, what these soldiers were saying sounds right.

When the bullets are flying, and delusional acts have bloody consequences, realism comes more naturally (to those on the "cutting edge" anyway).

And I respect those who opt for realism in these (or any) circumstances. (And not just my own particular variety of realism -- any realism worthy of the name.)

The nice thing about realism is that sometimes you can compare it directly with reality, while ideals like "democracy" (and intangible things in general -- like "hope") are somewhat more difficult to perceive directly. Moreover, the discussion of such ideals and intangibles can quickly degenerate into a whole cloth of complete bullshit.

Of course, a big part of keeping people divorced from reality is preventing them from getting useful information about reality -- and spinning various "lines" that appeal to their hopes, ideals and etc. (And etc.)

[mmonk]

22. You've got it right.

They (soldiers) say people here are divorced from the reality of the situation. One of them said he just wanted to shake people and say it doesn't matter what color of pajamas Michael Jackson wore to trial, there is a war going on and no real discussion about it.

[necso]

24. I feel for our troops.

We owe them better. We owe our nation better... We owe ourselves better.

We have collectively descended into the madness of the Führerbunker.

"Wo ist Steiner?"

[FreedomAngel82]

34. Something I wonder

When the troops do come home how will they react towards people who are disinformed? How will they react towards the Bush administration? Will it be like with Vietnam??

[FreedomAngel82]

33. Thanks for sharing this

I remember sometime late last year reading and hearing from various boards that for the most part people were joining the Iraqi invasion to save their friends and help them get out of there. I wish more people would write to their Congress person and urge them about Veterans. It's so disgusting what Bush has done to them. :cry: Is there anything we can do about that? I've written my Congressman a few times now really pissed off about it and he wrote back the first time telling how he signed a bill to keep them from paying for meals. Does anybody know if they're still paying for meals? Last time I heard they were $8.10 for one meal!! Knowing the Bush administration after they have the person THEY want for government they'll fake some event where they can declare victory and pull out just like with the Saddam statue topple, finding him in the hole and the "election." These people running the show want that oil and they'll do anything to get it. They don't care about training the military of them or anything. It's all a big show to keep them there long enough to get the oil.

[mmonk]

35. Anytime

Just keep pressure to make sure they are getting the care and benefits they need when they come home.

[MadHound]

23. You know, I agree with pretty much all you have said, however

The scenario you describe is going to come to pass no matter when we leave, no matter what governing body we leave behind, no matter what shape we leave the country in, no matter what we do.

Any governing authority we leave behind, elected, appointed, etc. is going to be considered illegal and illegit by the Iraqi people, and will be torn apart when we leave. There will be some sort of civil war, and it is almost certain the matter will be settled with violence to one degree or another. This has been proven time and again by other colonial powers.

So since this is bound to happen, why should we continue this occupation and this charade of establishing a government, when it is all going to come to naught anyway? Why should we continue to sacrifice our own soldiers in this madness? Why should we continue this slaughter of innocent Iraqi people, not just those who are classified as "collateral damage", but also those who are justifiably fighting for the freedom of their country? Why should we continue to pour money and resources into and illegal and immoral war, simply to make profits for those few in the military industrial complex? Instead, we should pull out now, and pay reparations to each and every Iraqi we have harmed in any way, and pay an amount that is decided by an indepent body like the UN.

The invasion of Iraq was illegal and immoral, the continued occupation is also. The time to leave Iraq is now. For we can do nothing but bring more harm the longer we stay.

[necso]

26. I'm all in favor of a pullout. /nt

[DistressedAmerican]

27. I'm With You. We Are The thing That Stands Between These People

and "Self Determimination"!

The longer we stay, the longer Iraq will be at war.

[Discord]

36. we are the problem, not the solution.

announce a total withdraw. plead the UN and NATO to accept our appologies for ruining the whole process, and ask for help in placing non-combat diplomats and ambassadors there to assist and oversee their structuring of a new government. The new government will follow guidelines agreed apon by UN supported directives. Take the money set aside for the "restructuring" and actually pay Iraqi companies and contractors to do some real restructuring in Iraq.

sounds good to me... no?

[mopaul]

6. funny, i don't see that on my t.v. machine

just a royal wedding in some underdeveloped nation....

[DistressedAmerican]

7. Thank God For DU. No Wonder Americans Are So Freaking Gullible!

[mopaul]

9. actual photo evidence

[DistressedAmerican]

13. Nice Shot! I've Archived It. Who Know When Such A Thing May Be Useful?

:evilgrin:

[Athame]

25. Do you think they obtained a permit for the demonstration?

I don't know exactly what to think of this. I went to the Yahoo slide show (linked in post below) and there were life-sized, professionally made cutouts of GW, Saddam, and Blair. The one of GW had fangs and blood running out of the mouth and men were throwing shoes at it. Others were burning American flags. So it does not seem like one that would be staged by our guys, but something just does not seem right. The article in the OP says that it was against the insurgency and the US occupation. There is no evidence in the pix that I could see against the insurgency.

Would the new Iraqi govt or the US forces allow a demonstration of thousands in Baghdad? Especially in that Saddam square and under the journalists hotels? Jeez, we think it is dangerous to march on Washington DC, can you imagine the risks these people are taking to demonstrate in Baghdad unless such a demonstration were actually encouraged by the current authorities? What is behind this? Maybe an excuse for us to pull back to the bases? (I doubt we are going to leave Iraq and give up access to oil and operating bases for further ME action.)

Something is way off.

[mattclearing]

10. How surprising that there are no pictures. n/t

[LynnTheDem]

11. Those "jubilant CROWDS" at the Saddam statue-toppling...

The CHALABI "crowds" of "DOZENS of Iraqis" and the US military & tanks.

After the SHAME of the US State Media for "the biggest staged photo-op since Iwo Jima", how amazing they'd still have the nerve to LIE.

The NON-CLOSE-UPS of the Saddam statue-toppling propaganda;







Remember when the rightwingnuts wanted Peter Jennings dead because he mentioned the *GASP!* truth about the "small crowd"? Even BBC reported "dozens" of Iraqis along with US military & tanks; but not the US "LIBERAL MEDIA".

Rightwingnuts; stupidest MFers on the planet.

[DistressedAmerican]

14. Always With The Stage Managed Scam!

Fuck the administrtion and fuck the MSM!

[LynnTheDem]

18. bush & Cartel are con artists. Scammers. Frauds. Phonies.

FAKE.

[jen4clark]

15. Links to spread around

Iraqi protesters demand US exit
Telegraph.co.uk: http://digbig.com/4dcxb
**********
Thousands Protest on Baghdad Anniversary
Newsday: http://digbig.com/4dcxd
********
Shiites Mark Anniversary of Baghdad's Fall
Yahoo News: http://digbig.com/4dcxg
*********
Slideshow of Iraq Protest
Yahoo: http://digbig.com/4dcxe
***********
Shi'ites Protest on Anniversary of Saddam's Fall
Reuters: http://digbig.com/4dcxf

[DistressedAmerican]

16. GREAT. THANKS!

:toast: :pals:

[DistressedAmerican]

17. My Favorite Shot From Your Links!

Powerful Image.

Terrorist Or Freedom Fighter? Evildoer Or Patriot?
You Tell Me!

[DistressedAmerican]

21. Recombined With That Posted By Mopaul For Better Effect...

[DistressedAmerican]

28. Charles And Di...Oh Wait, Camilla Kick

[DistressedAmerican]

29. Re-Kick!

Important Story People!

[DistressedAmerican]

30. Check Out This FINE Thread For More Photos!!!

http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=view_all&address=104x3454485

[FreedomAngel82]

31. Don't they know protesting doesn't work?

We've seen that here. Protesting doesn't work unless you're "pro-life." :eyes:

[Roland99]

32. Ruh-roh...the Propagandist is in trouble

his attempts at the new colonialism (spreading capitalism to make his business buddies richer) is falling apart before his eyes.

[Zhade]

38. And yet, many Americans refuse to push for what the Iraqis wish.

So much for "democracy".

[DistressedAmerican]

39. Kicking Again For Those That Were Watching The Wedding...

I think this will be yet another buried story if folks like us to not spread the info. It is big news, like the attack on Abu ghraib, also largely unreported.:wow:.