Rumsfeld: What we've gained in Iraq

[KevinTheOmnivore]

Originally Posted by mburbank

Alls I'm saying is sectarian death squads are a good indicator of a state of civil war, and that this is a very preidctable outcome of solving their first problem.

And I'll once again ask that you look at the overall population every time you try to turn a small % of people into the norm.

While these squads are certainly a problem, and need to be addressed (more so the level of complicity from within the Iraqi government), they we shouldn't make the mistake of holding them up as a reflection of the entire country. Things are going to be unstable, and we certainly haven't "won" yet. That doesn't mean we aren't winning, and I think the level of good that we've accomplished there is a clear indication of that.

The ONLY thing that I think had aspects of conspiracy and criminality was going to war in the first place, something I think the Whitehouse was determined to do long before 9/11. I don't even think it was for oil, I think it was for a lot of different, mostly ugly reasons. Since we invaded, it's been all about lack of forethought, incompetence, bad management, a smattering of profiteering and graft and some people with truly excellent motivations trying to do truly good work but very little command context in which to do that work. I think we stopped even trying to conspire with anyone over there when The Ahmed Chalabi/jake garner axis fell apart right at the very begining. I don't think there was ever a plan after that, overt or covert.

Who needs Ahmed Chalabi? We have Grand Ayatollah Sistani, and thus have a slight handle on Muqtada Al Sadr. These are men who represent the actual majorities in Iraq (albeit violently at times in the case of Al Sadr). These are just two examples of men who get it, and who are starting to "get it". Respectively.

I'd say we have no idea what the balance of pro vs. anti civil war is right now, or to what degree the Iraqi armed forces and police or compromised or not by militia infiltration.

Uh, ok, so then once again, it would seem logical to make assumptions off of what numbers we actually do have, right?

And I think that's a funny question to begin with. "Are you FOR or AGAINST violent civil war in Iraq???" Gee, I wonder what most folks might say to that. Just like everywhere else, the smallest groups will be the loudest, becasue they know they are the smallest. Here in America we use blogs, in Iraq they're using roadside bombs. This is the divide that needs to be fixed.