Some good news from Iraq

[HenryLB]

[Only Registered Users Can See Links. Click Here To Register]

A long time coming. And hopefully not a false start.

[wee 162]

Originally Posted by HenryLB
To view links or images in this forum your post count must be 5 or greater. You currently have 0 posts.

[Only Registered Users Can See Links. Click Here To Register]

A long time coming. And hopefully not a false start.

It is good news, and I hope it is succesful. However you have got to look at what is being said in the article and think about what it is that they are going back to. The implication in the article is that the security situation is safer, but that may well be in part due to areas having been ethnically (denominationally?) cleansed. rather than an ending of violence altogether. Iraq can't exist if the various ethnic and religious groups cannot live in peaceful co-existence. Increased homogenisation where people have to live will certainly not be conducive to that.

As I say, I am pleased that people will be able to go home, but the homes they go to may be very different to the ones they left...

[Dub]

Originally Posted by HenryLB
To view links or images in this forum your post count must be 5 or greater. You currently have 0 posts.

[Only Registered Users Can See Links. Click Here To Register]

A long time coming. And hopefully not a false start.

At first glance I thought someone had left the bath running
To view links or images in this forum your post count must be 5 or greater. You currently have 0 posts.
Its great news that the Iraqis are able to feel safe enough to return home, thats an important step IMO however Al does raise some very interesting points in his post.

[KABULHIBBY]

Originally Posted by HenryLB
To view links or images in this forum your post count must be 5 or greater. You currently have 0 posts.

[Only Registered Users Can See Links. Click Here To Register]

A long time coming. And hopefully not a false start.

If I was being cruel and cynical I would point out that the vast majority of refugees who fled to Syria were the poorer members of Iraqi society and it is obvious that their savings have ran out, whilst the more affluent hopped over to Jordan and are showing no signs of returning
To view links or images in this forum your post count must be 5 or greater. You currently have 0 posts.
.

However saying that, it is good that there are refugees returning as it will increase the stability of the region and show that some form of normality is finally returning.

[KABULHIBBY]

Originally Posted by wee 162
To view links or images in this forum your post count must be 5 or greater. You currently have 0 posts.

It is good news, and I hope it is succesful. However you have got to look at what is being said in the article and think about what it is that they are going back to. The implication in the article is that the security situation is safer, but that may well be in part due to areas having been ethnically (denominationally?) cleansed. rather than an ending of violence altogether. Iraq can't exist if the various ethnic and religious groups cannot live in peaceful co-existence. Increased homogenisation where people have to live will certainly not be conducive to that.

As I say, I am pleased that people will be able to go home, but the homes they go to may be very different to the ones they left...

International Herald Tribune gives a good take on the reasons why the violence is on the decrease, especially in Southern Iraq.

[Only Registered Users Can See Links. Click Here To Register]

I still maintain that the near civil war is a direct result of the Spams not having any idea on how to carry out ops within a peacetime role, the disbandment of the Iraqi internal security network was a god send to all insurgents and aided the recruitment no end, although not on the level of a Bloody Sunday it has helped elongate the conflict by about 10 years

[Green Sleeves]

Reading a newspaper like The Times means more than following the headlines and the words.

The headline begins with the words "Better Security" not because that is necessarily the truth but because The Times has suported the illegal military occupatuion of Iraq and will print ANYTHING that justifies it no matter how trivial or how blatant the propaganda is.

It is only when you get to paragraphs 8 and 9 that you realise that there may be an alternative reason for the Iraqis returning:

However, it also reflects the tightening of visa regulations by Syria two months ago, making it more difficult for refugees to stay and impossible for most to come back if violence flares up again. The border crossing into Syria is closed for them. Their trip to Iraq is one way.

“Not everyone is returning voluntarily,” a spokeswoman for the UNHCR said. “It’s a mixed picture. Some Iraqis report an improvement in security in Baghdad, while others fear their Syrian visas are running out.”

A newspaper with a different political agenda could have reported it thus: "IRAQI REFUGEES REFUSED VISAS AND BOOTED OUT OF SYRIA".

The black art of political spin and war propaganda. On that subject I'd recommend the film "WAR MADE EASY" which is narrated by Sean Penn. There can't be many better analyses of war propaganda anywhere. The perpetrators of war hang themselves with their own words.

[HenryLB]

Originally Posted by Green Sleeves
To view links or images in this forum your post count must be 5 or greater. You currently have 0 posts.

Reading a newspaper like The Times means more than following the headlines and the words.

The headline begins with the words "Better Security" not because that is necessarily the truth but because The Times has suported the illegal military occupatuion of Iraq and will print ANYTHING that justifies it no matter how trivial or how blatant the propaganda is.

It is only when you get to paragraphs 8 and 9 that you realise that there may be an alternative reason for the Iraqis returning:

However, it also reflects the tightening of visa regulations by Syria two months ago, making it more difficult for refugees to stay and impossible for most to come back if violence flares up again. The border crossing into Syria is closed for them. Their trip to Iraq is one way.

“Not everyone is returning voluntarily,” a spokeswoman for the UNHCR said. “It’s a mixed picture. Some Iraqis report an improvement in security in Baghdad, while others fear their Syrian visas are running out.”

A newspaper with a different political agenda could have reported it thus: "IRAQI REFUGEES REFUSED VISAS AND BOOTED OUT OF SYRIA".

The black art of political spin and war propaganda. On that subject I'd recommend the film "WAR MADE EASY" which is narrated by Sean Penn. There can't be many better analyses of war propaganda anywhere. The perpetrators of war hang themselves with their own words.

Well yes. But to be fair it is a mixed picture. The different newspaper that you describe would be equally guilty of myopic one-sidedness, and more so if it failed to mention that some were returning because they were optimistic about security, since the Times has at least flagged up alternative reasons.

[HenryLB]

And Sean Penn. I mean, really.

[Colr]

Originally Posted by KABULHIBBY
To view links or images in this forum your post count must be 5 or greater. You currently have 0 posts.

If I was being cruel and cynical I would point out that the vast majority of refugees who fled to Syria were the poorer members of Iraqi society and it is obvious that their savings have ran out, whilst the more affluent hopped over to Jordan and are showing no signs of returning
To view links or images in this forum your post count must be 5 or greater. You currently have 0 posts.
.

However saying that, it is good that there are refugees returning as it will increase the stability of the region and show that some form of normality is finally returning.

I wonder how many of those who fled the Batthist regime have returned. I bet there aren't many.

[am_moroccan]

ok, sounds good but what will they get if they are back home. destruction and horrible life.

amrican, british, and some iraqis millitants hands are still so bloody.

[Green Sleeves]

Originally Posted by HenryLB
To view links or images in this forum your post count must be 5 or greater. You currently have 0 posts.

Well yes. But to be fair it is a mixed picture. The different newspaper that you describe would be equally guilty of myopic one-sidedness, and more so if it failed to mention that some were returning because they were optimistic about security, since the Times has at least flagged up alternative reasons.

The Times neglected to tell its readers what has happened to some who have already returned. This is from yesterday's [Only Registered Users Can See Links. Click Here To Register]:


There are horror stories such as that told by Soad al-Obeidi, 24, whose family returned a few weeks ago to Dora, one of Baghdad's most dangerous neighborhoods.

Last week, her husband's uncles, who came home at her father-in-law's urging, were shot to death hailing a cab.

"One week before the incident, people had started to open their shops. But after the shooting, all the shops closed and no one reopened his shop again. They all feel afraid because they knew that the security situation was not improved at all," al-Obeidi said. "And my father-in-law feels so guilty."

Better security? No improvement? So who do you believe?

[Smurf]

Interesting how the Yanks appear to be winning their part and we lost ours..

[wee 162]

Originally Posted by Smurf
To view links or images in this forum your post count must be 5 or greater. You currently have 0 posts.

Interesting how the Yanks appear to be winning their part and we lost ours..

You call 4m people displaced, at an absolute minimum hundreds of thousands dead, and a scale of ethnic cleansing which dwarfs anything which happened in the former Yugoslavia winning? Want to give me your opinion of what exactly would constitute losing?

[Smurf]

Originally Posted by wee 162
To view links or images in this forum your post count must be 5 or greater. You currently have 0 posts.

You call 4m people displaced, at an absolute minimum hundreds of thousands dead, and a scale of ethnic cleansing which dwarfs anything which happened in the former Yugoslavia winning? Want to give me your opinion of what exactly would constitute losing?

Ok i accept it's not 'winning' as such but you get my point. Shall i say 'Achieving their objectives'?

[wee 162]

Originally Posted by Smurf
To view links or images in this forum your post count must be 5 or greater. You currently have 0 posts.

Ok i accept it's not 'winning' as such but you get my point. Shall i say 'Achieving their objectives'?

I take it you never read the link earlier in the thread from The International Herald Tribune?

And btw, no I don't get your point even remotely. If you mean that the US forces have been succesful whilst the British troops haven't that's utter nonsense. Basra has never seen anything like the same scale of carnage as areas like Baghdad. Now admittedly that is probably in large part down to the different demography and much less intra denominational fighting, but it's never even approached that scale.

If you mean that something along the lines of the US troop surge is the way ahead for Basra I fear for your mental health tbh...

[KABULHIBBY]

Originally Posted by Smurf
To view links or images in this forum your post count must be 5 or greater. You currently have 0 posts.

Ok i accept it's not 'winning' as such but you get my point. Shall i say 'Achieving their objectives'?

The UKs objective, after the first phase(winning the war/firefight) was to hand control over to the Iraqis ASAP, mission accomplished
To view links or images in this forum your post count must be 5 or greater. You currently have 0 posts.

[Smurf]

Originally Posted by KABULHIBBY
To view links or images in this forum your post count must be 5 or greater. You currently have 0 posts.

The UKs objective, after the first phase(winning the war/firefight) was to hand control over to the Iraqis ASAP, mission accomplished
To view links or images in this forum your post count must be 5 or greater. You currently have 0 posts.

From what i've read we've handed over Basra to Shia militias. Even the anti-war Independent Newspaper reported that 80% of assassinations in Basra are carried out by individuals wearing police uniforms. We retreated from Basra defeated. We lost 168 personnel over 4 years for what?

[Smurf]

Originally Posted by wee 162
To view links or images in this forum your post count must be 5 or greater. You currently have 0 posts.

If you mean that something along the lines of the US troop surge is the way ahead for Basra I fear for your mental health tbh...

But Iranian Revolutionary Guards in Basra is?