Dilbert_X
The X stands for
+1,810|6098|eXtreme to the maX
http://newsvote.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/middle_east/7185602.stm

Bush praises Iraqi Baathist law

US President George W Bush has praised a new law in Iraq that will allow former members of Saddam Hussein's Baath party to return to public life. Mr Bush called it an important step towards national reconciliation.

The Baath party, formed mainly from Iraq's Sunni minority, was declared illegal after the US-led invasion of the country in 2003.
The US had been urging Iraq's Shia-led government to approve the move in a bid to reach out to minority Sunni Arabs.
The new law will allow thousands of former party members to apply for reinstatement in the civil service and military.
"It's an important step toward reconciliation, it's an important sign that the leaders of that country understand that they must work together to meet the aspirations of the Iraqi people," said Mr Bush.
The president was speaking in Bahrain, the latest stage in a tour of the Middle East. Earlier, in Kuwait, he said hope was returning to Iraq.

"Iraq is now a different place from one year ago. We must do all we can to ensure that 2008 will bring even greater progress," Mr Bush said.

Reconciliation
Saddam Hussein's regime was predominantly Sunni and many figures were removed from government after his fall in 2003, under an edict from ex-US administrator Paul Bremer.
The army was disbanded, thousands of teachers, university lecturers and civil servants were sacked.
The initiative, based on the de-Nazification of Germany after World War II, banned anyone who had been a member of the higher tiers of the party from government employment.
Some were reinstated after the US found that it had cleared out key ministries and the military without having any replacements.
After the Americans handed over power to an Iraqi government in 2004, they urged the Shia-led administration to ease the measures further in an effort to promote national reconciliation.
Much of the Sunni insurgency is thought to be centred on dismissed military men from the Baathist regime.

'Heavy blow'
The new legislation - called the Accountability and Justice Law - was approved on Saturday by all 143 lawmakers present in the 275-member house.
It creates a three-month period for the ex-members to be challenged, after which they will be immune from prosecution over the Saddam era.
The law excludes former Baath members charged with crimes or still sought for them.
However, it will grant state pensions to many former Baathist employees even if they are not given new posts.
The BBC's Humphrey Hawksley in Baghdad says the legislation is seen as an attempt by the government to end the sectarian divide between the Shia and Sunni communities.
But almost five years on, after much bloodshed, it is unclear how many former Baathists will take up the offer to get their jobs back, our correspondent adds.
A spokeswoman for the US embassy in Baghdad told Reuters news agency that the new law showed "the political process is working in Iraq".
Meanwhile, Mr Bush said there had been a dramatic improvement in the country since the US troop "surge" last year - when 30,000 extra soldiers were sent to the Baghdad area.
He added that US and Iraqi soldiers had dealt "heavy blows" to al-Qaeda, and that the country was "now a different place from one year ago".
He said the withdrawal of 20,000 troops by July was on track, but no decision had been taken to bring home more.
DeBaathification was a dumb idea at the time, this won't help, its about five years too late with the insurgency well established.
Русский военный корабль, иди на хуй!
Kmar
Truth is my Bitch
+5,695|6593|132 and Bush

Well established? It was a mistake in the first place. But I think it will help. Bush has been pushing for this for a long time actually. It will help to re-establish unity. That's the only real thing that will solve Iraq's woes.
Xbone Stormsurgezz
CameronPoe
Member
+2,925|6547
Give weapons and training to Osama & Co. in Afghanistan.
Wait a few years.
Get a country where women are forcibly circumcised and education is outlawed and four passenger planes are hijacked and rammed into various parts of the US.

Give weapons and support to Saddam Hussein.
Wait a few years.
Rush to the aid of Kuwait who have ... wait for it ... just been invaded by Iraq.

Take out Saddam Hussein and rid the country of the Ba'ath party.
Open an ethnic violence can of worms.
Fail at controlling the situation.
Begin arming various Sunni and Shi'a militias to restore order.
De-deba'athify.
Wait a few years.
......................... [Fill in the blank]

The beautiful circle of life. It's must be groundhog day at the whitehouse.

Last edited by CameronPoe (2008-01-12 19:46:57)

Turquoise
O Canada
+1,596|6397|North Carolina
Oh...  the Neutron bomb is looking so nice right about now....
Dilbert_X
The X stands for
+1,810|6098|eXtreme to the maX
Oh...  the Neutron bomb is looking so nice right about now....
Yup, target Washington - Should raise the average IQ of the US.
Русский военный корабль, иди на хуй!
Turquoise
O Canada
+1,596|6397|North Carolina

Dilbert_X wrote:

Oh...  the Neutron bomb is looking so nice right about now....
Yup, target Washington - Should raise the average IQ of the US.
eh...  As much as I hate DC, I don't think you'd want a shadow government running us.  Although, some would say that's already happening in a way.
FEOS
Bellicose Yankee Air Pirate
+1,182|6403|'Murka

Glad to see the rational people have been active in this thread...

De-Ba'athification is the exact opposite of what the article says Bush supports.

I won't even engage with Cam's weak try at linking all the world's ills to the US...again.
“Everybody is a genius. But if you judge a fish by its ability to climb a tree, it will live its whole life believing that it is stupid.”
― Albert Einstein

Doing the popular thing is not always right. Doing the right thing is not always popular
CameronPoe
Member
+2,925|6547

FEOS wrote:

I won't even engage with Cam's weak try at linking all the world's ills to the US...again.
Head in the sand...

'All the world's ills' apparently corresponds to 9/11 and the invasion of Kuwait? The world is a lot simpler than I thought....

Are you denying any of the statements of fact I made?

Last edited by CameronPoe (2008-01-13 10:21:22)

splixx
ChupaCABRA
+53|6731|Omaha, Nebraska

CameronPoe wrote:

Give weapons and training to Osama & Co. in Afghanistan.
Wait a few years.
Get a country where women are forcibly circumcised and education is outlawed and four passenger planes are hijacked and rammed into various parts of the US.

Give weapons and support to Saddam Hussein.
Wait a few years.
Rush to the aid of Kuwait who have ... wait for it ... just been invaded by Iraq.

Take out Saddam Hussein and rid the country of the Ba'ath party.
Open an ethnic violence can of worms.
Fail at controlling the situation.
Begin arming various Sunni and Shi'a militias to restore order.
De-deba'athify.
Wait a few years.
......................... [Fill in the blank]

The beautiful circle of life. It's must be groundhog day at the whitehouse.
Exactly
FEOS
Bellicose Yankee Air Pirate
+1,182|6403|'Murka

CameronPoe wrote:

FEOS wrote:

I won't even engage with Cam's weak try at linking all the world's ills to the US...again.
Head in the sand...

'All the world's ills' apparently corresponds to 9/11 and the invasion of Kuwait? The world is a lot simpler than I thought....

Are you denying any of the statements of fact I made?
No. What I'm incredulous about is that you automatically tie the bad part of it to the US action at the beginning. You're confusing coincidence with causation.
“Everybody is a genius. But if you judge a fish by its ability to climb a tree, it will live its whole life believing that it is stupid.”
― Albert Einstein

Doing the popular thing is not always right. Doing the right thing is not always popular
CameronPoe
Member
+2,925|6547

FEOS wrote:

CameronPoe wrote:

FEOS wrote:

I won't even engage with Cam's weak try at linking all the world's ills to the US...again.
Head in the sand...

'All the world's ills' apparently corresponds to 9/11 and the invasion of Kuwait? The world is a lot simpler than I thought....

Are you denying any of the statements of fact I made?
No. What I'm incredulous about is that you automatically tie the bad part of it to the US action at the beginning. You're confusing coincidence with causation.
I'm not trying to link the US to the cause, I'm trying to show the link between what the US is doing and the futility/poor judgement of so doing. To have read that into what I wrote would be utterly incorrect.

Last edited by CameronPoe (2008-01-14 02:10:34)

FEOS
Bellicose Yankee Air Pirate
+1,182|6403|'Murka

1. My head's not in the sand. I just disagree with you on some points. One could argue that your head is in the sand on some issues, but we don't, now do we?

2. Give...Get. Yeah...not sure where I got that you were implying causation there.

CameronPoe wrote:

Take out Saddam Hussein and rid the country of the Ba'ath party.
Open an ethnic violence can of worms.
Fail at controlling the situation.
Begin arming various Sunni and Shi'a militias to restore order.
De-deba'athify.
Wait a few years.
3. And once again: De-ba'athification is the exact opposite of what the article is talking about. De-ba'athification (akin to de-Nazification after WW2 in Germany) was done as one of the first actions of the CPA, along with disbanding the army. Both abysmal mistakes by Bremer.

Ridding the country of the Ba'ath party is de-ba'athification. You can't de-ba'athify after you've gotten rid of the Ba'ath party.
“Everybody is a genius. But if you judge a fish by its ability to climb a tree, it will live its whole life believing that it is stupid.”
― Albert Einstein

Doing the popular thing is not always right. Doing the right thing is not always popular
CameronPoe
Member
+2,925|6547

FEOS wrote:

1. My head's not in the sand. I just disagree with you on some points. One could argue that your head is in the sand on some issues, but we don't, now do we?

2. Give...Get. Yeah...not sure where I got that you were implying causation there.

CameronPoe wrote:

Take out Saddam Hussein and rid the country of the Ba'ath party.
Open an ethnic violence can of worms.
Fail at controlling the situation.
Begin arming various Sunni and Shi'a militias to restore order.
De-deba'athify.
Wait a few years.
3. And once again: De-ba'athification is the exact opposite of what the article is talking about. De-ba'athification (akin to de-Nazification after WW2 in Germany) was done as one of the first actions of the CPA, along with disbanding the army. Both abysmal mistakes by Bremer.

Ridding the country of the Ba'ath party is de-ba'athification. You can't de-ba'athify after you've gotten rid of the Ba'ath party.
FEOS, you might want to reread the word I wrote - it's spelled De-deba'athify. Please observe two 'de's'. Essentially 'reba'athify'.

If you seriously think that I think the US intended 9/11 to occur then you've got another thing coming btw...

Last edited by CameronPoe (2008-01-14 02:22:59)

FEOS
Bellicose Yankee Air Pirate
+1,182|6403|'Murka

CameronPoe wrote:

FEOS wrote:

1. My head's not in the sand. I just disagree with you on some points. One could argue that your head is in the sand on some issues, but we don't, now do we?

2. Give...Get. Yeah...not sure where I got that you were implying causation there.

CameronPoe wrote:

Take out Saddam Hussein and rid the country of the Ba'ath party.
Open an ethnic violence can of worms.
Fail at controlling the situation.
Begin arming various Sunni and Shi'a militias to restore order.
De-deba'athify.
Wait a few years.
3. And once again: De-ba'athification is the exact opposite of what the article is talking about. De-ba'athification (akin to de-Nazification after WW2 in Germany) was done as one of the first actions of the CPA, along with disbanding the army. Both abysmal mistakes by Bremer.

Ridding the country of the Ba'ath party is de-ba'athification. You can't de-ba'athify after you've gotten rid of the Ba'ath party.
FEOS, you might want to reread the word I wrote - it's spelled De-deba'athify. Please observe two 'de's'. Essentially 'reba'athify'.

If you seriously think that I think the US intended 9/11 to occur then you've got another thing coming btw...
OK. Fair enough on the de-deba'athify thing. Your alliteration was elusive...at least this early in the morning.

But on a serious note...are you saying that ending the de-ba'athification policy is wrong?

And I don't think you are saying the US intended 9/11 to occur...it just sounds like you're saying the US helping the Muj fight the Soviets was the proximate cause of it.
“Everybody is a genius. But if you judge a fish by its ability to climb a tree, it will live its whole life believing that it is stupid.”
― Albert Einstein

Doing the popular thing is not always right. Doing the right thing is not always popular
CameronPoe
Member
+2,925|6547

FEOS wrote:

OK. Fair enough on the de-deba'athify thing. Your alliteration was elusive...at least this early in the morning.

But on a serious note...are you saying that ending the de-ba'athification policy is wrong?

And I don't think you are saying the US intended 9/11 to occur...it just sounds like you're saying the US helping the Muj fight the Soviets was the proximate cause of it.
I'm saying helping the mujihadeen was short-sighted in that they turned their attentions on their benefactors within a decade. Faustian pacts with ideological enemies against another type of ideological enemy is not good strategy.

As for de-deba'athification: the civil administration in place in Iraq at the time of the invasion should not have been dismantled I agree. The Ba'athists will always have a political support base in Iraq so to marginalise them would be 'undemocratic'. But at the same time I would say this: the US are relegitimising an ideological enemy, which when thrown into the mix of local militias being armed by the US does not bode well for the US if history is anything to go by.
Dilbert_X
The X stands for
+1,810|6098|eXtreme to the maX
Was the Ba'ath party really ever an 'ideological enemy' of the US?
They got on fine as I remember, with Saddam running one of the few secular regimes in the ME.
Русский военный корабль, иди на хуй!
CameronPoe
Member
+2,925|6547

Dilbert_X wrote:

Was the Ba'ath party really ever an 'ideological enemy' of the US?
They got on fine as I remember, with Saddam running one of the few secular regimes in the ME.
They have become an enemy since the US tried to pulverise them into nothingness. I suppose ideological is the wrong word.
FEOS
Bellicose Yankee Air Pirate
+1,182|6403|'Murka

CameronPoe wrote:

FEOS wrote:

OK. Fair enough on the de-deba'athify thing. Your alliteration was elusive...at least this early in the morning.

But on a serious note...are you saying that ending the de-ba'athification policy is wrong?

And I don't think you are saying the US intended 9/11 to occur...it just sounds like you're saying the US helping the Muj fight the Soviets was the proximate cause of it.
I'm saying helping the mujihadeen was short-sighted in that they turned their attentions on their benefactors within a decade. Faustian pacts with ideological enemies against another type of ideological enemy is not good strategy.

As for de-deba'athification: the civil administration in place in Iraq at the time of the invasion should not have been dismantled I agree. The Ba'athists will always have a political support base in Iraq so to marginalise them would be 'undemocratic'. But at the same time I would say this: the US are relegitimising an ideological enemy, which when thrown into the mix of local militias being armed by the US does not bode well for the US if history is anything to go by.
Did some research on the whole Afghan thing today. Turns out that not all the Muj turned against the US. Just the Taliban, who accepted the "Afghan Arabs" into their fold (and hence, UBL). The Northern Alliance...not so much. You are oversimplifying the turn of events following the Soviet pullout and subsequent Afghan Civil War.
“Everybody is a genius. But if you judge a fish by its ability to climb a tree, it will live its whole life believing that it is stupid.”
― Albert Einstein

Doing the popular thing is not always right. Doing the right thing is not always popular

Board footer

Privacy Policy - © 2024 Jeff Minard