When does sectarian violence constitute a civil war? That’s the subject of vigorous debate these days, amid stories from Iraq of government death squads and mass kidnappings and killings. In Senate testimony Thursday, Defense Secretary Donald Rumsfeld and Secretary of State Condoleezza Rice acknowledged the growing sectarian violence but suggested that it’s premature to call it a civil war. “There is a high level of tension in the country, sectarian tension and conflict,” Rumsfeld said, but it’s not yet a civil war “by most experts’ calculation.” But one such expert, Stanford University scholar Larry Diamond, says in The New Republic that “by one common social science definition — at least 1,000 dead (with at least 100 on each side) from internal hostilities in which one side tries violently to change the state or its policies — Iraq’s civil war began in the first year of the ‘postwar’ era.” Whatever you call it, it’s bad and getting worse.
Posted by Rhonda Holman
Registered?
Commenting on WE Blog now requires you to be a Kansas.com member. Use the links above to register, if you haven't already, or to log in.Contact us
Follow us
Daily Archives
-
Recent Comments
- BlueJay on Open thread 11/22
- Regular on Open thread 11/22
- Regular on Open thread 11/22
- Rage on Open thread 11/22
- cosmos_originally on Open thread 11/22
- Chas on Open thread 11/22
- BlueJay on Open thread 11/22
- Boxlock20 on Open thread 11/22
- satatom on Open thread 11/22
- JimJohnson on Open thread 11/22
71 Comments
Bush, Rice and Rumsfeld go traipsing along hoping over the bodies so worried about what to call what we’re paying billions soon to be trillions for, while spreading misery wherever we go.
They’ll never leave this insanity unless we stop giving them money.
The tension goes away when we go away.
It can’t get better until we leave and it can only get worse if we stay. That was true last year, and the year before, and will be true this year and the year after that.
Yes, it is civil war. And it was predicted before the invasion.
Yes it is civil war. But hey let’s accentuate the positive here people!
Now there are at least 3 distinct groups of Iraquis and representative insurgents from at least a half dozen assorted nations vying for opportunity to blow things up as fast as Halliburton can get overpaid to rebuild them.
Halliburton just had a record year!
Of course, such conditions are not good for the American troops there or the future of Iraq at large. But that was never really a consideration was it?
Imagine if we had fought the Revolution and Civil war simultaneously, would we now be a Democracy?
I look for Bush to play with words again and say something like “Sure Iraqis are blowing each other up on the streets, but I wouldn’t call it Civil, so it’s Not a Civil War!”
The unfortunate thing is we’ll never know as long as President Liar is in office.
You’ve got British commandos dressed up as locals arrested with a car load of explosives thrown into prison by Iraqi police, and before they can be questioned, the Allied military knocks down the wall of the jail with a tank.
No explanation was ever given.
We were lied into the war–”I don’t want our first knowledge of Iran’s nuclear capacity to be a mushroom cloud over an American city”–when Bush Co. knew full well that Iraq couldn’t deliver a nuclear device even if they had one, which they didn’t.
For years, Rumsfilled and Dead-eye Dick told us that the insurgency were a bunch of “dead enders.” Last Sept. Dick “Go F-Yourself” Cheney said that the insurengcy was in its “last throes, if you will.”
No, I won’t.
How long do we get lied to before we realize that these people just can’t be trusted?
I almost forgot–before the war, it was going to cost 1.7 billion dollars tops. That’s the absolute upper limit. Read our lips.
It has cost at least 250 BILLION, so far. Estimated costs by ivy league economists put out today say total costs could mount to 3 TRILLION as long-term health care for vets is added in . . .
This NY Times article indicates that Saddam was so concerned about the outbreak of civil war in Iraq that it distracted him from adequately responding to the U.S. invasion. This powder keg has been on the verge of explosion for a long time.
http://www.nytimes.com/2006/03/12/international/middleeast/12saddam.html?_r=1&oref=slogin
Is Iraq in Civil War?There are those in Iraq who desperately want civil war and will do anything they can to bring it about. Most notably, of course, Zarqawi and Al-Qaeda. That the bombing of an important Shiite mosque, an extreme act of desecration, did not cause the break down into civil war is the remarkable thing. It was a provocation designed to do just that, and failed to achieve it’s end.
For Al-Sistani and even Moqtada Sadr to push for unity after that event, and thousands to march in the streets against civil war, speaks to the deep desire of Shiites for Iraq to emerge intact. The Kurds could have used the situation to try to break away from Iraq, but they did not. An increasing number of Sunnis are committed not only to participating in the government, but are actively fighting against Al-Qaeda, a story that receives virtually no media coverage, but may be one of the most important developments happening in Iraq.
Groups in one of Iraq’s most violent provinces claim that they have purged the region of three quarters of al-Qaeda’s supporters after forming an alliance to force out the foreign fighters.“There is a hatred for Zarqawi in Ramadi now,” a resident said. “People are exhausted by what he has done. Six months ago he was still accepted, though not 100 per cent. Now we see him continue to target locals and their sons and kill our leaders, and we reject him totally.” “We have killed a number of the Arabs, including Saudis, Egyptians, Syrians, Kuwaitis and Jordanians,” said an insurgent representative in the western province of Anbar.
All three of the major groups in Iraq have centuries of dislike, distrust, and blood between them. Overcoming that is an extraordinary challenge for them, and is not going to come easily. It may be in the end that they will fail. The insurgents who are willing to kill indiscriminately and destroy even sacred mosques to prevent a democratic Iraq may prevail. But those that say this has already has occurred are wrong.
The violence we see now is not millions of people at war with each other. It is the same IED’s and suicide bombers as before. The same murder of civilians by those that don’t care who they blow up, as long as someone dies.
There are many agendas and a labyrinth of political maneuvering going on in Iraq, as groups jockey for influence. Sadr hates America, and yet he has pushed for restraint in sectarian violence. He knows that in the long run it is not in his best interest. “Sunnis and Shias are not responsible for such acts, national unity is required,” he said after Sundays car bombs in Sadr City, adding he would order his Mehdi army militia not to respond.
Each time a bomb goes off in Iraq, the media portrays it as sectarian violence. It is not. It is murder by terrorists who want to incite sectarian violence. If that is civil war, fine, call it that. But no major leader of any of the factions in Iraq is calling for his followers to go out and kill the others. None of them.
http://theflyoverzone.blogspot.com/2006/03/is-iraq-in-civil-war.html
NEW RULE
A post can be EITHER long OR boring. It should not be both!
And the Mossad is just sitting on its hands?….yeah right. Not helping to blow-up things…yeah right.
Its Israel’s war.
The only “terrorists” are the Israelis.
They’re the ones doing the bombing.
Israel is the root of all evil.
Gentle people,
Picnic info. Shelter #4 SE corner of the lake near the swimming area. I reserved #1 over thge phone but when I went to pay it was actually #4.
Still same time, same date. Thursday, March 16th, 4 til 7pm.
Hank
PS It’s terorists, not insurgents. It’s terrorists acts, not civil war.
“Terrorists is a made-up tag for Palestinian resistance.
The Israelis made-up the tag “terrorists” for the Palestinian resistance so they could say: Poor us, we’re such victims, give us tons of money.
That’s why its so important for Zionists to keep pointing the finger to the misnomer “terrorist.”
“Terrorist” do not exist, people being attacked by Israel do.
“Terrorist” is a sympathy-sucker and money-moocher.
Hank – what were the French and Polish Underground during WW2? Insurgents? Resistence? Terrorists?
Don’t post using my name Nathan {hank} Nathan you were caught before.
Dear Ben,
I’d be interested in what you think. In my opinion, it is a pretty disengenous question.
The old saying that one man’s terrorist is another man’s freedom fighter is bullshit.
Although the underground in WWII did take some action against sympathizers, all in all the majority of their actions were against German troups, supply and communications chains. Military actions carried out by organized resistance loyal to the country’s pre-war government. Resistance.
They weren’t insurgents. They weren’t terrorists. Their purpose was to cause the German army to assign troups and resources to fight them. They provided intelligence to the Allies. They helped repatriate Allied soldiers caught behind enemy lines.
You are smart enough to know this Ben. I’m disapointed that you think I’m too stupid to see past you’re phoney question.
I still love ya,
Hank
“There are those in Iraq who desperately want civil war and will do anything they can to bring it about. Most notably, of course, Zarqawi and Al-Qaeda.”
Brandon, and you know this . . . how? Did you interview them? Did you take a course at the local college? Did you even read a book on them?
No?
So you really don’t know sh*t, do you. How do you know Zarqawi is even still alive? How many Al Qaeda are operating in Iraq?
You don’t know, but you can read Zarqawi’s mind and tell us what he thinks and what he wants.
*****
“Each time a bomb goes off in Iraq, the media portrays it as sectarian violence. It is not. It is murder by terrorists who want to incite sectarian violence.”
And you know better than the media because you’ve been to Iraq? You took a survey? You interviewed Iraqis?
Do you even KNOW one, single Iraqi?
You don’t even bullsh*t well . . .
Hey Ed,
Are you coming to the picnic?
Hank
They also acted against collaborators; especially in Poland and Ukraine.
I suppose you call the “Contras” freedom fighters like Reagan did? The legitimate government of Nicaragua called them terrorists.
In Lebanon Hizbollah remained loyal to the Lebanese government when it fought against the occupation; the US labels them terrorist for doing that.
Seems to me our definition is “if they are on our side they are freedon fighters and if they are against us they are terrorists”
So, Hank.
What were Al Qaeda and the mujahideen when they fought a guerrilla war against the Soviets in Afghanistan?
Terrorists or freedom fighters?
I think the evidence of Shiite death squads in Iraq point to civil unrest by politically motivated qroups, most notably the Shiites, and points to the very real possibility of a civil war.
If it does happen, we should pull up stakes and bail. There would be no winning side worth staying for.
http://www.abcnews.go.com/International/IraqCoverage/story?id=1710040
Now Ben,
Typical liberal BS. You start a dialogue on a topic then you expand the topic instead of staying on topic.
What do you think? What were the French and Polish Underground during WW2? Insurgents? Resistence? Terrorists?
Let’s get this resolved before we move on. Time is limited, I’m running out of it until tomorrow.
Hank
Dear ProudLib,
You first.
Hank
The Zionists are continuously hammering away at trying to keep America divided into two arguing parties so as to divert attention from the common enemy…..Israel.
Job one: rid ourselves of this money draining leach and its trouble-making war-mongering goals.
Our being in Iraq does the same thing.
There are at least 3 distinct factions in conflict armed and otherwise within the border of the nation we call Iraq. There currently is no government. A government that maintains its cohesion and authority and conducts its affairs completely dependent on an occupying foreign military force is not a government.
SO it is a civil war
Though attempts are under way to create a government, this too is totally dependent on the military occupation. Further, religious and sectarian differences are now part of the fledgling government due the election of extremists from the various factions. By this fractious nature, it is highly unlikely that the new government can last wthout …..again, the direct suppport of the US Occupation.
And it will continue to be a civil war.
I think they were resistence fighters. Same holds for Hizbollah in their actions against the occupiers of their country. In Iraq the US is an occupying force in that country.
PL makes an interesting point as well – we armed the mujahadeen to fight against the government in Afghanistan; they eventually morphed into the Taliban …
From the Random House dictionary:
Civil war: a war between factions within the same country.See previous post
insurgent: a person who engages in unorganized outbreak against an established government or authority…… So this would include Iraqui insurgents, the Continental army, the Continental Congress, democrats in Kansas?
terrorist: one who uses violence or threats to intimidate or coerce, esp. for political purposes. So this would include the Iraqui insurgent terrorists….. arguably the US Occupation force……certain folks in this administration….
Guys, that’s some pretty fine hair-splitting. My question is, what do the people who are doing the fighting think they are? I would expect we think someone who plants a roadside bomb is a terrorist, but to many (most?) Iraqis, they’d be considered freedom fighters. It serves the administration’s purpose to call them terrorists. That doesn’t make it so. No matter what we call them, they’re doing a lot of damage and I don’t think anybody can say with a straight face that Iraq isn’t on the verge of slipping into chaos. Lots of civilians are dying, but life has gotten cheap in Iraq. That’s what happens when you have to deal with fanatics.
If it all breaks down, our troops are in a nasty position, and that should be our primary concern. It serves nobody’s purpose to lose an army in Iraq.
Somebody tell me again about all the good news in Iraq.
Halliburton is making a lot of money?
What is the difference between (a) planting a roadside bomb and (b) dropping a bomb from a jet?
… between (a) blowing up a civilian airliner with a baggage bomg and (b) blowing up a civilian airliner with a ship-launched missle?
I think they were terrorists then and they’re terrorists now. So were the Russian invaders.
Both sides were terrorists. To some extent the Russians were responding to terrorism, but then they just became bigger terrorists. Not a good plan.
Unfortunately, Reagan & HW Bush chose to arm Al Qaeda and put our troops into Saudi Arabia.
After Al Qaeda kicked the USSR out of Afghanistan, then they came for us.
Funny . . . violence leading to violence.
I think I remember getting warned about that somewhere . . . where was it . . . live by the sword and die by . . . now I remember, it was The New Testament.
Proudlib,
Don’t waste your time pretending like you actually read the Bible.
Can you even tell me where you get that verse from?
Ben,
What is the difference in (a) making disingenuous arguments or (b) asking disingenuous questions?
Nathan–
While it’s true I don’t spend as much time as you and Hank do praying on street corners so that everyone can see you, I do have some familarity with the New Testament, after attending church regularly for about 50 years.
The verse for which you ask about is Matt 26, verse 52. Mark also has a version of it.
You should read it sometime.
Poll: Bush approval rating hits new low
By Mark Memmott, USA TODAY
President Bush’s “approval rating” has sunk to a new low according to a USA TODAY/CNN/Gallup poll released Monday.
The latest results show only 36% of those polled saying they “approve” of the way Bush is handling his job. Bush’s previous low was 37%, set last November.
http://www.usatoday.com/news/washington/2006-03-13-bush-poll_x.htm
“The insurgency are in their death throes, if you will,” Dick Cheney.
Looks to me like the Administration is in its death throes.
Bush and his “buddies” like the turmoil in Iraq.
Cut-off the money to stop their party. Remember: The head of the snake.
New York: 88 million rats treading water with 8 million Zionists shimmed-up telephone poles. Awesome sight.
It’s the little things you need to watch.
Like shooting women in the legs for protesting a wall…..Little things…little things.
we armed the mujahadeen to fight against the government in Afghanistan; they eventually morphed into the Taliban
NO. THE MUJAHADEEN THAT FOUGHT THE SOVIETS WERE A DIFFERENT ENTITY LED BY A COMPLETELY DIFFERENT LEADER. THE TALIBAN ONLY CAME TO POWER AFTER THE MUJAHADEEN HAD ACCOMPLISHED RIDDING AFGHANISTAN OF THE SOVIETS. THE TALIBAN CAME TO POWER BY EITHER ELIMINATING OR ASSIMILATING THE VARIOUS WARLORDS THAT FOUGHT EACH OTHER UNDER THE POWER VACUUM THAT TOOK PLACE WHEN THE SOVIETS LEFT. THE TALIBAN ARE ALSO A DIFFERENT GROUP THAN AL QAEDA, THE FORMER CONSISTING LARGELY OF ETHNIC AFGHANS. AL QAEDA IS AN INTERNATIONAL TERRORIST MOVEMENT CONSISTING OF MUSLIMS FROM VARIOUS COUNTRIES, SOME EVEN FROM THE U.S. OSAMA BIN LADEN SENT TWO SUICIDE BOMBERS TO THE MUJAHADEEN LEADER THAT WAS STATIONED TO THE NORTH, THEY STAGED A MEETING AND KILLED THE MUJAHADEEN LEADER UNDER A GUISE OF AN INTERVIEW AND BLEW HIM UP AS A FAVOR TO THE TALIBAN LEADER MULLAH OMAR. AFTER THE MUJAHADEEN LEADER WAS KILLED, THERE WAS NO MORE OPPOSITION TO THE TALIBAN, THEY HAD FULL CONTROL OF AFGHANISTAN.
Ed,So you rejoice at the fact over 3,000 Americans including the firemen, policemen, ambulance units had lost their lives in 9/11?
Blech!!!You people are PATHETIC!If I fly a f*cking 747 into your house because I felt like it was God’s will to do so, WOULD YOU CONSIDER ME A TERRORIST OR A FREEDOM FIGHTER???
You are spineless, gutless, non-sensical, unpatriotic bunch of irrational SCUM!
CusaderX
Your post is not made more relevant by use of all capital letters.
Also, I think you should re read the standards for the blog at the top of each blog as to threatening remarks.
Exchanges do get heated here. Your post is the first that made a threat on someones life.
Ed has posted here for a very long time. ANy regular poster knows that Ed makes very volatile posts. He does provide links, which would tend to lend him at least some credibility. You do not have to read his posts if they upset you to the point of making threats.
My guess is your last post will get removed. But it would lend you credibility if you …….moderated it a bit.
Well, it looks like we’ve hit a new low. A death threat, no less.
Way to go, CrusaderX! I’m so impressed! Let’s see, you’re studying to be a lawyer? Are you by any chance part of the Phelps clan?
“You people are PATHETIC!”"You are spineless, gutless, non-sensical, unpatriotic bunch of irrational SCUM!”"if I ever find out who you are, you’re gonna end up with a bullet in your head.”My goodness, somebody’s got their panties all in a bunch!CrusaderX, tell us how you really feel.Have you considered anger management counciling?Were we supposed to be impressed?Boy, you must be one tough dude threatening an old man like that.A guy has to be pretty tough to make a statement like that anonomously.I think you should change your blog name to “Tuffy”.
Crux,
Ed is occasionally insightful, almost poignant and often funny, but his thinking is routinely hijacked by his positively rabid dislike of Zionism and Zionist actions (i.e. Israeli settlement building, bulldozing homes, “lockdowns” on the terrorities, wearisome and dangerous checkpoints etc.)
There is little question that ignoring the festering wounds in Israel made the phenom of bin-Laden possible. I don’t think acknowledging this is the same as supporting the 9-11 attacks.
Ed occasionally makes statements that are enigmatic and/or bizarre and/or outrageously offensive (I would guess the above New York comment refers to Manhattan sinking under global warming’s effects–but I have no idea who the “88 million” refers to). And I am reminded that Albert Einstein regarded himself as a Zionist, yet he also stressed that peace with the Arabs (yes, including Palestinians) was absolutely essential. Ben-Gurion politely listed, and ignored him.
At one point Ed made a crucial distinction between militaristic Likud-type Zionists and other Israel supporters, but as late he seems to be letting loose indiscrimately. A pity, as I at least thought I agreed with much of his views (I part company on Holocaust revisionism, and I believe the state of Israel–as stolen as it may have been in 1948–ain’t going anywhere, and a two-state solution is the only rational hope for peace.)
If you’re going to assasinate anyone, Crux, might I suggest you find a more important target, at least? ;-)
This is what I believe when people try to say that the media is portraying the wrong image out of Iraq.Quoting Farnaz Fassihi, a wall street journal reporter in an article with Bob Garfield.
BOB GARFIELD: When you read criticism of the press in general, that it is somehow so fixated on bad news that it doesn’t report the good, that it’s essentially suppressing the good news out of Iraq, what do you all say to one another? How do you react?
FARNAZ FASSIHI: I can just say that if there were five car bombs going off in New York and 50 people kidnapped a day, I’m sure that metro reporters would be writing those stories and not talking about the school that was painted. When you’re sitting in Iraq and putting your neck on the line to try to bring as balanced a story as possible, it’s very frustrating to hear criticism like that, because you know, as a professional reporter, that the only reason you’re there is because you want to convey the truth. And I can say that everyone is trying to go out their extra mile to find out exactly what’s happening there, good or bad, to try to find progress, obstacles, frustration. And I think, considering, we’ve done a pretty good job. I’m proud of what my colleagues have achieved.
The biggest thing is, she is there. She is right there in Iraq and writes what she lives. The people who keep harping on media coverage bias are armchair quarterbacks second guessing the game.
http://www.onthemedia.org/transcripts/transcripts_022406_aint.html
CruX is one of those jingoist so-called “patriots” who don’t give a damn about the facts. He knows that Iraq had nothing to do with 9/11 but still supports Bush’s invasion because he is just too stupid to care. Then he likes to retreat into his mindless threats of violence. Typical.
Perhaps the eagle should turn CruX in for his terrorist threats.
CrusX–
You post was wrong, very wrong about Afghanistan.
Most of the mujahadeen were locals that morphed into the Taliban. But Osama bin Laden left his cushy digs in Arabia to head up a movement of foreign fighters dedicated to Islamic government in “Islamic” lands and repelling invaders.
This group became Al Qaeda (the Base), a conglomeration of all the foreign fighters brought together in the fight against the Soviets in Afghanistan.
We AIDED Al Qaeda in Afghanistan. Osama bin Laden was our ally under Reagan/Bush. Just like Saddam Hussein was our “ally” as long as he were fighting Iran.
We fed the snake, and then it turned around and bit us.
Old, old story . . . never changes.
ProudLib – don’t confuse the psychopath with facts – that just makes him even more homicidal.
CruX must have killed all the moderators…they are dead at the switch. I can’t believe a death threat has stayed up for this long.
Yeah and Ed is absent too……….
He’s back…
8 million Zionists….10 rats per Zionist…88 million rats, now go stand in the corner.
What is happening to the Palestinians has been, was and still is horrible. It should make you sick. Really sick. Facility 1391 is where they fine-tuned it.
That is what would-up in Abu Graib. We only caught a glimpse. You have no idea how rotten theses people are, too Rotten to be called people.
What did you call me: Moments of something brilliance?
More and more of Israelis are backing the Likud hardliners under a different name. Opinions have sides no matter what, so the name may not suit the intended actions to be taken or approved.
That can shift in a heartbeat.
I recently heard an analysis on NPR that strengthening the Iraqi military is part of the problem and not the solution in Iraq. The thinking went that Sunnis – who are for the most part, the insurgents – see the military as Shi’ite/Kurdish militia – whom will harm them if given the chance.
To appropriately respond to this civil war, it might help if we bothered to understand the players and their motives. When I say understand, I am not recommending that everything will be okay with psychotherapy and empathy, rather we might be able to figure out our interests and how to get out of there if made a realistic appraisal of what was going on.
For those who aren’t sure about the location of the bloggers’ picnic, here’s a link to a map of the lake. It’s okay, guys. Nothing wrong with looking at a map. ::wink::
http://www.sedgwickcounty.org/lake_afton/map.htm
Thanks RD,
My computer at home is poo-poo. Having to sneak comments in at work!
If you look on the map RD linked to, the picnic will be at shelter #4 on the SE corner of the lake by the swimming area.
Hank
I doubt the kid (22) really meant it, but. . . you might inform your local PD, Ed, just in case.
Looks like they finally noticed. . . the last FUCK stayed about 40 minutes, if I recall. Anyone time the death threat?
Just curious.
Poo Poo?
Rage, I never did like the alalm clock, but it did wake me up.
Death threat was on for at least 24 hours. Ed ? Aren’t you dead?