Responding to my recent post on Fouad Ajami, commenter John Koch asked the excellent question:
- Why pick on the humbled Ajami when, week by week, Lewis makes bold assertions and predictions, based on his presumed unsurpassed knowledge. No one challenges him or points out how his past predictions about Iraq turned out mostly wrong. Witness: Bernard Lewis Advocates War, Predicts Iraq Future (2002).
Well, I disagree with the assessment that Fouad has been “humbled” by recent events… Momentarily taken aback, perhaps.
But John’s right that at least Fouad seems to evince some general cognizance that his confident earlier predictions had not panned out. And I was interested in checking out what Bernard Lewis has been writing recently.
It was the work of a few moments to go on a visit to the strange land of fog, wilfull ignorance, and misperception inhabited by this sadly misplaced medieval (in more senses than one!) historian.
See, for example, this interview, conducted by Atlantic Monthly contributor Elizabeth Wasserman on April 15, 2004.
Well, Elizabeth was throwing him the most amazingly silly and softball questions. (“You mention that the reason that the Arab-Israeli conflict appears to be the central preoccupation in the Arab world is that it’s the only local political grievance that people can discuss freely in the open forum.” Yes, I know: it’s not even a question, as presented there….) Meanwhile, April 15: never mind that over there in Iraq things were going to hell in a handbasket for the whole US imperial adventure and for hundreds of thousands of Iraqi people, eh?
So you might not want to wade through the whole, turgid transcript of Elizabeth’s interview. But if you go to almost the very end, you can read this gem:
- Q: Are you optimistic about the state of things there [in Iraq]?
A: I’m cautiously optimistic about what’s happening in Iraq. What bothers me is what’s happening here in the United States.
Q: Do you mean the controversy over the occupation? The pressure to pull out?
A: Yes, because the message that this is sending to people in that region is that the Americans are frightened, they want to get out…
And here, in the WSJ on May 12, we had the opportunity to read Lewis’s own unprompted musings on the situation.
His piece there was titled with startling chutzpah, “The UN is likely to botch the job in Iraq”. (Excuse me? The UN, as opposed to which imperial power, is “likely to botch the job”?)
Anyway, here was what Lewis was presenting as his “argument” there:
- The U.S. turn to the United Nations for help in Iraq raises two questions, one of perception, the other of substance.
There can be no doubt that this appeal, in the context of the events in Fallujah, will be perceived in many circles in the Middle East — and not only in the Middle East — as signifying fear and flight, in other words, as the beginning of a scuttle…
The line that Americans are degenerate, soft and pampered — “hit them and they will run” — has been a major theme of Islamic terrorists for some time now. It was temporarily silenced by the campaigns in Afghanistan and Iraq, but then revived by what was seen as public dithering and wavering. The turn to the U.N. will be perceived, or at least presented, as final and conclusive evidence of their view of America, and may well serve as the starting point of a new wave of terrorist action against Americans, reaching far beyond Iraq and perhaps even as far as these shores…
The second point is one of substance. The record of the U.N. in dealing with conflicts is not encouraging — neither in terms of fairness, nor of efficacy. Its record on human rights is even worse…
And that, dear friends, was as far as his “argument” went… That is, no place at all. He raised these two “questions” about the U.N., and then just left them there dangling.
Evidently, he did not feel under any obligation at all–at this point, unlike when he was a fearless cheerleader for the war 18 months ago– to propose any concrete course of action that could help the U.S. government and the people of Iraq to escape their continuing, very intense and dangerous predicament. All he could do was whine on with his pathetic diatribes against the U.N.
Welcome to Bernard Lewis’s La-la-land, indeed. A place where no-one needs to bother to take concrete decisions– far less, to take any personal responsibility for decisions they might have taken, or actions they might have advocated, in the past. A place where no-one ever really needs to take actual note of the bad things that have happened to many thousands of people as a result of one’s own earlier, completely misplaced “advice”, since some long-winded reference to some abstruse historical precedent can always–if you’re a ‘medieval’ historian–get you off the hook, instead…
So yes, John, compared with Bernard (“What went wrong with this man’s brain?”) Lewis, Fouad Ajami does indeed come out looking like a slightly more serious, realistic participant in the public discourse.
I attended a public lecture Lewis gave at the Kennedy School of Gov’t. in the months leading up to the Iraq war. I distinctly remember him saying – either in the lecture or in the Q & A session afterwards – that he predicted Iraqis dancing in the streets after the invasion. So he was yet another contributor to that particular neo-con image.
He also, BTW, said the same thing of the Iranians, as part of advocating a regime change in their country as well, a position which made me nearly fall out of my chair.
Why he manages to sustain the accolades he does for his knowledge of current affairs in the Middle East, I have no idea.
>> He also, BTW, said the same thing of the Iranians, as part of advocating a regime change in their country as well, a position which made me nearly fall out of my chair.
From what I know, Iranians are the most pro-american people in the whole region. They are both fed up by the theocracy and very young on average. As a consequence, they are unsatified with the gerontocracy in power.
Still I do not think Iran is in any way a reasonable target for invasion
Vivion, I don’t think it is surprising Lewis receives accolades because his positions support certain interest groups.
Iranians are by and large false-pride pseudo-nationalistic, probably more so than the Iraqis. Therefore an invasion is certainly ill-advised. However, there is no question that 26 years of Islamist dictatorship has turned the great majority of Iranians around and have made them pro-US and pro-West. It is not a misstatement to claim Iranians are the closest friend that US has in that region.
The issue is that democracy, due to its tolerant and pluralistic nature, does not flourish in chaotic insecure conditions with political power grabs in progress. That is why Allawi is offering a strongman solution. There is a distinct trade-off between democracy and security, between democracy and perceptions of national independence. Why does this tradeoff have to exist and exacerbate in the first place? This is the 64 million dollar question. Lewis is right in this respect. This neocon bashing is so disingenious and is being done at the behest of the CIA and those people who brought you Vietnam.
Just wait till Allawi pays homage to Ramallah and Tehran, and you would know what I am talking about.
>>>>There is a distinct trade-off between democracy and security, between democracy and perceptions of national independence.
>> That’s BS. Governments with democratic backing are the best vehicles to satisfy the popular need for security in the most efficient and forceful manner.
The tradeoff between democracy and internal security applies to today’s Iraqi scene – and not to a democratically conscious Sweden or Switzerland that you have in mind. Democracy has been a historic struggle in Europe and also in the States, and it did not come for free. Democracy was earned, sometimes the hard way, to get to the point where it becomes a guarantor of security (in the west).
In case you have not noticed, we are talking about two different frames of minds – two different civilizations. I have grown up in the middle east and certainly know what I am talking about.
Comparing the US to barbarians is like comparing your local municipal police force to a warlord’s private army in northern Afghanistan. Fact is that democracy comes from a barrel of a gun, historically speaking. Forces of dogmatism, obfuscation, idealism, and fascism are too great to be allowed to take advantage of democratic rights in order to subvert and bring down democracy. This is what is happening in Iraq, and pseudo-nationalistic cries of “occupation” are just a pretext to kill democracy.
Governments rule with the consent of the governed. That was written at a time and by a guy when every government he knew was a tyranny.
Democratic capitalism is a superior way to go to war because it is more likely that the country will be committed to the war, and the logistical needs of war are best satisfied by a diversified market economy.
On the specifics of Iraq, the US, by limiting the involvement of most Iraqis, and by limiting the speech of moderates who might have developed a secular political following, has elevated its enemies. The one who was willing to give the biggest finger to the US in public, Muqtada as Sadr, shot up in popularity and prestige.
By leaving the date of withdrawal open, the US is now setting up a competition among the political aspirants about who calls for a withdrawal at the earliest date.
On a larger level, the US offering to Iraq is generally along the lines of the most damaging tax raising/balanced budget/privatization/selloff schemes of the IMF. These are proven to harm most countries where they are applied, and lead to the diselection of the IMF-annointed president. It only surprises me that the revolt has happened so soon.
US never “limited the involvement of Iraqis”. US begged, cajoled and encouraged Iraqis of all walks of life to form their political parties and campaign peacefully. US initially entrusted Iraqis to write their own Bill of Rights and Constitution, which they failed. Only upon massive handwringing of the US and UN did they come up with a federal Interim Constitution, which was immediately blasted by the Islamists for its minority rights protections. This is a country with almost next to none democratic tradition.
Now, thanks to the US invasion, there are 218 free newspapers and publications in Iraq, countless radio and TV stations – all uncensored, and mostly anti-occupation. Only a couple advocating murder and violence were temprorarily closed. Of course for the pseudo-humanistic cultural relativists of the prosperous nations, this is too good for them, and US should stop enforcing press liberties and get out.
Most Iraqis want the presence of US peacekeeping forces, as they know the alternative is assassinations and violent political elimination, followed by power grabs like Sadr and the Islamifascists, and a bloody dictatorship as you see today in Iran, Egypt and Syria. Of course the selective-outrage people would not care the least if this happens – its just fine if they kill themselves off. Same as they didn’t give a hoot for the 10,000 civilians killed by Saddam annually.
This revolt has nothing to do with the privatization scheme, very little of which has been implemented. People who have lived under state capitalistic economies are the first to call for privatization, and this is unrelated to any IMF mythology.
Funny that the selective-outrage crowd has nothing to say about rampant monopoly capitalism of the most despicable kind, exploitation, alienation, and deep and decrepit class society in their own developed countries, as long as they are provided with jobs and social security – but rather try to deny formerly feudal societies from gaining a competitive foothold in the global economy, and wish to deny Iraqis and 3rd world nation a modicum of prosperity that a market economy can provide for their unfortunate citizens.
I guess when it suits you, deny others of their democratic and economic rights.
Back to an old point, I think taken up by Behnam: of course the Iranian public is probably the closest “friend” to the U.S. in the Middle East right now, I wasn’t disputing that.
The issue is that, should the U.S. actually invade Iran — especially after the fiasco that Iraq has become — I would be stunned if the general public did the Bernard Lewis “dancing in the streets” routine. (I certainly don’t think my relatives will be…)
I would have said that before the fighting in Najaf and Kufa, before the Abu Ghraib incidents, before the escalation of a security crisis in the country that now makes it virtually impossible for the average Iraqi citizen to live a normal life… but now the notion of a beaming Iranian public welcoming the beneficent presence of a U.S. invasion leaps to the level of delusional fantasy.
And, may I say that having grown up in the Middle East does not mean that one represents the entire region as an icon of authority.
yankee, go home…is, pretty much, a universal throughout the world.
“Yankees can go home” from Iraq, if you prefer to see political assassinations, mob rule, then the introduction of brutal intelligence police and emergence of shady strongmen – just like in Iran 1979 – 1981. 100,000 students, intellectuals, democrats, patriots were massacred by Ayatollah Khomeini in Iran at that time when he grabbed power. One has to be extremely sadistic to wish this on the Iraqis.
An invasion of Iran by the US is ill-advised. As said before, false-pride pseudo-nationalism is rampant in Iran. However, Iranians will arguably allow UN / Nato / EU (if any) peacekeepers to arrive and provide security and stability for a democratic order to take root.
The point is not if US is liked or disliked in Iran (it is certainly liked, but not to the point of invasion). This is certainly a secondary issue. The point is how do you usher in democracy. Upon a massive and peaceful uprising in Iran where the mollacracy is booted out – with the huge amounts of AK47’s and RPG’s in the mob’s hands, and with demagogues, Islamists, fascists and opportunists vying to enroll these mobs into their private security forces in order to gain political power through force (assassination, elimination, intimidation, slander, etc.), democracy, liberties, and application of justice will be first attacked by these forces and eliminated as an option.
This is where you need an external peacekeeping force to keep the order on the ground. Those who call for no foreign intervention, and advocate a racist and nationalistic solution “leave it up to the locals” to slug it out in politically intolerant societies, are generally part of such forces of opportunism, or worse, prefer that despotism and obscurantism remains embedded in these societies.
Behnam, I am sorry to be too blunt, but what you are demonstrating here with your remarks about Iraq is the projection of your own prejudiced feelings and beliefs, and has nothing to do with the reality in Iraq. It is clear you have no idea of the situation in Iraq, including – maybe especially – what Iraqis are thinking and feeling and doing and wanting.
You wrote:
“US never “limited the involvement of Iraqis”.”
Once again, I am sorry to be very blunt, but that is absolute nonsense. The US in fact has systematically denied Iraqis any meaningful participation in any decisions or actions concerning their or their country’s present or future. In fact, the reason Jay Garner, who had some prior experience and connections in Iraq, was fired so quickly and replaced by Bremer, who knew (and still knows) absolutely nothing about the country, was that Garner wanted Iraqis to be very involved in decision-making and actions at all levels. What made him most unsuitable for the job was that he planned to start holding local elections immediately, and national elections within a few months.
Iraqis were even barred from making the infrastructure repairs needed to restore essential civilian services, with the result that 15 months later there is still grossly inadequate electricity, water, telephone and sewage service.
“US begged, cajoled and encouraged Iraqis of all walks of life to form their political parties and campaign peacefully.”
You are joking, of course! To campaign peacefully for what, please? The elections that Iraqis have consistently demanded, and that the Americans have consistently barred from happening? The local so-called “elections” that have been absolutely controlled and manipulated by an American corporation which the Bush administration is paying tens of millions of dollars to ensure that the results are suitable to Bush adminsitration goals and interests?
“US initially entrusted Iraqis to write their own Bill of Rights and Constitution, which they failed.”
Where on earth do you get your information? The US insisted that their carefully hand-picked so-called Majlis Hokumi (aka the Governed Council) should write this so-called “Constitution” as it was dictated by Americans, and under the direction and always subject to the approval of their American rulers.
It is interesting that Noah Feldman, the American constitutional and Islamic law expert hired by the Bush administration to oversee the writing of the constitution, resigned early in the process. It is reasonable to suppose he was asked by the Bushies to resign. One way or the other, his resignation was a result of his unwillingness to go along with the Bush administration’s ignorance-and-self-interest-based ideas of what Iraq’s government should look like. This is typical of the Bush administration. If someone(e.g. Feldman) is truly knowledgeable and, based on his expertise, has ideas different from their ignorant and self-serving plans, they will get rid of him and replace him with someone who knows nothing at all, and who will follow the program without question(e.g. Bremer).
The Iraqi people not only were given nothing to say about this so-called constitution, they were not even informed about it until it was signed and approved by Bremer. Only then were the Iraqi people allowed to know about its contents, which gives the Americans what they want, and gives very little of any significance to Iraqis.
“Only upon massive handwringing of the US and UN did they come up with a federal Interim Constitution…”
The “federal Interim Constitution” as you incorrectly call it, was written by Salem (“Sam”) Chalabi, from notes by Paul Bremer, signed by the All-Bremer-hand-picked Majlis, and subject to the final approval of Bremer, who is its true author. The Iraqi people had no knowledge whatsoever about it until it was a done deal.
“…which was immediately blasted by the Islamists for its minority rights protections.”
It was immediately blasted by the overwhelming majority of Iraqis from every group and walk of life for many very good reasons.
“This is a country with almost next to none democratic tradition.”
Again, this is untrue as anyone familiar with Iraq’s history knows. And so what if it were true? That would not justify barring Iraqis from making decisions about their own future and that of their country.
“Now, thanks to the US invasion, there are 218 free newspapers and publications in Iraq, countless radio and TV stations – all uncensored, and mostly anti-occupation.”
You seem to have done a very good job indeed of absorbing the American Occupation Authority’s propaganda. Perhaps you should tell this to those journalists and media people who have quit in disgust over the control exerted on them by the American Occupation Authority – control that has even extended at times to advertising. In a couple of cases virtually the entire management and staff have become fed up and walked out of newspapers, radio or TV stations.
“Only a couple advocating murder and violence were temprorarily closed.”
This is not factual.
“Most Iraqis want the presence of US peacekeeping forces…”
Once again, you are completely out of touch with Iraqi reality. According to polls, most Iraqis 1) do not consider the US forces even remotely “peacekeeping”, 2) want them to leave immediately.
And by the way, anyone who can keep a straight face while using the term “peacekeeping” in relation to US forces is in serious need of a reality check. The US presence is the primary destabilizing factor in Iraq, and is overwhelmingly the greatest source of violence, death and destruction.
“as they know the alternative is assassinations and violent political elimination, followed by power grabs like Sadr and the Islamifascists…
And that is different from what they have now in exactly what way?
“Of course the selective-outrage people would not care the least if this happens – its just fine if they kill themselves off.”
Yes indeed! Why should they be allowed to kill themselves off when the Americans are doing such a grand job of it for them?
“Same as they didn’t give a hoot for the 10,000 civilians killed by Saddam annually.”
Only 10,000 a year? Well, the Americans have managed to kill at least five or six times that many just in the past 15 months alone.
“This revolt has nothing to do with the privatization scheme, very little of which has been implemented.”
With all due respect, revolt is not the correct term. The term is resistance, and you have no idea what the resistance is about. Revolt is an attempt to overthrow a legitimate state authority. Resistance is “a struggle for national liberation in a country under military or totalitarian occupation“, and that is exactly what we are seeing in Iraq.
There are many different groups and individuals involved in the Iraqi resistance, and not all have the same reasons or goals, but certainly all want Iraq to be free from both overt and covert American occupation. They also want Iraq’s economic and political future to be determined by Iraqis in the interest and for the benefit of Iraqis, and not by a foreign power acting in its interest.
“People who have lived under state capitalistic economies are the first to call for privatization, and this is unrelated to any IMF mythology.”
Iraqis who live in Iraq are calling for the right to develope and determine their own economic and political systems for their own interest and benefit, instead of having them imposed by a foreign power for its interest and benefit.
“Funny that the selective-outrage crowd has nothing to say about rampant monopoly capitalism of the most despicable kind, exploitation, alienation, and deep and decrepit class society in their own developed countries, as long as they are provided with jobs and social security – but rather try to deny formerly feudal societies from gaining a competitive foothold in the global economy, and wish to deny Iraqis and 3rd world nation a modicum of prosperity that a market economy can provide for their unfortunate citizens.”
In the ’70’s and the first part of the ’80’s Iraq was considered an emerging first world country with social, medical and education systems and infrastructure that were the envy of many, including some first world western countries. It was the war with Iran, encouraged and assisted by the United States government, which started Iraq’s decline back to third world status. It was the deliberate destruction of civilian infrastructure and 13 years of criminal economic sanctions and isolation that completed its descent to sub-third world conditions, and at the same time stripped the Iraqi people of the wherewithall to rid themselves of their filthy dictatorial regime.
“I guess when it suits you, deny others of their democratic and economic rights.”
I guess it suits the US government to deny the Iraqi people of the right to determine and run their own government, their own leadership, their own economy and their own lives.
Behnam, once again you wrote: ““Yankees can go home” from Iraq, if you prefer to see political assassinations, mob rule, then the introduction of brutal intelligence police and emergence of shady strongmen.”
And I repeat my question: How, do tell us, is “political assassinations, mob rule…brutal intelligence police and emergence of shady strongmen” different from what is going on in Iraq now? And how is it different from what the Americans are setting up now that they have appointed one of Saddam’s thugs to be Prime Minister?
What is this ‘selective’ outrage stuff? Many of us who opposed and oppose the Iraqi adventure opposed our government’s support of Saddam Hussein, the Gulf War, the sanctions, and now this utter debacle. Which is not too surprising since many of us learned about the duplicity of our government by growing up with Vietnam. And we didn’t like the Shah all that much, either. So Behnam. Calm down.
Incinerating families, levelling homes and bombing wedding parties caused al-qaeda bloodlust to die down a bit? Funny, “dying down” must be a new euphemism for soaring recruitment. Same thing happened here in similar circumstances: American jingoism almost died completely after Pearl Harbor, didn’t it?
Shirin writes:
“Iraqis were barred from infrastructure repairs”
This is absolute nonsense and there has been no such press reports. Bremer begged and cajoled Iraqi contractors and paid everyone big monies to make the utilities work. The on-the-ground insecure conditions just did not allow a smooth functioning of anything related to government services. Nobody gains by water or electricity shortages.
And funny on the one hand you decry US imperialistic mal-intentions and other US nefarious motivations and then you have praise for Gen. Garner and Noah Feldman !!!! Fact is that the IGC failed to write a constitution because of internal differences and the general middle eastern lack of democratic experience, and putting personal considerations ahead of national considerations.
The permanent constitution is to be written by an elected CA (Constitutional Assembly) in December. So where do you get the idea that Iraqis are not participating?
Besides you should know that national sovereignty is something to be earned and not a right. You cannot have national sovereignty unless you respect human rights and liberties for your own people. Like saying the sanctity of one
Shirin: “Iraqis were barred from infrastructure repairs”
Behnam: “This is absolute nonsense and there has been no such press reports”
If press reports are your sole source of information regarding goings on in and about Iraq, then it is no wonder there are so many gaps in your information, and no wonder you carry so many mistaken ideas. On the other hand, if you had followed the press closely enough, you would have seen a number of such reports, even in the mainstream American press.
It is a fact, Behnam, that the very Iraqi engineers and technicians who designed, built and maintained Iraqi electrical, water, telephone, and other infrastructure were barred from making the repairs needed to restore service in a timely manner. I know this from a number of sources, including press and other reports, and my own personal contacts in Iraq. I even know personally a number of Iraqi engineers who experienced this directly.
“Bremer begged and cajoled Iraqi contractors and paid everyone big monies to make the utilities work.”
Now THAT is nonsense, and the facts are so well documented that it takes quite a bit of chutzpah to make such a claim. In fact, it is so clearly not true that I don’t think even anyone in the Bush administration has made such a claim.
The reality is that the American corporations that were awarded the billions of dollars worth of contracts have by and large imported foreign workers rather than hire Iraqis, and the few Iraqis who WERE given jobs are paid the bare minimum.
“And funny on the one hand you decry US imperialistic mal-intentions and other US nefarious motivations and then you have praise for Gen. Garner and Noah Feldman !!!!”
Please do not mistake my remarks about Garner and Feldman for praise. They were both part of this imperialist endeavor. The fact that they were not as bad as Bremer and his ilk does not amount to praise.
“Fact is that the IGC failed to write a constitution because of internal differences and the general middle eastern lack of democratic experience, and putting personal considerations ahead of national considerations.
The fact is that the so-called Majlis Hokumi was a bunch of crooks and opportunists who were hand-picked by Bremer in an attempt to put an Iraqi face on the American takeover of Iraq. A further fact is that a very significant percentage of them left Iraq a long time ago and are completely out of touch with Iraqi reality. Some of them don’t even speak Arabic all that well, and are barely literate in the language. The Majlis was intended to appear legitimate without having any real legitimacy, were never and was never viewed as legitimate by any Iraqi with more than half a brain cell.
“The permanent constitution is to be written by an elected CA (Constitutional Assembly) in December. So where do you get the idea that Iraqis are not participating?”
You really need to get beyond the propaganda you hear on Fox News.
“Besides you should know that national sovereignty is something to be earned and not a right.”
Forgive me for being harsh, but it is late and I am both tired and short on time. That is such contrafactual nonsense that it is hardly worth commenting on.
Behnam, you really appear to have very close to zero grasp on reality as it pertains to Iraq. You seem to get all your information from the CPA website and similar sources. I am tired and have to get up and go to work in a few hours. I could write an entire essay refuting each one of your contrafactual and illogical claims. While that would be entertaining I really don’t have the time. For now, all I can do is suggest you try to see past your prejudices and devotion to Bush administration propaganda and look for facts, realities and try to use logic to form your conclusions. And please use a broader range of sources.
Dear Shirin – URL talks B*** S*** walks.
Please produce the URL backing up your claim that 50,000 to 60,000 innocent civilians have been killed by the US in its peacekeeping efforts in Iraq last year. This is my 2nd request to back yourself up.
Behnam: “The permanent constitution is to be written by an elected CA (Constitutional Assembly) in December. So where do you get the idea that Iraqis are not participating?”
Shirin: You really need to get beyond the propaganda you hear on Fox News.
UN is already well underway in preparing CA elections (to the chagrin of the selective-outrage alligator-tear anti-democratic crowds). Obviously you do not read the news on Iraq, if you think only Fox is reporting this.
It is a fact, Behnam, that the very Iraqi engineers and technicians who designed, built and maintained Iraqi electrical, water, telephone, and other infrastructure were barred from making the repairs needed to restore service in a timely manner.
I can see this happening in the first few weeks of the invasion, due to bureacratic chaos or security considerations. But since you repeat this long after utilities have been restored and are functioning, your message is that the US does not want anyone to provide utility services to the Iraqis.
Now you need to back up your claim with a URL.
Your credibility on this board is seriously on the line. You have to produce two URLs to backup your preposterous claims. And if you do not, I will refuse to communicate with you and will add you to my ignore list.
URL talks, B*** S*** walks.
az chAleh be chAh – heheheheheh
qorbAnat, Behnam
Dear Behnam,
I thought I had read your posts here with some care, but somehow I managed to miss seeing you provide a single source – URL or otherwise – for any of your claims. You spoke first. You made many claims here before I made a single comment. So, you first. You provide the sources for your claims, and I will be more than happy to provide mine. I hope you will accept my apology if your sources are here and I have been careless enough to miss seeing them.
I would also be interested to know the source for your definition of peacekeeping. I have never heard of a definition of that word that would fit the Bush administrations acions against Iraq.
Nice try Shirin jAn. Instead of backing up your two nonsensical claims or admitting that they are not factual, you call for me to back up every single statement I have written, and then assert that you will do yours only AFTER I have fully obliged !!!!
Your attempt at obfuscation is only 2nd or 3rd rate, and a typical Islamist hezbollahi tactic. You should learn that the purpose of such debates is not to vent a spleen or spew ideologic propaganda. You should learn that the purpose of civil discourse is enlightenment, understanding and learning, and arriving at positive solutions. Your methodology speaks volumes in itself and any intelligent forum participant can easiy see through your self-assertions and accompanying obfuscatory cover up.
For the 3rd time I ask you to provide URL backup for
Shirin: 1- US has killed 50,000 to 60,000 innocent Iraqis since liberation, and
2- US intentionally does not want anyone to repair the service infrastructure.
As for me providing backup, pls. indicate which of my statements you wish me to backup, and I will happily do so. To show good faith on your part, and to make this dialog a positive one, please in the meantime provide the two URLs requested for so long.
Regarding the source for the term “peacekeeping” – this has been my interpretation of US’s actions to restore security to Iraq, and to keep the conflicting factions and schisms reasonably apart – and is mandated by UN Resolution 1511 of October 2003, specifically paragraphs 13 and 16.
It is not for me to lecture you on methodology here. But you owe it to yourself and this forum to conduct yourself in a positive manner. What you are doing is debasing this forum, and those of us who wish to arrive at understanding through dialog.
I will give you one more chance to back yourself up on the two claims. Otherwise I reserve the right to stop communicating with you.
mesl-e inkeh yek eerooni ham keh nisti va hatman yek eslAmi hezbollahi vatanforuxteh hasti keh intor javAb midi. xAk tu sareh har chi Adam-e doruq goo.
sincerely – Behnam
Dear Behnam,
I am so sorry if I did not make myself clear. I was not asking you to provide sources for every single one of your claims in order for me to provide sources for what I have said. If you provided a source for only one or two of your statements that would encourage me to give you my sources.
How about it? Can you provide your source for, say, two of your claims? After all, you did make quite a few, so surely you can come up with something to substantiate two of them, can you not?
Behnam,
I believe I have been somewhat ungracious, and I do apologize for that. As one source for Iraqi fatalities, please see the October, 2003 report by MedAct. Of course, it covers only the period from March-October, 2003, and there have been many, many fatalities since then, but it gives an idea. I am sorry, I do not have a URL for this report, but I am sure you can find it.
Again trying desparately to wiggle out of the box with more obfuscations ey? You were supposed to provide URL backups for two of your preposterous claims. And you managed to fail for the 3rd time? I did give you my source for the “peacekeeping” comment I made, namely UN Resolution 1511 paragraph 13 and 16.
Obviously you do not adhere to the princple of a constructive and positive dialog. I am not going to ask you for the 4th time to provide the URL backup as obviously you have concoted the figure of “50,000 civilian deaths in Iraq” and have lied.
I just say get lost Shirin jAn the BS artist – you are not worthy of my dialog. Welcome to my ignore list. ***Plonk***
Dear Behnam,
I did miss your source for your claim that the Americans are peacekeepers in Iraq. I apologize.
So, as I understand it, your source is your “perception”, combined with two paragraphs from a UN resolution. Am I correct in this?
Whether or not the Americans are acting as peacekeepers has to do with their real actions on the ground, and the results of those actions, not words on in a document, and not one person’s perceptions. And I am sorry, but I do not understand exactly on what basis you perceive the US actions in Iraq as peacekeeping. What realities on the ground tell you that the Americans are functioning as peacekeepers in Iraq? Is it their willingness to use massive force in civilian areas? Is it the massive attack on and nearly month-long siege of Falluja, which resulted in the highest monthly American death toll since the invasion began, plus 600-700 mostly non-combatant Iraqi deaths and massive destruction in the city, in addition to a solidifying of resistance throughout the country, and a clear defeat for the Americans? Or perhaps turning the holy Shi`a cities into major battlegrounds by taking a series of completely unnecessary actions against Muqtada Sadr constitutes peacekeeping. This ended, by the way, in another clear defeat for the Americans as they ended up giving in to Muqtada’s demands.
And in general what to you is the strongest on-the-ground sign that the Americans are functioning as peacekeepers? Could it be the the steady increase in violence and lawlessness since the Americans invaded? Is it the fact that resentment and distrust toward the Americans has spread like wildfire throughout the country?
I am truly curious as to the basis for your perception of the Americans as peacekeepers, since oddly enough I don’t know a single Iraqi who sees them that way, and I don’t think they even describe themselves that way.
Behnam,
You keep insisting that I provide you with “two URL’s” – I guess that would be one for each of the two statements you are contesting.
I am sorry to tell you this, but “two URL’s” is not the answer for everything, and not everything is available via a URL. You see, Behnam, I have many, many different sources of information, including acamedic sources, and personal contacts in Iraq.
I referred you to a report by an organization called MedAct which studies health and environmental consequences of events. This report has a lot of information about the health and environmental effects of the U.S. actions against Iraq. It includes an estimate of the number killed and wounded as of October, 2003. I don’t know whether there is a URL for this report, as I did not get it from a website. It may be available on the web, but I just don’t know.
In general, Behnam, my sources are far more complex, varied and sophisticated than one-statement-one-url.
Bahnam,
By the way, and FYI, while I have spent quite a few very pleasant weeks in Iran, I have not a single drop of Irani blood and do not know more than a few words of Farsi, so your Farsi remarks are almost completely lost on me. Also, I am not Shi`i, nor particularly religious, let alone “Islamist”, so the Hizbollah charge does not fit at all.
Also, you misrepresented what I have said when you characterized me as stating that the “US intentionally does not want anyone to repair the service infrastructure”. That is not what I said. What I said was that the American Occupation Authority has barred Iraqis from repairing their own infrastructure. The evidence for this, while not contained in a single URL as far as I know, is overwhelming, and is supported in part in American mainstream press reports. I am also personally acquainted with Iraqi engineers who were not allowed to make the repairs needed to restore service. It is also a well publicized fact that electrical, water, telephone and other services are well below pre-invasion levels even now.
And finally, Behnam, you accuse me of “debasing this forum”. Perhaps you are right, but at least I have remained civil throughout all my discourse here and have refrained from personal attacks and unbased accusations.
Behnam, you have made a series of belligerent posts. Shirin’s credibility is not at stake here, and he is not the one debasing the forum. I think that you would be better off somewhere else, frankly.
Dear Shirin – there is a tone of sincerety in your post that compells me to come back. Yes, you have been very civil and commendable in refraining from personal attacks – something which is inspirational for me as well.
I did pursue your linkless “MedAct report” on the subject of number of civilian deaths in Iraq. It says 7,800 to 9,600 Iraqi civilians have been killed in the 7 months since the start of invasion. It does not say how many of these were combatants (guerillas) and how many are support civilians to the combatants and how many were killed by Islamiofascists themselves as opposed to US forces. My rough guess, based on daily reports, has been that 80% of non-combatant casualties are caused by homicide bombers, IED bombers and Iraqi combatants who have demonstrated very little care for innocent life. This figure does not jibe with your assertion of 50,000 or 60,000 innocent civilians killed in the past year by the US. Your assertion would amount to 150 innocent civilians killed on an average daily basis by the US. No such reports have been forthcoming.
But no, instead of honestly admitting to your error, you continue to obfuscate and avoid a request for a backup after 4 repeated tries, and throw another nonsensical figure 600-700 non-combatant deaths in Fallujah, when there has been no breakdown of such casualties, and all indications are that at least 80% of those casualties were direct or indirect combatants, and the civilian casualties were those unfortunate individuals caught in the midst of a firefight. After all, when an RPG wielding fascist blackshirt shoots at a US tank, he risks a round of howitzer coming toward himself and anybody or any structure standing behind him.
And then you start playing with words about “URLs” when you very well know what I mean. Sorry, but no amount of artistry is going to substitute for objective evidence and judgement. I guess this is the difference between those coming from an subjective lit-crit or humanities tradition, and those like myself coming from an objective scientific tradition. If you have a source, then name it, or honestly indicate that it was personal correspondence, and please spare me the lecture why everything is not a URL: In general, Behnam, my sources are far more complex, varied and sophisticated than one-statement-one-url. Something as serious as 55,000 innocent casualties committed by the US is certainly a URL. If this is not a URL, then it is just an ideologically inspired opinion and heresay.
Your claim that US does not want Iraqis to repair infrastructure and that this has been in press reports, but you cannot produce a single URL, is equally lame. There are probably upward of 100 power plants in Iraq, not to mention hundreds of pumping stations, water treatment plants, a few dams, some sewage treatment plants, hundreds of transmission lines and power substations, hundreds of telephone exhanges and thousand of substations and telecommunications centers, etc. And I suppose every one of them is being staffed by Americans and their lackeys the Poles. So this will amount to tens of thousands of expatriots having a merry time while going around and casually keeping this huge infratructure in service. I suppose a lit-crit would not know that these plants are actually run by real people (as opposed to a fictitious person in a romance or a psycho-drama) and that if they are not constantly maintained and routinely overhauled, the service will almost immediately come to a halt. But no – if under the anarchistic and insecure ground conditions of today these services are not perfect, then it means that US is barring Iraqis from repairing their own infrastrucutre, and there is no URL to show for this either, as it is tooooo obvious and certainly unnecessary even after 3 requests.
As much as I like you as a person, I must admit that you have not been honest in the manner which you have conducted your debate and have been dialogically insincere. This is not very helpful as you can guess, and does not further the causes of understanding and tolerance. I wish I had the time to learn more from you – it is a source of deep curiosity for me to understand why people can look at the same set of facts and arrive at totally divergent conculsions. This would obviously be more interesting than “hit and run” political debating.
BTW In the Persian context, the term “hezbollahi” no longer refers solely to a Shiite Islamofascist ideologue. It has picked up a wider application over the years – meaning a person, secular or more often religious, who does not adhere to the rules of inquiry and objectivity. It is slang for a right-wing or left-wing obfuscator that makes short shrift of democracy, and in the meanwhile can make the right anti-western noises. I sort of figured that you did not understand my Persian and that you did not have first hand experience living and breathing in a dictatorship, just like the vast majority of the selective-morality crowd we see in forums like this, who believe that human rights is something of a privelege (for the citizens of the 3rd world) and that democracy is to be earned the bloody and hard way by the locals slugging it out over a course of a few centuries.
No Preference: I think that you would be better off somewhere else, frankly.
May I suggest instead of your cheap partisan interjection demanding self-censorship from somebody that you obviously disagree with (most likely for ideological reasons), may I suggest that you pay attention to the issue at hand and explain why is it that Shirin (and more poignantly the selective-outrage anti-democratic anti-human rights crowd) spews out unfactual and subjective statements, and when reasonably asked for a backup, embark on an obfuscatory cover-up? This is the real issue at hand, and not my supposed belligerence and impatience. You claim to have the good of the Iraqis at heart, one of which is their right to voice their political opinion free of censorship and harassment. And you cannot even tolerate an opposing view on this forum, wishing to filter this place, and send the rejects elsewhere.
As I may not have the time to pursue this debate, pls. excuse me if I do not further participate.
Behnam, I would much rather see opposing viewpoints than spend all my time here reading posts with which I agree. However, I’m not interested with debating opponents who treat their opponents with comments like these:
the selective-outrage crowd. . . . . I guess when it suits you, deny others of their democratic and economic rights. . . . .Those who call for no foreign intervention, and advocate a racist and nationalistic solution . . are generally part of such forces of opportunism, or worse, prefer that despotism and obscurantism remains embedded in these societies.
And that was from just two of your posts.
texas holdem
texas hold’em online poker texas holdem texas hold’em