What is improving in Iraq (since the destructive war)

I will preface this with this: The invasion was destructive. The insurgency was and is terrifying. Many innocent people have undoubtably been killed, and many children have suffered greatly.

But, what about the other side of the coin? What is improving?

Are the positive changes for real, or just fluff?

Schools are rebuilt and more continue to be rebuilt. The economy is getting stronger. The Iraqi military is taking on more responsibility. And the vote. The election is here.

I hope that we can use the blogs IN Iraq done BY Iraqis to get a feel of what is going on there on the ground.

To be fair and upfront, I am biased. I think invading was the right call. I believe the Iraqis on the whole will benefit greatly from the removal of Saddam, and the forcefeeding of democracy.

But, how is it really?

I will start with today’s election:

[quote]We have noticed on our way to the polling station that the streets are much quieter this time than they were back in January.
Of course we did hear a few explosions, probably RPG or mortar fire but nothing compared to the attacks we had last time in number or size

Association of Muslim Scholars, Iraq:

"In recent times, one of the most difficult periods has been the past 35 years, during which Iraq was subjected to one-party rule by a minority that dragged the country through a series of misadventures, with heavy losses for the Iraqi people. During the last chapter of that painful era, Iraqis were for many years punished with sanctions that caused the death of hundreds of thousands of innocent people, most of them children. The sanctions ended with an invasion, followed by an occupation by US and British troops, in total complete contravention of international law and in defiance of the UN. The invaders resorted to pretexts that soon proved to be false, including the lie about weapons of mass destruction.

Things became much worse under occupation, which has delivered none of the promised dividends of democracy, freedom, security and prosperity. Instead, Iraqis have been living in fear, poverty, oppression and a lack of freedom.

The occupation troops have resorted to excessive force, indiscriminate killing and collective punishment of the population. They have besieged entire towns, storming into them, instilling fear and horror among residents and destroying their homes. Iraqis have been humiliated and stripped of their basic human rights; they have been subjected to brutal and ghastly forms of torture, as the infamous Abu Ghraib prison case and the British troops’ abuse of detainees in Basra have shown.

In the meantime there has been a scandalous failure by successive Iraqi governments to attend to the basic needs of the population. There has been a continuous rise in unemployment, which has been used to force young men to join the military and security establishments, which in turn throw them into the furnace of a destructive, yet futile, war. Many other young men find themselves drawn into drug trafficking because Iraq has become a theatre for this sinister industry although it had until the invasion been one of the few countries in the world that had no significant drugs problem.

The conduct and motivation of the occupation authorities were suspect right from the start, when they encouraged the organised theft of public properties; left weapon dumps unguarded; dissolved the Iraqi army and replaced it with militias whose agendas are incompatible with the collective interests of the Iraqi people; and when it introduced sectarian and racial quotas in political life, paving the way for serious sectarian and racial conflict that has been exploited by some political groups for their own exclusive ends.

This is what has become of Iraq under occupation. The US and its allies bear full legal and moral responsibility for all this: they are the ones who instigated it by illegally invading Iraq.

This is Iraq’s reality today. It goes without saying that the continuation of this dreadful situation will have very serious repercussions not only for Iraq but for the region and the entire world.

What is the solution? The cause of the problem, the source of the trouble, is the occupation which has brought all this upon Iraq and the Iraqis. This has to be eliminated. But the US administration remains committed to its occupation and insistent on pushing ahead with a political process that is entirely without credibility.

The refusal by some Iraqi political groups and religious authorities to endorse this process is not born out of a rejection of peaceful political engagement or a decision to opt for a violent solution - as the occupation-sponsored media machine alleges - but stems from a belief in justice, freedom and independence as basic prerequisites for any genuine political process. None of these prerequisites are present, and therefore the current political process cannot provide the Iraqi people with peace and security.

The abuses witnessed during previous elections, as well as during the draft constitution referendum - which had the effect of denying the will of the majority of the Iraqis - only generate scepticism and reinforce the suspicions of those who are boycotting today’s elections. Whether Iraqis take part or not, few regard these latest occupation-sponsored elections as any more free or fair than those that preceded them, and they will not help to solve the crisis facing the country.

For the political process to succeed it must proceed in a healthy environment which will take shape only when occupation comes to an end. The solution to the Iraqi problem, in the view of the Association of Muslim Scholars, is simple and logical: it is one that fully complies with international legality and would serve to reinforce it; that would put an end to the daily haemorrhage of Iraqi blood; that would lay the foundations for a state of law that protects the rights of all its citizens and seeks to secure basic human dignity; that provides an alternative to occupation, as explained in the memorandum we submitted to the United Nations and the Arab League.

This solution must be based, first, on an announcement by the US and its allies of a timetable for withdrawing their troops. Second, it would entail replacing the occupation forces with a UN force whose main task would be to fill the security void. This would be followed, thirdly, by the formation of an interim Iraqi government for six months under the supervision of the UN in order to conduct genuine parliamentary elections in which all parts of the Iraqi population would take part. Finally, the duly elected Iraqi government would take charge of the task of rebuilding the country’s civil and military institutions.

Nothing will work in Iraq unless the root of the problem is addressed: the occupation must end."

I feel this will happen much sooner than it did in Germany and Japan. But again, the troops should remain on military bases. And when I hear people trying to rush the process, I feel they just want to grab what can be grabbed…as happened when the USSR fell apart. Who wants that again?

I feel this will happen much sooner than it did in Germany and Japan. But again, the troops should remain on military bases. . . .[/quote]

Presumably that’s so the Bush administration can exercise ultimate control over the destiny of the Iraqi people – however they might wish.

Doesn’t that make a mockery of all this self-congratulatory talk about how the Bush administration has delivered democracy and self-determination to the Iraqi people?

I don’t see how this is possible when Bush is out in 2 years, unless Jeb is coming in. :slight_smile:

Anyway, I don’t want to get off topic so early in the thread.

What about the small victories? Schools opening; people voting; business picking up? Do you, Spook, see anything positive happening on the ground?

Well, the Muslim scholars can oppose Ameirican opposition all they want, but the very fact that they can do that publicly represents some amount of progress. Even as they condemn the elections Sunnis are coming out in force to vote for thier representatives, so at this point you can hardly say the elections are bogus.

washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/co … 00228.html

I think it should be " Association of Sunni Muslim Scholars" :s

I think the Election speaks for itsself about the conditions in Iraq.

Well, I don’t think anyone will argue 5 years from now that Iraq would’ve been better off without Saddam and left to its own devices as opposed to the intervention later.

I hope those kids are getting a quality education, aren’t we doing kind of bad in the United States teaching our own kids in math and science?

EDIT: Thanks JD for catching the really serious typo.

[quote=“jdsmith”]
What about the small victories? Schools opening; people voting; business picking up? Do you, Spook, see anything positive happening on the ground?[/quote]

I believe the economic progress in Iraq today is primarily due to the lifting of sanctions and would have occurred under the Baath regime as well.

As far as free, democratic elections in Iraq go, there’s no doubt that huge advance in the lives of the Iraqi people could only have occurred with the forcible removal of Saddam Hussein and the Baath Party from power by the Bush administration.

It should be recalled though that representative elections in Iraq were originally opposed by the CPA and only acceded to after Ayatollah Sistani insisted on them. The Bush administratiion plan under the “Agreement on Political Process” and non-repealable Fundamental Law was to appoint and exercise control over the process to avoid having an Islamic republic established in Iraq. Dealing with an increasing insurgency over-shadowed that goal though and made compromise with the Shiite majority and its defacto leader, Sistani, necessary.

Still, removing Saddam from power was a profoundly good thing, just as removing the dozen or more other brutal dictators around the world from power would be. I just don’t believe the ends justifies the means.

Thank you spook. Thought you’d forgotten about me. :slight_smile:

[quote]
I just don’t believe the ends justifies the means[/quote]

I do. How can the stronger “civilized” nations sit around twiddling their thumbs while dictators literally kill off opposition, starve their peoples, and bleed their countries dry, leaving nothing for the future generations?

One day, Africa will be the richest continent on Earth, but not until the “civilized west” stops pretending that “They’re just doing it to themselves.” No, the civilized are allowing it to happen because we give dictators a place at the table, as though putting powdered sugar on a turd will make it smell better.

Too shockingly GRAPHIC for the mainstream media to show!

Iraqis in former rebel stronghold now cheer American soldiers