Rasta TimesCHAT ROOMArticles/ArchiveRaceAndHistory RootsWomen Trinicenter
Africa Speaks.com Africa Speaks HomepageAfrica Speaks.comAfrica Speaks.comAfrica Speaks.com
InteractiveLeslie VibesAyanna RootsRas TyehimbaTriniView.comGeneral Forums
*
Home
Help
Login
Register
Welcome, Guest. Please login or register.
April 28, 2024, 04:44:44 PM

Login with username, password and session length
Search:     Advanced search
25910 Posts in 9966 Topics by 982 Members Latest Member: - Ferguson Most online today: 82 (July 03, 2005, 06:25:30 PM)
+  Africa Speaks Reasoning Forum
|-+  WORLD HOT SPOTS
| |-+  Around the World (Moderators: Tyehimba, leslie)
| | |-+  Terror in Baghdad
« previous next »
Pages: [1] Print
Author Topic: Terror in Baghdad  (Read 7197 times)
Bantu_Kelani
Service Member
*****
Posts: 2063


WWW
« on: October 29, 2003, 11:13:11 AM »

Shifty I have a vague memory of a whole bunch of experts on the region saying that the occupation would be a disaster. Maybe I'm wrong...

B.K

-------------------------

Terror in Baghdad
 
Le Monde | Editorial

 Tuesday 28 October 2003

 "We're in an insurrectionary situation with people who strike and run. We didn't think that it would be so intense and so long. We're still at war. "This is about Iraq. The man who describes it this way is no savage opponent of the Bush administration. It's Colin Powell, the U.S. Secretary of State. And he was speaking before the five suicide attacks perpetrated Monday October 27 right in the heart of the Iraqi capital!

 "Do we succeed in capturing, killing, and dissuading more terrorists every day than the Madrassahs and religious radicals recruit, train, and send against us? Must we establish a large and concerted plan to stop the next generation of terrorists?" In sum and in substance: aren't we busy magisterially deluding ourselves? That question is posed by one of the pillars of the Bush administration, Defense Secretary Donald Rumsfeld.

 Two moments of sincerity, two instants of lucidity that demonstrate doubts and disarray and contrast sharply with the way the White House seems to cultivate blindness in the face of a situation, which, far from improving as George W. Bush says, seems to be getting worse. Because we've witnessed an increase, not a reduction, in attacks against American forces the last three weeks: from a half a dozen a day to nearly thirty...What's unreal is not the way the press reports this security fiasco, but the Coué (t.n.: positive thinking) method the White House practices and the accusations it launches against journalists. The situation in Iraq is not much like what the Vietnam War was, except in one regard: the White House desire to impute to the press a too pessimistic portrayal of what's happening on the ground. That has to be seen as a further sign of disarray. Iraqi Kurdistan in undoubtedly calm and the Shi'ite region is perhaps on the road to normalization. But United States is challenged in the Baghdad region and at the very heart of the capital itself.

 They are challenged by an enemy devoid of scruples, as the attack against the Red Cross demonstrates. An enemy that targets the Iraqi population-most of the 43 dead Monday were Iraqis- at least as much as the American forces. An enemy whose talent for coordination was demonstrated by the simultaneity of the attacks. An enemy, finally, with two heads: Saddam Hussein partisans-still on the run- and militant Islamists who have entered Iraq by the hundreds since the American occupation began. It's from among the latter that suicide bombers are recruited.

 And that's not the least paradox of this war started in the name of the war against terrorism. With the motive of finding the still undiscoverable weapons of mass destruction, this war was launched against a regime guilty of crimes against humanity, but that offered no base of support for radical Islam. Six months later, Iraq is one of the major theatres of operation for Islamic terrorism.

http://www.lemonde.fr/web/article/0,1-0@2-3208,36-339812,0.html

Logged

We should first show solidarity with each other. We are Africans. We are black. Our first priority is ourselves.
Ayinde
Ayinde
*
Posts: 1531


WWW
« Reply #1 on: November 02, 2003, 07:45:26 AM »

William Pfaff IHT  Saturday, November 1, 2003

The U.S. in the world

PORTO, Portugal More than nine months into the Iraq crisis, meetings between West Europeans and Americans of goodwill remain strained nondialogues in which most of the American participants find it hard to admit that the catastrophic loss of America's reputation abroad has anything to do with them.

Such a meeting in this old port city last weekend produced the usual American citations of scandalous incidents of foreign anti-Americanism.

The German Marshall Fund statistics were circulated, showing that the gap between American and European attitudes is widening and that Europeans increasingly disapprove of America's position as the sole superpower.

The Americans' response is nearly always that there must have been some failure in communication. Perhaps the United States should "consult" more, they say.

"It's as if they can't hear," said an Irishman who had thought of himself as one of America's best friends abroad.

But every nation has a story - a narrative it tells to explain its place in the flow of history and to give meaning to its actions. The American story since 1942 (and before) is well known, and is considered by Americans and others a story reflecting responsibility and high-mindedness.

Despite aberrations in Vietnam and Latin America, the American story of responsible world leadership has been accepted among democracies as an essentially valid account of the role modern America played during the years leading up to the collapse of the Soviet Union. The problem today is that, in the view of many others, the story has changed. Another one has taken its place, even though most Americans deny that this is so.

Because of the powerful Calvinist influence - predestinarian and theocratic - in American Protestantism, the American story has always described a confrontation between the Elect and the Evil.

When the Soviet Union no longer fulfilled the latter role, Washington tried out several possible successors, finally settling on "rogue nations" - those professing radically un-American ideas and that give evidence of wanting to possess nuclear deterrents.

Their feebleness, however, tended to diminish their credibility when cast in the role of global Evil.

Then came Sept. 11, and the problem was solved. The rogue nations now became the Axis of Evil. They were integral to a vast international threat, capable of striking the United States itself. Moreover, this threat more or less resembled (less, actually, than more) the clash between civilizations that Samuel Huntington had warned would be the "next world war."

Americans declared that "everything has changed, and nothing can be the same." The nation was at war with "terror."

Terror expressed itself through Al Qaeda, the Taliban, Palestinian suicide-bombers, South American narco-terrorists, Chechen separatists and Moro separatists in the southern Philippines. Terror was a ubiquitous force that could ultimately manifest itself in weapons of mass destruction, supplied by the rogue states.

Hence, preventive wars were necessary; Afghanistan and Iraq had to be invaded to seize terror's leaders and their nuclear and biological weapons. International law must step aside.

But what actually has happened during the past nine months is something Americans have yet to grasp, and that others have yet to say out loud: People outside the United States have stopped believing the American story.

They don't think terrorism is an Evil force the United States is going to defeat. They say instead that terrorism is a way people wage war when they don't have F-16's or armored divisions.

They say that Chechens, Moros, Taliban, Colombian insurgents, Palestinian bombers and Iraqi enemies of the U.S. occupation do not really make up a single global phenomenon that the world must mobilize to defeat.

They say that, actually, they had never really believed the American story in the first place. They had listened to it because Washington said it, and they respected Washington. Now they don't.

This is the reason why there is trouble between the United States and the countries that have been its allies. And this is why it may indeed prove true that between them, things "will never be the same."


Tribune Media Services International
http://www.iht.com/articles/115911.html
Logged
Pages: [1] Print 
« previous next »
Jump to:  

Powered by MySQL Powered by PHP Powered by SMF 1.1.21 | SMF © 2015, Simple Machines
Copyright © 2001-2005 AfricaSpeaks.com and RastafariSpeaks.com
Valid XHTML 1.0! Valid CSS!