A very thoughtful and realistc article. It touches on the 'on the ground' present day realities in Iraq and looks past the expected repetition of history. That history was devoid of hope and optimism. This piece is written with a touch of hope and optimism, something missing from the lives of Iraqis for several generations. With sentiments, such as expressed by Bashdar, peace and a form of democracy acceptable to the Iraqi's will eventuate. It may take sometime but such will be worth the effort and the sacrifice of all.

The Sunni Islamists continue to target Shiite women and children in sickening terrorist attacks.

Some months ago a Sunni Islamist pulled up in a car and called Shiite children over to it with promises of candy - as the children crowded around the car he blew it up. Parents of the Shiite children came out of their houses to find body parts of their children scattered about the street.

The US needs to arm Shiite militias and withdraw from Iraq to its borders to stop other Sunni Islamists form entering, but more importantly to stop the Sunni Islamists in Iraq from leaving - let the Shiites end the terror targeted against them by Sunni Islamist Foreigners.

The foreign Sunni islamist 'insurgents' have targeted and killed more Shiite Muslims than US soliders in Iraq - Muslims killing Muslims.

But at the end of the day, not should one hated Infidel US soldier should lose his life for a Muslim.

Bashday,

Regarding the future of Iraq, as also now on Iran, it is the historians and social scientists who appear to have much less faith in the future of Iraq than from a big percentage of the public, whom some political philosophers dare to call right now, the moronic majority in America, Britain and Australia. whom seem to be basing their thinking that military power, possibly more so than historical insight, must surely win in the end. It is simply just looking after number one, which means for the majority, backing unipolar Americana with powerful conventional weaponry galore, as well of course the ultimate in nuclear weaponry.

Even talking casually to people in the street these days. International Relations academics get the message, that as far as the oil industry is concerned, especially in the Middle East, why should not the Americans and Brits run the whole Middle East show if Iran gets knocked out, they have the most efficient oil engineers, anyhow

Part Two

It is hard to convince the average Joe Blow, or the feminine eqivalent these days, that we may be a bit wrong about forcing democracy on the whole Middle East, because if it did come to a vote over the whole Middle East, all Westerners would need to get out quick smart, as well as told to take the Israelis out with them.

So Middle East democracy over places like Iraq, Iran and Syria, would have to be ersatz, or a managed democracy, as tried in colonial times, called in more friendly parts of India, Dyarky democracy, meaning double-rule, with colonial commissars matching every strategic local appointment. Much like Paul Bremer has already arranged for Iraq, as it will surely be for Iran and Syria if subjugated.

The above is the way most historians appear to be looking at it, because they already have the thorough insightly knowledge of what went one before with pretty well the same Anglipholistic people engaged, or their sons and daughters, anyhow.

George C, WA - Bushbred

A thoughtful article by Bashdar. I agree that the key to a viable and successful government will be the accommodation of the three major groups, the Shiites, the Sunnis, and the Kurds, in a balanced distribution of the "key posts" in government.

Once the government is formed, the other paramount goal will be the defeat of the insurgency. The latter can be accomplished in my opinion by the following stratagem: Under article 108 of the Iraqi constitution, oil and gas are the ownership of all the people of Iraq. Under article 109, the revenues from oil will be distributed fairly in a manner compatible with the demographic distibution all over the country. My suggestion is, that all Iraqi households be the recipients of dividends issued from some of the profits of oil. These should be paid not at the end of the financial year, but in advance, with the formation of the government. This advanced payment will be financed either by The International Monetary Fund or by The World Bank. The incoming government by making the Iraqi people the equity holders of a major part of the oil profits, will irretrievably win, and lock, the loyalty of the people behind it. This will deliver a devastating blow to the insurgents as it will totally isolate them from the people. Furthermore, every attack by the insurgents against the facilities of oil will be seen as an attack against the direct interests of the people. This is the way to bring definitive peace to its insurgency-torn ravaged people.

P.S. This proposal of mine of Iraqis being the major equity holders of oil, was sent both to The White House and to the Pentagon on October 2003, and to my surprise and chagrin was not adopted by the Americans.

Blog NEMESIS: http://congeorgekotzabasis.blogspot.com

Bushbread,
Another insightful post, I agree 100%, I would add that the current situation in Iraq I expect to last for at least another decade.

The invasion was about oil, not terrorism, however terrorists have now joined in the fight with prodominately the USA, and I can't see an end to this ugly war any time soon.

USA democracy is questionable at the best of times, with President George.W. Bush having been elected on just over 50% of eligable voters, i.e. anything more than 25% of the eligable voters, which leaves the majority of voters unrepresented, is that democracy? I think not.

Bush and Howard have killed thousands of Iraqi citizens and US military soldiers to create an Islamic democracy in Iraq. This is completely useless to the west, as well as a waste of human life and money. The US financial cost alone of this war is appropriated at $251 billion by March 31st 2006. These leaders do not even practice democracy in their own nations, so the whole thing is a failure.

regards,
Teresa van Lieshout
http://teresavanlieshout.tripod.com/

This post might be off direction but thought it ought to be posted.

Iraq's WMD Secreted in Syria, Sada Says
by IRA STOLL - Staff Reporter of the New York Sun, January 26, 2006
Full item: "The man who served as the no. 2 official in Saddam Hussein's air force says Iraq moved weapons of mass destruction into Syria before the war by loading the weapons into civilian aircraft in which the passenger seats were removed. The Iraqi general, Georges Sada, makes the charges in a new book, "Saddam's Secrets," released this week. He detailed the transfers in an interview yesterday with The New York Sun.
"There are weapons of mass destruction gone out from Iraq to Syria, and they must be found and returned to safe hands," Mr. Sada said. "I am confident they were taken over."
Mr. Sada's comments come just more than a month after Israel's top general during Operation Iraqi Freedom, Moshe Yaalon, told the Sun that Saddam "transferred the chemical agents from Iraq to Syria."

Democrats have made the absence of stockpiles of weapons of mass destruction in Iraq a theme in their criticism of the Bush administration's decision to go to war in 2003. And President Bush himself has conceded much of the point; in a televised prime-time address to Americans last month, he said, "It is true that many nations believed that Saddam had weapons of mass destruction. But much of the intelligence turned out to be wrong."
Said Mr. Bush, "We did not find those weapons."
At http://www.nysun.com/article/26514