What twaddle!

The author forgets to mention the US role in the Iran-Iraq war.
Also forgets to mention the chemical weapons supplied by US.
Also forgets that "England and her allies" means: England and the US.
In other words: England and US screwed up the Ottoman empire for oil, then kept screwing it, then kept screwing it.
Deliberately forcing traditional enemies together from a position of power is a tactic to keep the rightful owners of wealth (oil) from obtaining it. It should be no surprise the locals have issues with this, and the US. Not because "they envy our freedom" but because they have a sense of justice!
Bush was a drug addict, dishonest and obviously a puppet for criminal elements. He broke international law, the US constitution and sickened half the globe with his sadistic BS...yet folks *still* want to defend him!

Bashdaar Ishmael's article is a whitewash of a monumental crime against humanity.

If people want to properly inform themselves about the Iraq war, I suggest they visit a few other forums:

"War: not in my name" at http://forum.onlineopinion.com.au/thread.asp?article=8306#130142
"Winning the war in Iraq" at http://forum.onlineopinion.com.au/thread.asp?discussion=2052#42987
"Bush's democracy of hypocrisy" at http://forum.onlineopinion.com.au/thread.asp?article=8288#131101

They should particularly question the Big Lie used by George Bush to justify the invasion of Iraq and the whole "War on Terror" namely that the atrictiy of 11 September 2001 was orchestratd by Islamist extreists form within cves in Afghanistan and not from within the White House. For further information see http://911oz.com http://911truth.org http://ae911truth.org http://911blogger.com and the OLO "Forum 9/11 Truth" at http://forum.onlineopinion.com.au/thread.asp?discussion=2166&page=74#53689

Bashdar Ismaeel wrote, "As events over the past number of years have hardly disguised, it is no secret that US policy to deal with the new dawn in Iraq was indecisive, incoherent and simply lacked practical assessment. The decision to disband the Iraqi army and the expectation that brief post-liberation euphoria would turn into mass support for the concept of democracy, ..."

It is a lie that the chaos of the start of the occupation was the result. It was intentional as Naomi Klein has show in "The Shock Doctrine" of 2007. It was done to allow crony capitalists such as Becthtel, Halliburton and Blackwater, plunder the wealth of Iran and the US Treasury.

(tobecontinued)

(continuedfromabove)

The alleged antipathy of Iraqis to democracy is a despicable libel. As I wrote in another forum (http://forum.onlineopinion.com.au/thread.asp?article=6974&page=0#108120):

As Naomi Klein writes on page 350 of "The Shock Doctrine":

... in February 2004, eleven months after the invasion of Iraq,
an Oxford Research international poll found that a majority of
Iraqis wanted a secular government: only 21% said their favoured
political system was an 'Islamic state'. ... Six months later ...
another poll found that 70% wanted Islamic law as the basis for
the state.

...

The plans of the US centred upon the Iraqis being too disoriented to resist the plans to privatise their economy for the benefit of the likes of Bechtel and Halliburton and open it wide for foreign investment, however on page 361 Klein writes:

"Instead, a great many Iraqis immediately demanded a say in the
transformation of the country. And it was the Bush administration's
response to this unexpected turn of events that generated the most
blowback of all."

There were spontaneous elections in many parts of the country and "In many cases, US forces believing their President when he said the army had been sent to Iraq to spread democracy, played a facilitating role, helping to organise the election, even building ballot boxes."(p362)

However, Paul Bremer, realising that these would pose an obstacle to the plans of the US occupying authority, did not allow those elected a role in the administration of Iraq and cancelled its stated plans to convene a large constituent assembly.

After the comments on my previous post I want just clarify my position on this and other issues. I am neither a 'right' or 'left' wing nutter. My position is that we (all people) do not have choices if we are not being told the truth. The Western world was not told the truth about Iraq and the Bush invasion was one big lie. That does not mean that I support the lies told by any of the terrorist groups or dictators either. I want to be neutral about situations until I am told the truth and then I want to make up my own mind.
I realize that the idea that people will ever be told the truth by governments about anything is really radical, definitely a condition that some may see as insanity. Until that insanity takes over Iraq will be followed by another Iraq and so on, until someone pushed things just that little bit too far

I know of some Iraqis who do not feel 'dramatically freer, dramatically safer and dramatically better' : These are the Christians, living alongside Muslims for hundreds of years and now only half the number compared to before the Bush invasion. Despite the fact that they are only a small minority, their concerns do not seem to be even recognised by the western secular press. If you believe in prayer these people are certainly in need of being included in your prayers. If you believe in prayer then i am sure that all other Iraqis are already included.