Comments on: Holding On To Paper Tigers http://commentsfromleftfield.com/2007/10/holding-on-to-paper-tigers Wed, 08 Feb 2012 16:39:52 +0000 hourly 1 http://wordpress.org/?v=3.1 By: Kyle E. Moore http://commentsfromleftfield.com/2007/10/holding-on-to-paper-tigers/comment-page-1#comment-9209 Kyle E. Moore Mon, 15 Oct 2007 18:08:23 +0000 http://commentsfromleftfield.com/2007/10/holding-on-to-paper-tigers#comment-9209 Well, yeah and no. I mean, you keep touching on the point when you mention that none of the successes have anything to do with the surge, but the larger point, the bigger point is that none of the successes address the true problems facing Iraq right now. Anbar, yeah, it was cleared of AQI, but also, of Shias. That's to say, the core problems aren't being addressed but instead side stepped through localized ethnic cleansing. Further, on AQI, now the last stat I've heard on AQI is that they account for roughly seven percent of the violence in Iraq, and that stat is a couple of months old by now. Now, I'll cede that while they may only account for a tenth or less of the violence, perhaps their target selection and gruesomeness makes that ten percent a little heavier, but the big point is simply that, they aren't, as we agree, as big as the administration makes them out to be, and that once they are gone, you still have a whole bunch of other problems to deal with, problems that were there all along and not being taken care of. Well, yeah and no. I mean, you keep touching on the point when you mention that none of the successes have anything to do with the surge, but the larger point, the bigger point is that none of the successes address the true problems facing Iraq right now. Anbar, yeah, it was cleared of AQI, but also, of Shias. That’s to say, the core problems aren’t being addressed but instead side stepped through localized ethnic cleansing.

Further, on AQI, now the last stat I’ve heard on AQI is that they account for roughly seven percent of the violence in Iraq, and that stat is a couple of months old by now. Now, I’ll cede that while they may only account for a tenth or less of the violence, perhaps their target selection and gruesomeness makes that ten percent a little heavier, but the big point is simply that, they aren’t, as we agree, as big as the administration makes them out to be, and that once they are gone, you still have a whole bunch of other problems to deal with, problems that were there all along and not being taken care of.

]]> By: Publius Endures http://commentsfromleftfield.com/2007/10/holding-on-to-paper-tigers/comment-page-1#comment-9201 Publius Endures Mon, 15 Oct 2007 17:14:45 +0000 http://commentsfromleftfield.com/2007/10/holding-on-to-paper-tigers#comment-9201 Kyle: I'm with you that AQI is Bush's paper tiger (after all, they never seem to have had much of a formal relationship with the original Al Qaeda, and they only exist because of the fact that we're there to begin with), though I do think you somewhat downplay the amount of influence they had, which is still significantly less than Bush would have us believe. Indeed, it seems that AQI pretty much owned Anbar province for an extended period of time; however, AQI was a Sunni group, and cannot be blamed for all the Shia violence or for the state of virtual civil war in Baghdad itself. There has been some very good news of late, but Andrew Sullivan has had a couple of recent posts that make a fairly persuasive argument that the good news is a result of Sunnis (who did quite well under Saddam's secular regime) rejecting AQI's fundamentalism rather than anything having to do with the "surge" itself. Also, it sounds like many Shia are beginning to get fed up with al-Sadr and turn on him- but again, this has little to do with the surge, and much to do with people like al-Sadr being even worse for Iraqis than the occupation. Kyle:
I’m with you that AQI is Bush’s paper tiger (after all, they never seem to have had much of a formal relationship with the original Al Qaeda, and they only exist because of the fact that we’re there to begin with), though I do think you somewhat downplay the amount of influence they had, which is still significantly less than Bush would have us believe. Indeed, it seems that AQI pretty much owned Anbar province for an extended period of time; however, AQI was a Sunni group, and cannot be blamed for all the Shia violence or for the state of virtual civil war in Baghdad itself.
There has been some very good news of late, but Andrew Sullivan has had a couple of recent posts that make a fairly persuasive argument that the good news is a result of Sunnis (who did quite well under Saddam’s secular regime) rejecting AQI’s fundamentalism rather than anything having to do with the “surge” itself.
Also, it sounds like many Shia are beginning to get fed up with al-Sadr and turn on him- but again, this has little to do with the surge, and much to do with people like al-Sadr being even worse for Iraqis than the occupation.

]]>