When planners devised the Baghdad security plan late last year, they had assumed most Baghdad neighborhoods would be under control around July, according to a senior American military officer, so the emphasis could shift into restoring services and rebuilding the neighborhoods as the summer progressed.
“We were way too optimistic,” said the officer, adding that September is now the goal for establishing basic security in most neighborhoods, the same month that Bush administration officials have said they plan to review the progress of the plan.
Lt. Gen. Raymond T. Odierno, the senior American ground commander in Iraq, said in a brief interview that he never believed that a midsummer timetable for establishing security in Baghdad was realistic. “This was always going to be conditions-driven,” he said, noting that he always had expected it would take until fall to establish security across much of the city.
And so, come September, they're going to be asking for more time. We can take all the time in the world and we're not going to fix this. Edward Wong explains why in this must-read piece from Baghdad. Excerpt:
PERHAPS no fact is more revealing about Iraq’s history than this: The Iraqis have a word that means to utterly defeat and humiliate someone by dragging his corpse through the streets.
The word is “sahel,” and it helps explain much of what I have seen in three and a half years of covering the war.
It is a word unique to Iraq, my friend Razzaq explained over tea one afternoon on my final tour. Throughout Iraq’s history, he said, power has changed hands only through extreme violence, when a leader was vanquished absolutely, and his destruction was put on display for all to see.
[snip]
But in this war, the moment of sahel has been elusive. No faction — not the Shiite Arabs or Sunni Arabs or Kurds — has been able to secure absolute power, and that has only sharpened the hunger for it.
Listen to Iraqis engaged in the fight, and you realize they are far from exhausted by the war. Many say this is only the beginning.
President Bush, on the other hand, has escalated the American military involvement here on the assumption that the Iraqi factions have tired of armed conflict and are ready to reach a grand accord. Certainly there are Iraqis who have grown weary. But they are not the ones at the country’s helm; many are among some two million who have fled, helping leave the way open for extremists to take control of their homeland.
“We’ve changed nothing,” said Fakhri al-Qaisi, a Sunni Arab dentist turned hard-line politician who has three bullets lodged in his torso from a recent assassination attempt. “It’s dark. There will be more blood.”
We can't stop this. We can't win this. What's the point in continuing?

Add to Newsvine
Add to StumbleUpon
...and then can t give any rational answer or evidence as to why one should be a moral person in a universe without God... Did they really give no rational answer or evidence, or will none ever satisfy you as you seem unwilling to accept any notion outside of that big whitebearded skydaddy of yours?
Here's a reason why one should do to one's neighbors as one would have done to one's self that doesn't involve God:
It's sustainable and peaceful.
The example of "it being in my self interest to steal from my neighbor" is simply an unpeaceful way to live. You steal from your neighbor, and your neighbor should rightly have no compunction against stealing right back from you.>
The Old Whitebearded Myth.
quote: "Did they really give no rational answer or evidence, or will none ever satisfy you as you seem unwilling to accept any notion outside of that big whitebearded skydaddy of yours?"
Me: Very funny about the whitebeared God comment. I shows me how ignorant you are about my conception of God. I guess the closest thing you can give to a rational answer is sarcasm. Proves my point yet again.
rr
"[...] Why should you be moral if there is a God? Well, fear of punishment certainly gives a basic, concrete reality to morals because immoral behavior has real consequences in this life or the next. But beyond that one should be moral if God exist because when one views God as heavenly father, has a relationship with him and loves him one will want to please him. And loving your neighbor and being a good person is part of that."
All interesting but entirely faith-based metaphysical presumptions about the existence and particular attributes of God (including the notion that what a supernatural agent wants is always best for one's self or other people - pace harvey lacey's quote in the first response). These assumptions are simply not a priori truths and cannot be asserted as such. Anyone seeking to claim an absolute foundation for moral axioms faces the same inherent problems. It's inherently no more or less justifiable than what an agnostic or atheist would assert is the metaphysical basis for a moral system.
"If God did not exist, it would be necessary to invent Him." - Voltaire
Post a Comment
By submitting these comments, I agree to the beliefnet.com terms of service, rules of conduct and privacy policy (the "agreements"). I understand and agree that any content I post is licensed to beliefnet.com and may be used by beliefnet.com in accordance with the agreements.