Are things getting better in Iraq?

[Donovan]

I think things are getting worse. More violent and dangerous to the troops. What do you think? Please discuss.

[12th Doctor]

If things are getting worse, it is only because we are getting closer to the election (in both the U.S. and Iraq).  The over-all situation has certainly improved from 3 years ago and things will continue to get better as Iraqis establish themselves.

[The Duke]

I'm waiting until after this new offensive to vote.

[Donovan]

If things are getting worse, it is only because we are getting closer to the election (in both the U.S. and Iraq).

Haven't we always been getting closer to the election?

[J. J.]

It depends if you use to get raped by Uday or not.

[The Duke]

It depends if you use to get raped by Uday or not.

Good answer.

[Umengus]

If things are getting worse, it is only because we are getting closer to the election (in both the U.S. and Iraq).  The over-all situation has certainly improved from 3 years ago and things will continue to get better as Iraqis establish themselves.

oh yeah...

1000 US soldiers dead
12 000 iraq civils dead
Chaos in Iraq
...

an improvement, for sure...

[The Duke]

If things are getting worse, it is only because we are getting closer to the election (in both the U.S. and Iraq).  The over-all situation has certainly improved from 3 years ago and things will continue to get better as Iraqis establish themselves.

oh yeah...

1000 US soldiers dead
12 000 iraq civils dead
Chaos in Iraq
...

an improvement, for sure...

What was the death rate among Iraqis in the average year under Saddam?

I bet its higher than it was this year.

[2952-0-0]

If things are getting worse, it is only because we are getting closer to the election (in both the U.S. and Iraq).  The over-all situation has certainly improved from 3 years ago and things will continue to get better as Iraqis establish themselves.

oh yeah...

1000 US soldiers dead
12 000 iraq civils dead
Chaos in Iraq
...

an improvement, for sure...

What was the death rate among Iraqis in the average year under Saddam?

I bet its higher than it was this year.

Saddam ruled for 25 years. 300000 dead. One year and 12000 Iraqis dead. That makes it 300000 dead in 25 years.

[Silent Hunter]

I'm sure 300000 is a severe underestimation. Count Iran-Iraq, sanctions, the suppression of the Shia uprising and you're getting close to 2 million.

[Donovan]

It depends if you use to get raped by Uday or not.

Would that mean things are better or worse?

[Donovan]

I'm sure 300000 is a severe underestimation. Count Iran-Iraq, sanctions, the suppression of the Shia uprising and you're getting close to 2 million.

Well there are worse things then being dead though you know. So I don't thing number of deaths is the only factor to consider.

[The Duke]

I'm sure 300000 is a severe underestimation. Count Iran-Iraq, sanctions, the suppression of the Shia uprising and you're getting close to 2 million.

I was thinking the same thing.  I hd always heard the number was closer to 2 million.

[Mort from NewYawk]

Things are getting better.

Al-Sadr has lost close to 1000 "insurgents" in Najaf, Baghdad, and Samarra in the last month.

In Samarra we killed 100, and lost one soldier.

In the taking of the Najaf cemetery, we lost 4 Marines and killed 400.

Now, Al-Sadr is negotiating seriously to give up the insurgency and form a party for the election (see today's NY Times).

In this part of the world, unfortunately, it's about war and brinkmanship - twisting arms until someone says enough.

Once Al-Sadr stops making war on us, what we have left is Al-Zarqawi and the foreign terrorists, who are doing most of the car bombs and suicide bombings. These people have no support among Iraqis.

I believe there is a good chance that we'll see a large turnout for the January election, and a real sense of legitimacy in the new government.

It would be a shame if Bush weren't President when that happens. I just hope that a President Kerry would at that point turn his rhetoric around and stick with the Iraqi people.

[Bogart]

I think it's also important to remember that the United States was holding back from major offensives for the most part. It was hoped that an Iraqi army would be up and running soon enough to deal with a lot of the insurgency. This is what Bush wanted, it's what Allawi (sp?) wanted. The insurgency has been allowed to go on festering to a large extent.

[opebo]

Sure its getting worse - we're about to have an election.   This is an incredibly stupid move - elections in such places just result in theocracy.

We should just set Alawi up as a brutal client dictator and have him kill off the rebels by any means necessary.  Oh and let the Kurds continue in de facto independence.

[Donovan]

Things are getting better.

Al-Sadr has lost close to 1000 "insurgents" in Najaf, Baghdad, and Samarra in the last month.

In Samarra we killed 100, and lost one soldier.

In the taking of the Najaf cemetery, we lost 4 Marines and killed 400.

Now, Al-Sadr is negotiating seriously to give up the insurgency and form a party for the election (see today's NY Times).

In this part of the world, unfortunately, it's about war and brinkmanship - twisting arms until someone says enough.

Once Al-Sadr stops making war on us, what we have left is Al-Zarqawi and the foreign terrorists, who are doing most of the car bombs and suicide bombings. These people have no support among Iraqis.

I believe there is a good chance that we'll see a large turnout for the January election, and a real sense of legitimacy in the new government.

It would be a shame if Bush weren't President when that happens. I just hope that a President Kerry would at that point turn his rhetoric around and stick with the Iraqi people.

Can you brainstorm any ideas that would indicate things are getting worse? Such as number of dead, living conditions, number being injured etc?

Under what circumstances would change your mind?

[Mort from NewYawk]

I would change my mind if it became apparant that the majority of Iraqis were committed to racial and religious war rather than a peaceful united nation, better economic prospects, and political and economic freedoms. That's not going to happen. Those committed to racial and religious war are at most 5% of the population.

I would fear for the success of this enterprise in Iraq if Ayatollah Al-Sistani declared that America is the enemy, and joined with rebels like Al-Sadr in urging military resistance. That's not going to happen. Al-Sistani, the head of Shiite Islam, has shown how different his thinking is than that of the Iranian religious leaders. He's taking responsibility for his people, and understands compromise. He's a good leader to have around if you're trying to introduce democracy into a country.

[Donovan]

I would change my mind if it became apparant that the majority of Iraqis were committed to racial and religious war rather than a peaceful united nation, better economic prospects, and political and economic freedoms. That's not going to happen. Those committed to racial and religious war are at most 5% of the population.

I would fear for the success of this enterprise in Iraq if Ayatollah Al-Sistani declared that America is the enemy, and joined with rebels like Al-Sadr in urging military resistance. That's not going to happen. Al-Sistani, the head of Shiite Islam, has shown how different his thinking is than that of the Iranian religious leaders. He's taking responsibility for his people, and understands compromise. He's a good leader to have around if you're trying to introduce democracy into a country.

1 in 20 is a huge section of the population don't you think? I means 1 in 20, considering the size of families in the country, would mean that 1 in 2 families would have a close relative as a rebel. You think we can still have stability in that environment?

[Mort from NewYawk]

I would change my mind if it became apparant that the majority of Iraqis were committed to racial and religious war rather than a peaceful united nation, better economic prospects, and political and economic freedoms. That's not going to happen. Those committed to racial and religious war are at most 5% of the population.

I would fear for the success of this enterprise in Iraq if Ayatollah Al-Sistani declared that America is the enemy, and joined with rebels like Al-Sadr in urging military resistance. That's not going to happen. Al-Sistani, the head of Shiite Islam, has shown how different his thinking is than that of the Iranian religious leaders. He's taking responsibility for his people, and understands compromise. He's a good leader to have around if you're trying to introduce democracy into a country.

1 in 20 is a huge section of the population don't you think? I means 1 in 20, considering the size of families in the country, would mean that 1 in 2 families would have a close relative as a rebel. You think we can still have stability in that environment?

Of course, because the situation is fluid. Over time, an Iraqi-run government strengthens, and so does  public participation in Iraq’s educational and political institutions. As the possibility of a tolerant and democratic society becomes more real, public opinion turns against fundamentalist and racial violence, and most of the families who have a rebel as a close relative convince him that the political process is the more effective way to make the country better.