Some Iraq Questions - like the $1 billion for 25000 mercenaries called

[papau]

private guards - Does the Pentagon plan to draw down forces by hiring more private "guards"? And Did not Congress require the Pentagon to develop a plan to control those private guards and hold them accountable for killing anyone - a plan that the Pentagon has not delivered. The 25000 is the working estimate in the media - but does anyone really know that it is not 50,000 or more?

Will Shiites, influenced by their Islamic clergy, believe their sheer numbers - an estimated 60 percent of the population - grant them the right to rule via imposed rules that please that clergy?

Will Kurds, about 15 percent of the population, forgo a secular independent state for Sharia based Shiite State.

Will Sunni Arabs agree to being poor - no piece of the oil pie, as they are ruled by Shiites who both rule their southern Federation and rule all of Iraq?

Can we get an US type 1788 compromise where women are counted as 3/8ths of a person, but considered slaves in the south (bad word - considered as traditional Arab women with rights coming from the Koran and their Husband or male relative)?

[enigma000]

1. Lemme this about this. . .

[papau]

2. You have said more than the US Media has said about each of the

points I mentioned....

sigh....

:-)

[enigma000]

4. OK let's try this....

I'm not sure what to think about the private guards. Are they really on the Pentagon payroll? Perhaps this will be allocated as a "foreign aid" cost. Just a thought.

Will Shiites, influenced by their Islamic clergy, believe their sheer numbers - an estimated 60 percent of the population - grant them the right to rule via imposed rules that please that clergy?

Well, they could have forced passage of the any draft constitution to their liking through the general assembly yesterday (or weeks ago)but I suspect the Kurds and the Arab Sunni would not accept Sharia rule. Try this article on al-Sistani

http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/6920460/site/newsweek/page/4/

But he has set down some guidelines that will have to be followed. "He rejects any role for the clerics in the governance or administration of the country," says Shahristani. Al-Rubaie, also a member of the United Iraqi Alliance's executive committee, confirmed that. And Sistani will insist that Islam is the national religion, with no laws that contradict Islamic principles. But at the same time, as he once told a Shia politician, "there is nothing written in the Qur'an about elections."


Will Kurds, about 15 percent of the population, forgo a secular independent state for Sharia based Shiite State.

Doubtful. Kurds are by Muslim standards, rather secular in outlook. Becoming part of Shia-stan is not their idea of a satisfactory end to this whole affair. Fortunately they don't seem to want independence, so they say

http://www.helenair.com/articles/2005/08/16/ap/headlines/d8c140e00.txt


Will Sunni Arabs agree to being poor - no piece of the oil pie, as they are ruled by Shiites who both rule their southern Federation and rule all of Iraq?

Unless the Sunni participate in the Constitutional process they will wind up partitioned away from the oil reserves, in poverty, and isolated forever. What future is there is being Loser-stan, with Zarqawi and his merry jihads chopping off heads? Terrorism by Iraqi Sunni is just plain stupid - they should be forging a political alliance with the Kurds. I hope, when the Sunni come to realize that Zarqawi stands between them and their fair share of oil revenue, he's toast.


Can we get an US type 1788 compromise where women are counted as 3/8ths of a person?.....

Look, we both saw pictures of Iraqi women lining up to vote in last January's election. They did not strike me as the sort of women that are going to lie down and get, metaphorically, screwed over. Maybe, just maybe, if the Constitution does acknowledge Sharia law, the female half of the population will vote it down in October.

Try this article
http://www.opinionjournal.com/editorial/feature.html?id=110007112

Hope this helps.

[papau]

6. Thanks for the reply - as to the private guards - they are not on the

the Pentagon payroll and the 200 deaths so far are not counted as US dead - but of course we do contract for their services to the tune of about a $1 billion so far.

I assume the appropiation is carried as an Iraq war cost but who knows.

I agree they could have forced passage of the any draft constitution to their liking through the general assembly yesterday, but passage in the October vote has no chance if the Kurds or Sunni are reject in at least 2 provinces by 75% (I believe I have the rules correct - but I could be wrong).

The Sistani demand for Islam as the national religion, with no laws that contradict Islamic principles means womens rights are tossed and that will not go over with the Kurds and Sunni - or most of the women.

I agree it is fortunate that the Kurds are not demanding a secular state now - but they are demanding the right to do so later and want the rules on how they do so later put into the Consitution - and the Sunni's object,

I agree the Sunni Arabs should join with the Kurds - they are both Sunni - but Kurds will not have it. The best they can do is get a fair share of oil revenue - but will that be enough - they like the Kurds want secular with Islam "a" source of law.

I also agree that the women's vote in October may kill the draft if Sharia law is agreed to.

Thanks for the links - now to get the talking heads on the evening news to discuss.

[donkeyotay]

3. You raise 2 questions that the media covered extensively before the war

1) Is this a war winnable or would it bring chaos.

2) Is using mercenaries a good idea as in a) are they actually cheaper and b) is it a good idea to deputize a bunch of thugs and let them loose to do whatever strikes their fancy?

Both of these problems were covered by the media and fully discussed in a national debate BEFORE we invaded... did you miss it?


:crazy:

[papau]

5. LOL - the mercenary discussion and the $1 B cost I saw in Spring 05

when Congress ordered the Pentagon to develop a policy on how to control the "private guards"

But no media dare say mercenary.

I thought they would when the Marines held 14 private guards and taunted them about making 3 times what they had made the prior year as Marines in Iraq... the thought the morale problem would make news - but like all things that question Bush - the media killed the story.

Winnable war was indeed discussed by Cheney- I believe it was we will be greeted as liberators and Iraqi oil will pay for our costs of going into Iraq. But our media has forgot this as they forget WMD and mushroom cloud speeches - must not be political about using our memory, now!

:-)