"Living in Fear" - Life for Iraqis in Iraq

[Jonathan Randall]

Sectarian violence in Iraq is at Civil War levels:

http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/15896932/

Many, including myself, felt that we were opening Pandora's Box by invading and occupying Iraq. Unfortunately, we were right.

 

[MA-Caver]

Somewhere Saddam sits gleefully and quietly chuckling in his cell, for he's surely getting news of the atrocities that's happening. Waiting, hopefully for a chance that the strife will somehow free him and he can resume his reign.

Part of me says the U.S. just needs to get the hell out... totally out, and let Iraq settle it through their own Civil War... we had minimal interference when we had ours... and we came out alright. Stronger in fact.

Yet another part says that we need an even stronger force to help quell the violence. But violence begets more violence and it's a double edged sword for us.

What to do?

It's terrible what's happening over there. People are being burned alive now from what I read in yesterday's papers. Children are being made to suffer for their parents' beliefs.
But this little snippet from (above) article lets me think that it might work out...

Yet amid the fear gripping this city of 7 million, there were also signs of Iraq's famous cohesiveness, even as the sectarian divide widened. In some mixed neighborhoods, Shiites provided shelter to Sunnis targeted by Shiite militiamen, even though they risked being branded as collaborators. Others took care of Sunni children or bought groceries for Sunni neighbors who feared walking to the local market.

What to do?

 

[michaeledward]

Somehow, it seems to me, that someone who has recently been sentenced to death by hanging would not be gleeful about anything. But, maybe that's just me.

And you have to wonder how the leader of any country could be happy with their country's destruction. Would George W. Bush be pleased if the United States descended into anarchy? Clinton? Carter? Ford? H.W.? Why would we project that onto Hussein?

That we had little outside interference in the Civil War is a bit of an odd analogy. No outside force started our civil war. The current Iraqi Civil War would not be occurring had the United States and its coalition partners not invaded the sovereign nation of Iraq.

Seems like a lopsided trade. We get Saddam Husseing swinging on the end of a rope and Iraq gets a civil war.

 

[Brian R. VanCise]

You certainly have to feel horrible for the Iraqi citizenry. That is a sad, sad way to live.

 

[FearlessFreep]

One thing of note is that it's easy to look around at your current situation and say it is bad. However, history gives perspectives that we cannot see today. Live is not a choose-your-own-adventure story that we can try different paths and see the outcomes of our decisions and then decide which path to take. So all we can do is guess. We have the advantage of time and perspective to look at the US Revolutionary War or the US Civil War and other conflicts that I'm sure that those living at those times thought were terrible and wondered why they had to live through them and that maybe the fight for freedom or the fight to keep the union together was not worth the price that they had to pay.

I don't know if that is the case today, but I wonder if in 30 or 50 or 100 years or so history will judge these events differently. If the entire mid-east dissolves into even worse war and anarchy, or if this is the beginning of something new and good for the area. Too early to say.