Dismiss Notice
Join Physics Forums Today!
The friendliest, high quality science and math community on the planet! Everyone who loves science is here!

News What type of government do the ins s in Iraq seek to impose?

  1. Nov 17, 2004 #1
    What type of government do the insurgents in Iraq seek to impose?

    If insurgents succeed in establishing a state based on terrorism, would it not be fractious and set Iraqi society back a millennium (a la Afghanistan under the Taliban), or would it ally with one of the existing Iraqi political powers to form a fundamentalist Islamic state?
  2. jcsd
  3. Nov 17, 2004 #2


    User Avatar

    erm...it already was a state based on terrorism..
  4. Nov 17, 2004 #3
    Yes, with at least a brief hiatus. What goals of an insurgent government would emulate or modify the tyrrany of Saddam?
  5. Nov 18, 2004 #4


    User Avatar
    Science Advisor
    Homework Helper

    Which insurgents? They don't all have the same goals.

    In general, the group in power won't be very supportive of terrorism. A state based on terrorism implies the winning group is so weak they'll compromise and accept help from anyone that increases their chances of staying in power. You also have to consider the other side, as well. Considering the goals of your terrorist groups, they would be most likely to back an Islamic fundamentalist group that believes in ruling by theocracy.

    That means there's two possible states of terrorism:

    1) A religous theocracy that protects terrorist groups in return for the terrorist group including government opponents among their targets, or

    2) A government that winds up being so weak it can't control what happens within its borders. While not exactly a state based on terrorism, the end result is the same - it becomes a haven for terrorist groups that might not be to eager to dispose of a government that is at least to weak to fight them.
  6. Nov 18, 2004 #5
    First you have to understand those who are called "insurgents" are civilians who have either had family memmber murdered by Bush regime bombs or flat out loyalists to Iraq in general who do not agree with Bush regime terrorism (the murder of civilians).

    Put all intentions aside and look at their actions. They want an defending Iraq. That is a respectfull Iraq.
  7. Nov 18, 2004 #6
    More insane generalizations from you. I'll just pull the most recent event that destroys your theory.

  8. Nov 18, 2004 #7


    User Avatar

    Staff: Mentor

    Omin, even if that were true, it still didn't answer the question: what type of government would they want?

    BobG's answer was pretty good. The end result would likely be somewhere in between Iran (more 1980s Iran) and Afghanistan.
  9. Nov 18, 2004 #8
    Yeah thats why the palestinians and jordanians are over there. Cause we bombed them too.
  10. Nov 18, 2004 #9


    User Avatar
    Staff Emeritus
    Science Advisor
    Gold Member

    My guess is that Iraq will end up with a Islamic theocracy, much like Iran. Which by the way, is now and always has been more of a terrorist problem then Sadam ever was. All that money and all those lives only to lose ground.

    Ain't is wonderful.
  11. Nov 18, 2004 #10


    User Avatar
    Staff Emeritus
    Science Advisor
    Gold Member

    I love how all you Bushmen know better about the situation in the ME then someone who lives there!

    Why not shut up and attempt to learn something from the likes of Omin. We have here a very unique connection, to you this is Fox news to Omin it is his life. Why do you all want to shout down what he has to say? Perhaps his opinion has broader implications then you care to admit.

    IE that Bush's Policies have not made the world a safer place for America, but just the opposite.

    I do not even think that Omin must be 100% correct in everything he has to say, but right or wrong he should be listened to carefully.
    Last edited: Nov 18, 2004
  12. Nov 18, 2004 #11


    User Avatar

    Ah yeah...let's help spread more disinformation around by ignoring factual errors...okaaaay.
  13. Nov 18, 2004 #12


    User Avatar
    Staff Emeritus
    Science Advisor
    Gold Member

    Close your mind a little tighter, somebody may say something you don't agree with. How is it you have better info then a resident of the ME? Especially when it concerns the mind set of ME residents?
  14. Nov 18, 2004 #13
    Integral maybe you don't understand. Bush is a god now, remember?
  15. Nov 18, 2004 #14
    Of course, the folks now trying to threaten us with hostage taking and violence into cutting and running want us to cut and run. But, I don't confuse a minority of insurgents projecting megapolitical violence with 25 million Iraqis expressing their legitimate will, throuigh some form of political process. If and when that process asks us to leave, we've got to leave, no matter what.

    Ask yourself:

    1] If the insurgents represent the will of the majority of Iraqis, why don't they simply wait until the election process begins?
    2] If the insurgents never started their attacks, would the civilian death toll be so high?

    IF the insurgents care about the Iraqis...then why are they blowing up their own people... and IF the insurgents are representative of the majority of the populace why don't they wait until peaceful elections to vote the US out?
  16. Nov 18, 2004 #15
    Maybe they watch CNN and realise that the US isn't above rigging the elections.
    Maybe they don't understand the democratic process.
    Maybe they don't want a democracy because it's too inefficient.
    If the USA got invaded by another nation which was setting up it's own republic (based on a very different constitution) would you wait for the elections since you know you're the majority?
  17. Nov 18, 2004 #16


    User Avatar

    I grok a lot about the ME, info in the ME..and the mind set of the ME because most of my inlaws live in the ME...and my children are also...according to the laws of Lebanon...Lebanese citizens.
    One doesn't have to have a closed mind to identify opinion being presented as fact..with no factual reference to back it up. So you can continue to whine and cry because someone challenges his post if you'd like BUt if he can't back it up with fact and only puts forth opinion in place of fact he will continue to get factchecked....I refuse to treat him any different then I would anyone else on this forum, I'm not a bigot like that.
  18. Nov 18, 2004 #17

    The Shia Majority in Iraq--if they are all uniformly up in arms against the American Occupation, all they have to do is nothing. Take a break. Wait exactly 90 days. Throw an election, take majority power in Iraq, vote to tell the American forces, now officially guests at the request of Iraq, to leave.

    Not one shot fired.

    And, America would have no credibility at all if it did not simply agree, turn around, and leave, or else 'sovereignty' and 'democracy' mean nothing.

    So, what is wrong with my analysis? Something is severely flawed, because some Shiite folks over there are not doing 'nothing.'

    a] They are not a majority?
    b] They are a majority, and some are not pleased with the look ahead at the new form of Iraqi government, as not giving them enough power over the other minorities? Possible. Some? All? Many?
    c] The majority is just not unified in its desires? Hmmmm....let's expound on that.

    A radical minority of the majority -- the folks now holding knifes to the throat of Japanese woman, about to kill her if Japan does not give in to its terrorstic demands--folks led by a thug who had a rival moderate Shiite cleric murdered--are afraid that, in that democratic Iraq, they won't have the power they seek, and see as their only chance, a knocking over of the apple cart.

    Insofar as it yet remains a unilateral change in 'attitude,' it is also another in a long series of distinctions between those who kidnap Japanese women and threaten to burn them alive, and those who (yet) stand up to that.

    The deeper cause of this insurgency may be a clash of views of justice.

    For decades, a Saddam led Sunni minority abused a Shia majority, as well as Kurds, via brutal oppressive force. Saddam has Sadr's father openly assassinated. There is an opportunity for hot retribution in the air--except for one impediment to the same old, same old.

    Not satisfied with the prospect of cold courts of justice, of trials and convictions and exections for past crimes, a radical Shiite sect wants to grab power in Iraq and unleash retribution of the majority on the minority, but it can't do that for as long as there are US forces on the ground backing up some experiment in Western civilized democracy.

    And, why should a so recently abandoned (by the US, continuously, between 1991 and March 2003)Shia population have faith in the jsutice from across the horizon, when fully half of the folks from across the horizon are crying to cut and run again?

    I mean, as lates as 1996, with the 'No FLy Zones' in place, with UN on the ground controling nothing in Iraq, Saddam sends his military to finish off the last of the Kurd and Shia rebellion against him. This, according to Bob Kerrey. And, we did nothing.

    Where is the recognition of any of this? Where are the cries against "vigilantism" and resort to "brute force" of the Shiite miliitia brigades and terrorists? Silence on that. In a wolrd full of 'greys', black very easily becomes white, and threats to burn human beings alive are justifiable acts of rebellion against an authority striving to ... enable peaceful elections in Iraq.

    Well, OTOH, they have a point, and the West/UN has reinforced it time and time again; the West wants only 'peace' at all costs, not justice. In response, to injustice, it offers only half measures and gesture politics, the bare minimum necessary to sweep the issue onto the back page of our collective conciousness. Some smirking convicted terrorist walking out of a court in Germany, because...the US failed to release a terrorist being held in the US. No wonder he was smirking. And that is the flavor of justice that we are trying to sell to these long abused Shiia majority in Iraq. Some kind of half assed celebration of how deliberately clueless and fair minded we are; so mind numbingly 'fair minded' that we find a moral equivalence between a Hutu majority sending out teenagers with machetes to murder innocents, with a Tutsi minority arming itself to stop that.

    "Just stop the violence. Screw justice. Screw defending innocents from thugs. A sweaty march inside some Big Headed Puppet on some safe street in Europe will have to do."
  19. Nov 18, 2004 #18


    User Avatar

    Ugh,that really says it all.
  20. Nov 18, 2004 #19

    Firstly, you have no idea where Omin is from.

    Secondly, your attempt at a diplomatic "shut up moron" is not well received. The fact that you think I should keep my mouth shut on an internet forum (do I need to post the definition of forum?) for political and world affairs discussions speaks volumes on who here should LEARN something.

    The rest of your post is the same typical hyperbole and at this point doesn't even warrant a real response. It has NOTHING to do with the wrong statement made by Omin, by response refuting it, and the fact that the ONLY people to ever respond to me when I refute Omin on these insane generalizations are his "He lives there, I somehow know this to be true, and you shut up you big meanie because he is right." crowd.

    Come again when you have some information to REFUTE mine, not just spread disinformation and rhetoric.
  21. Nov 18, 2004 #20


    User Avatar
    Staff Emeritus
    Science Advisor
    Gold Member

    All I have,apparently like you, is the news channels, different from others, I recognize that this does not make me an expert. That is why I appreciate having access to other sources of information. Even if it is biased it is still information. Heck I even watch Fox news, with the recognition that is fair and balanced... by their definitions.

    Unlike the Bushmen of the country who have no appreciation of data driven approaches to such matters I like enjoy hearing other peoples views. I am free to apply filters as I see fit.

    What I am getting a bit tired of is the same response to Omin, over and over. Basically it runs like you are wrong, here is an American newspaper article which proves it... :zzz:

    Listen to what he has to say, balance it with what the article has to say and perhaps somewhere in the middle, may lie a grain of truth.

    But this is just rhetoric to you, so take it with a grain of salt. Like I do everything you or (a bag of salt) Kat.

    Tell me Kat are your Lebanese relations part of the Large Christian population or are they Muslim?
Share this great discussion with others via Reddit, Google+, Twitter, or Facebook