Iraq: How bad can things get?

[Greg S]

Just remember the US and its allies are meant to be in there to help establish democracy in Iraq - not turn it into a American outpost in the middle east.

As for using heavy handed tac-tics, the Americans have been doing that and are sustaining very heavy losses. 2/3 dead soldiers a day on average now..........

Britain has been a lot more restrained and earned the trust and respect of local leaders in the south of Iraq (in general).

[Marina]

Hi Redhand

Well, I do not agree with you.
The US need all the help they can get in winning the war on international terrorism and by alienating the moderates is not a good sign. Some of these vulnerable youngsters (14 and 15 year olds) are psychologically manipulated by these cunning extremists. The moderates would have a better insight to what is going on within the ‘muslim psyche’ then the CIA or FBI who seem to bungle up their operations sometimes!
Even in western countries like the UK or US there are people who have been treated unfairly and put prison for crimes they did not commit or been detained under suspicion, so everything is not hunky dory in the West either.
Its really strange how countries bend the law to suit themselves i.e Gerry Adams and Martin McGuinness (sp?) (linked to the IRA) visiting the USA many years ago !
Anyway, USA has the right expel anyone who they categorise a threat to their National Security. Britain did it when it denied entry to Dr Louis Farrakhan.

P.S
My own theory of why Cat Stevens (or Yusuf Islam) was denied entry was that he's been never forgiven for the song 'Morning has broken'. We were forced to sing it at morning assembly in school !!

[wannabe_bootneck]

You can't really compare the US & British losses I'm afraid, look how many more troops the US have their & how much more responsibility they have in Iraq.As I say, heavy handed tactics where heavy hands are needed. Look at the US success in Falluja, no matter how the media broadcast it as a ceasefire agreement, the Yanks were pulverising the rebels. If it hadn't been for them hiding in the mosque, they'd have been wiped out, they knew it & that's why they hid there. Obviously the stalemate was forced by the mosque situation. I doubt you will agree, but I think that a show of force & the awesome might that can be bought to bear in minutes, every now & again, does good in a situ. like Iraq, it puts fear into would be fighters & also shows the locals that we're not afraid to get our hands dirty, as I said in these cultures such demonstrations generate respect.

[Tab]

Greg, there is a lot of difference between north and south Iraq, they are really two different countries with different relgions and tribal back grounds. The south had a rough time under Sadam, where as the north did very well under him as that is where he came from. So the south feel that any thing is better than what they had and or more inclined to put up with the British troops. In the north they feel that they are now losers and want to hit back, just count our blessing that we got that part of Iraq rather than the other part of it or we would be getting hit rather than the Americans.

[Greg S]

The number of roadside bombs up north is shocking, buggers are putting shells in the road and blowing them up when the American hummers drive past

I think the Americans are seen more as a occupation force in Arab eyes, which doesn't help...

Hmmm..... Rumsfeld wants them out of there sooner rather than later........good on him!

[snyder]

There was a link on this site showing muslim population percentage worldwide in all countries. They didn't even register as 1% in America i believe. And yet the good ole USofA should cater to them???? Please!!

I didn't state or imply, nor do I believe, that the good ole USofA should "cater" to Muslims. The good ole USofA should be neutral with respect to religion, as prescribed by our constitution. Keeping Cat Stevens, or whatever he calls himself, out of the country seems pretty dumb to me. I have a hard time believing that he is any kind of terror threat. This makes his exclusion symbolic, which is another way of saying it's political. I don't think the politics are very smart, given that Stevens is not presenting a militant Islamist face that I know of. It makes the U.S. appear intolerant, and that's not something I like to see.

That said, he did call for the execution of Salman Rushdie, the author, so it's not as if he's warm 'n fuzzy these days. In any case, whatever the motive for his exclusion I also believe that the U.S. government has the sovereign right to keep him out for any reason no matter how trivial or foolish. Immigration policy, be it for the U.S. or any other country, is and ought to be strictly a matter of national self-interest as defined by that country's government. I think the U.S. should be tolerant in general, and I think it's in our self-interest as a country for this tolerance to be reflected in immigration policies. Yet it's completely a matter of American discretion.

There are plenty of Christians and Jews who I wouldn't admit to the U.S. either.