Comments on: We blundered in. Let's not betray them too http://www.stephengrey.com/2005/02/we-blundered-in-lets-not-betray-them-too/ Tue, 09 Aug 2011 11:11:22 +0000 hourly 1 http://wordpress.org/?v=3.1.3 By: harbinger http://www.stephengrey.com/2005/02/we-blundered-in-lets-not-betray-them-too/comment-page-1/#comment-19 harbinger Tue, 09 May 2006 20:33:00 +0000 http://stephengrey.wordpress.com/2005/02/07/we-blundered-in-lets-not-betray-them-too/#comment-19 Although this article by Stephen is a year old the issues it raises remain today (May 2006) pertinent. Steps have been made and those with an interest to do so such as Tony Blair and George Bush call them significant if not momentous. They point primarily to the elections and the formation of a government. Of secondary 'success' is the partial restoration of civil order in certain provinces. Stephen suggests we need a colonial office with all the apparatus of a colonial administration. A neat idea but it won't work. Such a creature is considered in today's world undemocratic. Of course we can wash our hands of Iraq and that is the most likely outcome coupled with some nonsense of political trumpet blowing. We did it with Zimbabwe so what's to stop a British government doing it again. Nothing at all. We gave democracy to Zimbabwe and look what happened once we had wrapped our flag and cleared off.<br/>What use is democracy to a country like Iraq? What use is it giving universal sufferage to a Middle East region? Does democracy makes the trains run on time? Deliver fresh water to homes? make the sewage plants work? does democracy run an economy? No, is the short answer. You don't need democracy to do these things. And ask any Iraqi what he or she wants most of all, a vote comes after all the benefits mentioned above. Democracy has become a catchword among western politicians for all the benefits of a western consumer society. Utter the word democracy and you know your audience will associate the word with life in Surbiton or some such 'haven' of the good life. This is how news reporters currently in Iraq attempt to portray the advantages of democracy. But Iraq is not England and never was and never will be. The standard of living for Iraqis will be no better and probably worse than other middle east countries for decades to come. When do we leave Iraq? at what stage do we judge affairs of this nation to be acceptable for our departure? it all depends on what criteria we apply. Do we leave when we see that Iraq is on a par with a poor African nation? or do we wait until it rivals Saudi Arabia?<br/>As much as Stephen argues for us not to turn our backs on Iraq, I am afraid history is entirely against him. Firstly nobody has even created a synthetic nation that lasted. Only dictators and colonialists have managed that trick for a short time. Secondly democracy itself is the product of centuries of battle within nations. It evolved in step with the emergence of a middle class of merchants and traders. It is extremely simplistic to believe that by putting the cart before the horse and starting with democracy everything else will naturally follow.<br/>The current thinking within Downing Street is to leave Iraq by stealth. A mass withdrawal is out. What is evisaged is a piecemeal handing over of provinces to local governors. and of course hoping and preying that this house of cards does not collapse. It will, there is no doubt about it. Civil war is as natural to Iraq as it was to both England and the United States and France and Italy and Russia and Spain....need I go on.<br/>By 2010 the burning question will be how the United States and Britain respond to an Iranian entry into Iraq to restore civil order in the aftermath of the British and American withdrawal, using the same pretexts as Bush used to invade Iraq in the first place. Although this article by Stephen is a year old the issues it raises remain today (May 2006) pertinent. Steps have been made and those with an interest to do so such as Tony Blair and George Bush call them significant if not momentous. They point primarily to the elections and the formation of a government. Of secondary ‘success’ is the partial restoration of civil order in certain provinces. Stephen suggests we need a colonial office with all the apparatus of a colonial administration. A neat idea but it won’t work. Such a creature is considered in today’s world undemocratic. Of course we can wash our hands of Iraq and that is the most likely outcome coupled with some nonsense of political trumpet blowing. We did it with Zimbabwe so what’s to stop a British government doing it again. Nothing at all. We gave democracy to Zimbabwe and look what happened once we had wrapped our flag and cleared off.
What use is democracy to a country like Iraq? What use is it giving universal sufferage to a Middle East region? Does democracy makes the trains run on time? Deliver fresh water to homes? make the sewage plants work? does democracy run an economy? No, is the short answer. You don’t need democracy to do these things. And ask any Iraqi what he or she wants most of all, a vote comes after all the benefits mentioned above. Democracy has become a catchword among western politicians for all the benefits of a western consumer society. Utter the word democracy and you know your audience will associate the word with life in Surbiton or some such ‘haven’ of the good life. This is how news reporters currently in Iraq attempt to portray the advantages of democracy. But Iraq is not England and never was and never will be. The standard of living for Iraqis will be no better and probably worse than other middle east countries for decades to come. When do we leave Iraq? at what stage do we judge affairs of this nation to be acceptable for our departure? it all depends on what criteria we apply. Do we leave when we see that Iraq is on a par with a poor African nation? or do we wait until it rivals Saudi Arabia?
As much as Stephen argues for us not to turn our backs on Iraq, I am afraid history is entirely against him. Firstly nobody has even created a synthetic nation that lasted. Only dictators and colonialists have managed that trick for a short time. Secondly democracy itself is the product of centuries of battle within nations. It evolved in step with the emergence of a middle class of merchants and traders. It is extremely simplistic to believe that by putting the cart before the horse and starting with democracy everything else will naturally follow.
The current thinking within Downing Street is to leave Iraq by stealth. A mass withdrawal is out. What is evisaged is a piecemeal handing over of provinces to local governors. and of course hoping and preying that this house of cards does not collapse. It will, there is no doubt about it. Civil war is as natural to Iraq as it was to both England and the United States and France and Italy and Russia and Spain….need I go on.
By 2010 the burning question will be how the United States and Britain respond to an Iranian entry into Iraq to restore civil order in the aftermath of the British and American withdrawal, using the same pretexts as Bush used to invade Iraq in the first place.

]]> By: harbinger http://www.stephengrey.com/2005/02/we-blundered-in-lets-not-betray-them-too/comment-page-1/#comment-21 harbinger Tue, 09 May 2006 20:33:00 +0000 http://stephengrey.wordpress.com/2005/02/07/we-blundered-in-lets-not-betray-them-too/#comment-21 Although this article by Stephen is a year old the issues it raises remain today (May 2006) pertinent. Steps have been made and those with an interest to do so such as Tony Blair and George Bush call them significant if not momentous. They point primarily to the elections and the formation of a government. Of secondary 'success' is the partial restoration of civil order in certain provinces. Stephen suggests we need a colonial office with all the apparatus of a colonial administration. A neat idea but it won't work. Such a creature is considered in today's world undemocratic. Of course we can wash our hands of Iraq and that is the most likely outcome coupled with some nonsense of political trumpet blowing. We did it with Zimbabwe so what's to stop a British government doing it again. Nothing at all. We gave democracy to Zimbabwe and look what happened once we had wrapped our flag and cleared off.</>What use is democracy to a country like Iraq? What use is it giving universal sufferage to a Middle East region? Does democracy makes the trains run on time? Deliver fresh water to homes? make the sewage plants work? does democracy run an economy? No, is the short answer. You don't need democracy to do these things. And ask any Iraqi what he or she wants most of all, a vote comes after all the benefits mentioned above. Democracy has become a catchword among western politicians for all the benefits of a western consumer society. Utter the word democracy and you know your audience will associate the word with life in Surbiton or some such 'haven' of the good life. This is how news reporters currently in Iraq attempt to portray the advantages of democracy. But Iraq is not England and never was and never will be. The standard of living for Iraqis will be no better and probably worse than other middle east countries for decades to come. When do we leave Iraq? at what stage do we judge affairs of this nation to be acceptable for our departure? it all depends on what criteria we apply. Do we leave when we see that Iraq is on a par with a poor African nation? or do we wait until it rivals Saudi Arabia?</>As much as Stephen argues for us not to turn our backs on Iraq, I am afraid history is entirely against him. Firstly nobody has even created a synthetic nation that lasted. Only dictators and colonialists have managed that trick for a short time. Secondly democracy itself is the product of centuries of battle within nations. It evolved in step with the emergence of a middle class of merchants and traders. It is extremely simplistic to believe that by putting the cart before the horse and starting with democracy everything else will naturally follow.</>The current thinking within Downing Street is to leave Iraq by stealth. A mass withdrawal is out. What is evisaged is a piecemeal handing over of provinces to local governors. and of course hoping and preying that this house of cards does not collapse. It will, there is no doubt about it. Civil war is as natural to Iraq as it was to both England and the United States and France and Italy and Russia and Spain....need I go on.</>By 2010 the burning question will be how the United States and Britain respond to an Iranian entry into Iraq to restore civil order in the aftermath of the British and American withdrawal, using the same pretexts as Bush used to invade Iraq in the first place. Although this article by Stephen is a year old the issues it raises remain today (May 2006) pertinent. Steps have been made and those with an interest to do so such as Tony Blair and George Bush call them significant if not momentous. They point primarily to the elections and the formation of a government. Of secondary ‘success’ is the partial restoration of civil order in certain provinces. Stephen suggests we need a colonial office with all the apparatus of a colonial administration. A neat idea but it won’t work. Such a creature is considered in today’s world undemocratic. Of course we can wash our hands of Iraq and that is the most likely outcome coupled with some nonsense of political trumpet blowing. We did it with Zimbabwe so what’s to stop a British government doing it again. Nothing at all. We gave democracy to Zimbabwe and look what happened once we had wrapped our flag and cleared off.What use is democracy to a country like Iraq? What use is it giving universal sufferage to a Middle East region? Does democracy makes the trains run on time? Deliver fresh water to homes? make the sewage plants work? does democracy run an economy? No, is the short answer. You don’t need democracy to do these things. And ask any Iraqi what he or she wants most of all, a vote comes after all the benefits mentioned above. Democracy has become a catchword among western politicians for all the benefits of a western consumer society. Utter the word democracy and you know your audience will associate the word with life in Surbiton or some such ‘haven’ of the good life. This is how news reporters currently in Iraq attempt to portray the advantages of democracy. But Iraq is not England and never was and never will be. The standard of living for Iraqis will be no better and probably worse than other middle east countries for decades to come. When do we leave Iraq? at what stage do we judge affairs of this nation to be acceptable for our departure? it all depends on what criteria we apply. Do we leave when we see that Iraq is on a par with a poor African nation? or do we wait until it rivals Saudi Arabia?As much as Stephen argues for us not to turn our backs on Iraq, I am afraid history is entirely against him. Firstly nobody has even created a synthetic nation that lasted. Only dictators and colonialists have managed that trick for a short time. Secondly democracy itself is the product of centuries of battle within nations. It evolved in step with the emergence of a middle class of merchants and traders. It is extremely simplistic to believe that by putting the cart before the horse and starting with democracy everything else will naturally follow.The current thinking within Downing Street is to leave Iraq by stealth. A mass withdrawal is out. What is evisaged is a piecemeal handing over of provinces to local governors. and of course hoping and preying that this house of cards does not collapse. It will, there is no doubt about it. Civil war is as natural to Iraq as it was to both England and the United States and France and Italy and Russia and Spain….need I go on.By 2010 the burning question will be how the United States and Britain respond to an Iranian entry into Iraq to restore civil order in the aftermath of the British and American withdrawal, using the same pretexts as Bush used to invade Iraq in the first place.

]]> By: Anonymous http://www.stephengrey.com/2005/02/we-blundered-in-lets-not-betray-them-too/comment-page-1/#comment-18 Anonymous Thu, 02 Mar 2006 21:12:00 +0000 http://stephengrey.wordpress.com/2005/02/07/we-blundered-in-lets-not-betray-them-too/#comment-18 Yes, Mr. Grey, by all means put on your uniform and help police and administer in Iraq.<br/><br/>You, too, will have a target on your back there.<br/><br/>As for me, I say cut and run and blame Bush and Blair.<br/><br/>The heat in Iraq will be turned down considerably as soon as the US and Britain leave. The Iraqis will work their problems out by partitioning, and there will not be anything like post-colonial India.<br/><br/>You will see. You WILL see, because the Iraq war is lost and the US and Britain must flee. Yes, Mr. Grey, by all means put on your uniform and help police and administer in Iraq.

You, too, will have a target on your back there.

As for me, I say cut and run and blame Bush and Blair.

The heat in Iraq will be turned down considerably as soon as the US and Britain leave. The Iraqis will work their problems out by partitioning, and there will not be anything like post-colonial India.

You will see. You WILL see, because the Iraq war is lost and the US and Britain must flee.

]]> By: Anonymous http://www.stephengrey.com/2005/02/we-blundered-in-lets-not-betray-them-too/comment-page-1/#comment-20 Anonymous Thu, 02 Mar 2006 21:12:00 +0000 http://stephengrey.wordpress.com/2005/02/07/we-blundered-in-lets-not-betray-them-too/#comment-20 Yes, Mr. Grey, by all means put on your uniform and help police and administer in Iraq.</></>You, too, will have a target on your back there.</></>As for me, I say cut and run and blame Bush and Blair.</></>The heat in Iraq will be turned down considerably as soon as the US and Britain leave. The Iraqis will work their problems out by partitioning, and there will not be anything like post-colonial India.</></>You will see. You WILL see, because the Iraq war is lost and the US and Britain must flee. Yes, Mr. Grey, by all means put on your uniform and help police and administer in Iraq.You, too, will have a target on your back there.As for me, I say cut and run and blame Bush and Blair.The heat in Iraq will be turned down considerably as soon as the US and Britain leave. The Iraqis will work their problems out by partitioning, and there will not be anything like post-colonial India.You will see. You WILL see, because the Iraq war is lost and the US and Britain must flee.

]]>