h2g2 The Hitchhiker's Guide to the Galaxy: Earth Edition

What? Has Japan turned on us lately and I didn't notice? Germany?

As I said - "almost".

Depends upon your view of history.

Japan has a long tradition of bushido - losing to an honorable opponent. It's a country that has survived subjugation under many masters, including the ruling class of samurai, for thousands of years. So the victory by the Allies over Japan was certainly depressing for the Japanese, but they managed to accept the situation and move on. The United Nations certainly made things easier - by forbidding them to have a military, they were able to shift over to electronics production, and now they dominate the market. Interesting factoid: I just learned recently that the 'Hello Kitty' graphic was designed to cheer up school children in Japan after WWII.

The reason Germany became such a problem is the punitive measures imposed upon them by the League of Nations after the first World War. They were isolated, the economy was depressed - they were ripe for a psychopathic dictator to move in and unite the country against a common enemy. I think the reason Germany wasn't a problem after the second World War is because it was under such scrutiny by the rest of the world... and by itself.

Iraq is a different matter. They have no tradition of surrender. They would rather die honorably than live dishonorably. Iraqis will continue to fight against the occupation until they're all dead, or until we leave. I vote for leaving, personally.

Me too. One of the biggest mistakes we made was awarding the contracts for rebuilding Iraq to a bunch of cronies of the Bush administration. If the rebuilding had been being done by Iraqis rather than Americans, we might not be in the mess we are in today.

Well, I just re-read that statement, and of coruse the Biggest Mistake we made was invading Iraq in the first place. But once we did that stupid thing, we compounded the error.

I thought the biggest mistake was allowing GB to get elected. Or allowing him to steal the election. Whichever.

Please tell me how, short of treason or domestic terrorism, this travesty of justice could have been prevented?

I can't believe I'm going to say this, but *how* we leave Iraq may be as important as *when*. We totally abandoned so many in VietNam who spent subsequent years in *reeducation*; and those were the lucky ones.

Whether anyone's willing to call it or not, they're in civil war over there. What else can you call it when dozens of citizens kill each other night after night?

SC

Sounds like a civil war to me.

Why do they call it a Civil War? Sounds pretty un-civil to me.

I know! I know.


What I don't get is why they don't quit their fighting and pretend to get along so that their government will ask us to leave. Then they could go all out blowing each other up until a new dictator takes over.

I don't think leaving them to slaughter each other is ethical, either. I hate to say it, and some of you might disagree, but I don't think the U.S. can simply pull out overnight and wash our collective hands of the Iraqis. We got them into this mess, we need to help them out after "mission accomplished".

That's Bush's sad legacy here--we'll be stuck in Iraq long after our troops leave.

I agree, FG. We shouldn't have gone there in the first place, for *so* many reasons, but we can't just walk out and leave the Iraqis to clean up the mess they didn't even ask for. Hussein was a Bad Man, but we've been bloodier to the Iraqi populace in the time we've been there, proportionally, than he was in the previous 28 years.

And all to bring a *democracy* that wasn't even asked for? (Since there weren't any WMD and no Al Quaida ties to begin with, that's the reason being offered by Shrub these days!)

SC

I feel like we can't desert Iraq either, but our current approach is ineffective.

If we're going to help the Iraqi people at all, we need to do it through proxies. Any further US interference will be met by more bombs, more attacks, and general resistance. We need an organization like the Red Cross to rebuild homes, restore power plants, fix the roads and water supplies, and make Iraq a place where people can live.

We've been fighting terror with military means, but the military is unsuited to fight what is essentially criminal activity. Terror has no nation. The military can't go to terror, invade it, and take over its capital. We need the UN peacekeeping force in a police capacity to arrest terror suspects, investigate attacks, and break up terrorist networks.

In addition to all that, we need to make a national commitment to abide by the rules of the Geneva Convention.

One of our most cardinal errors happened when Saddam had been deposed and the country of Iraq was in a shambles and we began funnelling money into the country to rebuild. Rather than awarding the contracts for rebuilding Iraq's infranstructure to Iraqi companies, we funded cronies of the administration to do the work. We got ripped off by those cronies through cost over runs and being billed for work not done and services not rendered. At the same time, the people who would have had a psychological boost from doing it and who would have started possibly feeling like a nation rather than an occupied territory were left out in the cold.

On another note, something for your animation fix for the evening:

http://brothercanyouspareajob.com/watch.html

It was made a few years ago, but it's still relevant.

One of my NeoCon friends (yes, I know...) said that the reason we couldn't let the Iraqi's have the money to rebuild was that They were too corrupt!!!!!!!

I think we may have redefined for *them* what corruption looks like...

SC

Now, if we were in a book club, I would recommend what I'm reading right now: "American Theocracy: The Peril and Politics of Radical Religion, Oil and Borrowed Money in the 21st Century" by Kevin Phillips. It's about the morphing of the Republican Party into the party of Big Oil, the Religious Right and Big Credit/Debt and how it is affecting America's standing in the world and our legacy to history. It's written by a longtime member of the GOP aghast at his fellow party members' abandoning of Republican party principles.

Yes, in my dad's day it was the part of fiscal responsibility. Hah!

How do y'all feel about me starting a second American Politics thread, now that we have another election bearing down on us?

Sounds good to me.

Are we keeping two threads about American politics alive, or--as in the main Salon--are we all moving over and starting anew in the second one?

The idea is to start a new one, kicking off with the midterm elections.

Not to mention, the Clinton interview on Fox News is a glorious send-off from this thread. The excerpt of part one is over at crooksandliars.com, and it's mandatory viewing. I just read the piece about Clinton in the latest New Yorker, and the two things are a perfect complement.