Philosophical Conversations Public Opinion Junk for code
parliament house.gif
Think Tanks
Oz Blogs
Economic Blogs
Foreign Policy Blogs
International Blogs
Media Blogs
South Australian Weblogs
Economic Resources
Environment Links
Political Resources
South Australian Links
"...public opinion deserves to be respected as well as despised" G.W.F. Hegel, 'Philosophy of Right'

Popular uprising in Basra « Previous | |Next »
March 26, 2003

The media are reporting a popular uprising in the town of Basra in southern Iraq. This is good news---the Iraqi people----the Shi'ite opposition group---are taking things into their own hands. Rejecting both the rule of Iraqi regime and the future rule of the Anglo-American army.

Remember the history. The Shi'ite Muslim population, rose up against Iraqi
President Saddam Hussein in 1991, and is broadly hostile to the Iraqi regime, was sold down the river by the Americans. The US refused to intervene and the rebellion was crushed. Would the Iraqi regime have fallen if the US had supported the Shi'ite rebellion?

The Americans would be seen to be better than the Iraqi regime but still not trusted. They are still foreigners. It is not their country. Given the distrust the best way for the Anglo-American army to help is support the popular uprising, bring in lots of humanitarian aid, and enable the Iraqi's to establish a more democratic and federal regime. Or will thre Americans be seen to be occupy the country?

It is Tony Blair's credibility that is online here. It is he, rather than Bush or Howard, who has made the moral case of enabling the Iraqi's to have a better future and a more flourishing life. It is he who has taken up the mantle of the failures of the past. The burdern of distrust is on his shoulders. Howard has washed his hands of all that history.

| Posted by Gary Sauer-Thompson at 8:14 AM | | Comments (5)


it's not a general uprising...some blogosphere speculation that it could be Iranian operatives sent in to foment unrest amongst Shi'ites. The uprising could be against both US and Sunni if that is so. Iran tried many times to capture Basra - let's hope they don't try to strike again now if they detect weakness in any way. PNAC dictates, however, that Iraq will be the staging point for an invasion of Iran - a much stronger, tougher foe that Iraq. Iran may therefore decide to preemptively invade the new US ally in order to secure a vital gulf port.

You seem somewhat confused, AY. This is a war of liberation. The people are cheering for the Coalition. There are no ramifications beyond this.

Well Tim, you have accepted the one sided media view of this war then in thinking its just going to be some jolly good romp to Baghdad cheering the US all the way.
"There are no ramifications beyond this."
Its almost ridiculous to say that seeing as how national borders never reflect cultural ones. You have Shiites, Sunnis, and Kurds in one country. You have Turkey wanting to wage war against the Kurds, you have the Shiites wanting to oust Saddam like they always have, and you have Sunnis who are mostly in support of Saddam and making the cities impossible to enter for ground troops. In the mean time, Iraq has been suffering for 12 years now under sanctions and the devastation that was laid upon them after the first war. Why the hell should they trust westerners who have done nothing but play games with them. Bush Sr. went on TV praising an uprising after the first war but then did nothing to support it and in effect letting it get crushed. The people who were a part of that or friends and family of who were a part of that are all going to cheer when a tank knocks down Saddams picture. Just realize that they would cheer if a tank knocked down a picture of either of the Bush's too. And if you followed anything besides CNN (BBC for instance) you would know that theres 10 times as many people spitting and cursing at the Americans for all the pain they have caused them (a lot more than Saddam). I remember back a few months ago when this had nothing to even do with "liberating" the Iraqi people but with WMD. When did this change? It changed when that was no longer a decent excuse and the inspectors were actually making progress. Like most of the American public you have been tricked into believing that this is a just and glorious cause bringing democracy to the simple Iraqi people. First off, bombing hospitals and bus stations and poor urban neighborhoods kills civilians. If you read former U.S. Attourney General Ramsey Clark's book The Fire This Time you wouldnt tell me that its ridiculous to suggest that hospitals were destroyed in the first Gulf War when the man was on the ground and saw the devastation with his own eyes. Civilian casualties have been the hallmark of US bombings (150,000 in the first Gulf War and most likely 500,000 in this one, if you dont believe me read the description of what a JDAM does and how dropping thousands of these on a city of 5 million is at all "surgical"). And if you still just think I'm a liberal anti-American peacemonger of some sort, take a look at who our government is considering replacing Saddam with:

Great post James. I reckon Tim was being ironic in his post. He would probably support a lot of what you say. I do.

Sorry, I guess it is. I've just been so pissed off about the reasons people are stating for why this war is such a great idea. I've done about a months worth of research into the whole subject and have come to find that its Bush Sr. and Jr. who are the bullies of the world giving their 48 hour ultimatums while Iraq tried over and over desperately to resolve things diplomatically.