November 29, 200718 yr Nothing deep or profound to add, but... maybe they don't really want anybody to "rule" them? Not the coalition forces, not the "Iraqi Government" and not the Al Quaida. When coalition forces were the dominant military force, they fought them, when it looked like Al Quaida started to dominate the country side, they turned on them. If they are successful in eliminating those, I wouldn't be surprised to see them turn all their attention on the government forces... Well, just a theory. Only the people involved can really tell you. “He who joyfully marches to music in rank and file has already earned my contempt. He has been given a large brain by mistake, since for him the spinal cord would surely suffice.” - Albert Einstein
November 29, 200718 yr Author I can see that they'd be both war weary and not very keen on being ruled by anyone. I'm not 100% on being ruled by anyone either. Hence I support democracy. I want a say in things without having to shoot anyone. Maybe these chaps have realised that if stable democracy can be introduced then they can get what they want, or at least some of it, by 'jaw jaw rather than war war' as Winston put it. What bugs me more than anything is the perception I often meet of this meeting Coalition versus Iraq. I let that general perception bug me too much. I apologise. I very much appreciate you sounding out ideas, Steve. I know I have a lot of preformed ideas of my own, but I hope I'm not totally immutable. I may well be, but I try. I am just occasionally a little like this. "It wasn't lies. It was just... bull****"." -Elwood Blues tarna's dead; processing... complete. Disappointed by Universe. RIP Hades/Sand/etc. Here's hoping your next alt has a harp.
Create an account or sign in to comment