Iraqi police to train in country with poor human rights record and high police abuse

[Skunk]

But, the distinction I'm focusing on is between those who do and those who think/talk -- between an attitude of action and one of passivity and procrastination. Think Treebeard and the Ent's council. While I think every action should be well-conceived, I think that taking action is important...And the attitude of action is certainly an American attitude

Well I rather think of Sauraman the White, leader of the Council and the free (and good) peoples who, upon acting impetuously and unilaterally, is seduced by the power and thus sucumbs to the Evil Eye. Later he finds himself besieged by the Ents, his stronghold torn down by them and left to repent at leisure. Eventually he is cast down as head of the White Council and finally he dies a treacherous death at the hands of the 'faithful' servant that he bullied for so long...

I sincerely believe, without seeing evidence to the contrary, that the issue was to get them trained, not to get them trained in any evil way.

I have no doubt that this is true - yet who actually does the training really does matter. A 'bad' police force creates resentment and leads to riots - I'm sure you havn't forgotten the LA riots anymore than us Brits have forgotten similar scenes in Brixton and Toxteth. In other words a bad police force creates more problems that it solves. Without trust, a police force is nothing - who will come forward to the police if they do not trust their integrity?

Up till now, the training that has been done has been performed by US and British policeman - I have no problem with that. Let it continue or recruit more officers from police forces with an equally sound reputation.

"Act in Haste - Repent at leisure" - Lloyd George admitted in his memoirs that he was too eager to solve the Irish problem, and agreed to the terms of the 1920 Government of Ireland Act, that partitioned Ireland too quickly. His own feelings at the time though was that Ireland should not have been partitioned and that the whole country should have been given 'dependent territories status' but allowed himself to be pressured into a quick decision.

He regretted that hasty decision to cave in to the Unionists for the rest of his life. Britain has regretted it for 80 years. There is no substitute for measured consideration.

Quick-fix solutions always require more fixing and always cost more in the long run.

[ 08-26-2003, 07:48 PM: Message edited by: Skunk ]

[Azred]

It seems to me that being trained in Hungary and by Hungary are two different things. Besides, I don't think it will matter much in the long run, because the best training in the world will be useless if those being trained are just biding their time until they are placed in control so they may do what they please. Yes, that is cynical...but also probably quite realistic.

I agree with Timber vis-a-vis America's "damned if you do, damned if you don't" situation. However, I will take this one step further: since many in the world already accuse America of turning Iraq into a puppet and there are simultaneous complaints that we a) caused all the problems in the first place, b) shouldn't have gotten involved, c) should stay in, and d) should pull out then we might as well do ourselves a favor and take over Iraq completely. Our detractors are going to complain no matter what we do, so we might as well reap all the benefits possible while we can.
Childish and short-sighted? I don't believe so. Realistic? I hope so. In personal relationships the best choice is to ignore those who dislike you and steer your own course; I am simply applying this logic to national affairs. [img]graemlins/laugh3.gif[/img] Not even the neocons have the cajones to make that statement in public. Oh, well....

[Azred]

Originally posted by Skunk: Quick-fix solutions always require more fixing and always cost more in the long run.

Not necessarily, but you have to be willing to make the committments required to making your "quick-fix" solutions both stable and long-lasting.

[Skunk]

Not necessarily, but you have to be willing to make the committments required to making your "quick-fix" solutions both stable and long-lasting.

In 1953, at the behest of the British, US decided on a quick-fix solution to the nasty democratic Iranian governments decision to nationalise its own oil reserves - launch a coup - which successfully installed a dictator to power. For 26 years the United states was committed to maintaining the regime - and carefully nurtured it - unfortunately, the Iranians didn't like the police state and a popular revolution occured and the government was replaced with yet another regime which (at least in the early years) was equally unpleasant - only now it was entirely anti-American.

Not to be outdone and remaining fully committed to the future of Iran - the US tried numerous times to destabilise the new regime (including making the rash decision to support a young Iraqi politician by the name of Saddam Hussein); supplying this man (rashly) with the technology to construct chemical weapons to use in a war with Iran (that the US had egged Saddam on to commit himself to).

The 'Cheap and Cheerful' solution to the 'Iran problem' and its nurturing has led to a 24 years of US problems with Iran and one of its quick-fix solutions to that problem led to 12 years of problems with its neighbour and is currently costing the US tax payer $1 billion dollars a week to sort out (not including the increased costs in domestic security).

When the Soviets looked like they were going to get too much influence in the Afghanistan by helping the socialist government to put down a rebellion by muslim fundamentalists, some bright spark in Washington thought that it would be a quick and cheap solution to supply and train the local resistance groups with arms. The US were successful in their endeavour - problem was that the new government was worse than the one from before and within three years of the conflict one of those that it trained (Osama Bin Laden) began his first attempt to blow up the WTC...Continue to 15 years later and now it is the US playing the part of invader, commiting loving detail to fruitlessly spending US lives and dollars in the country.

How many more 'quick fix' solutions will there be before someone decides to think of the consequences before acting?

[Timber Loftis]

As I said, actions should be well-conceived. This particular issue, however, is ministerial in nature. It is one decision out of thousands. It is a fine detail. In trying to stablize Iraq, even the most benevolent liberating force would need to be able to act on the minutae without scrutinizing each grain of sand so thoroughly. Rash may be bad, but overcaution is just as bad. At some point, you have to say this is simply the small stuff you're not supposed to sweat.

[Rokenn]

Why do we even bother trying to train them (Iraqi Police) if we are just going to shoot anyways?

Just heard a lovely story on the radio about three Iraqi police officers involved in a high speed chase. Suddenly the driver's partner is shot from behind in the shoulder. They stop and see a US tank nearby. The Lieutenant in the car gets out hand over his head to talk to them. He is shot bewteen the eyes. They then drag the last guy out and haul him off for 'interrigation' for a few days.

[WillowIX]

Originally posted by Timber Loftis: quote: Originally posted by WillowIX: Totally unecessary comment Timber. [img]graemlins/idontagreeatall.gif[/img]

I don't think so. I think the "damned if you do, damned if you don't" mentality is one of the most salient issues regarding the US in general (as globocop) and Iraq in particular. Now, mayhaps I had too much bile and extended my rant a scooch too far, particularly in bashing other nations/peoples (*that* almost *never* happens ), but I think the overall point is very important and should not be discounted. [/QUOTE]I'm sorry Timber but in my book 'damned if you do, damned if you don't' doesn't mean the same as "Good thing for you guys we exist, 'cause otherwise you'd just talk everything to death.". I agree with your whining about the damned-if-you-do,-damned-if-you-don't-whiners ( [img]tongue.gif[/img] *giggles*). You can't have it both ways. But saying that we're lucky US exist isn't really the same to me.

Azred, spot on in you first paragraph. The on topic one.

[Timber Loftis]

Silly Willow. When I said "we," I meant "muppets." Sorry for not being clear. And yes, you are lucky we exist. [img]graemlins/petard.gif[/img]

[Azred]

Originally posted by Skunk: How many more 'quick fix' solutions will there be before someone decides to think of the consequences before acting?

Only one solution is needed...as long as it is a working solution that has been well-thought-out beforehand. [img]graemlins/petard.gif[/img]

Originally posted by WillowIX: Azred, spot on in you first paragraph. The on topic one.

I suppose 1 out of 2 isn't too terribly bad, at least in this context. [img]graemlins/petard.gif[/img]

[WillowIX]

Timber and Azred, I guess that smiley shows a lot more about your posts than your comments do. [img]tongue.gif[/img] BAH! *throws hands in air and stalks out of thread*