Many people knew from the beginning that the tribal people of Iraq could not sustain a democracy. They do not have the civil infrastructure to support an open society, and are controlled by religious and tribal prejudices.
If the US will stay in Iraq for several more years, there is a small chance that civil society can be strengthened. But it's not likely. When the US does leave, next year or in 5 years, Iraq will break into full civil war. Either Iraq will be divided into 2 or 3 countries, or a strong military leader will come to power.
Should we avoid the interim period of bloodshed, and find a strong military leader to take control of Iraq? Bush's liberal idealism got us into this mess, hoping futilely to move medieval people into modernity in a few years. A strong leader could unite the country, and provide the stability required. The only viable option seems ot be dividing Iraq, like India/Pakistan or the former Yugoslavia.
2007-07-21
09:44:51
·
8 answers
·
asked by
A Plague on your houses
5