We are developing the social individualist meta-context for the future. From the very serious to the extremely frivolous... lets see what is on the mind of the Samizdata people.
Samizdata, derived from Samizdat /n. - a system of clandestine publication of banned literature in the USSR [Russ.,= self-publishing house]
|
Fighting the attrition battle in Iraq Looks like the US is playing hardball and refusing to compromise with the Islamists in Iraq. All to the good, I suspect.
The best chance for a reasonable long term political settlement in Iraq will come when Moqtada al-Sadr and as many of his supporters as possible are dead. Getting there will require resolve in the ongoing attrition battle but if the casualty numbers are even close to accurate, then things are going as well as can be reasonably expected in such a grim business.
|
Who Are We? The Samizdata people are a bunch of sinister and heavily armed globalist illuminati who seek to infect the entire world with the values of personal liberty and several property. Amongst our many crimes is a sense of humour and the intermittent use of British spelling.
We are also a varied group made up of social individualists, classical liberals, whigs, libertarians, extropians, futurists, ‘Porcupines’, Karl Popper fetishists, recovering neo-conservatives, crazed Ayn Rand worshipers, over-caffeinated Virginia Postrel devotees, witty Frédéric Bastiat wannabes, cypherpunks, minarchists, kritarchists and wild-eyed anarcho-capitalists from Britain, North America, Australia and Europe.
|
Our position improves as the folks like this get killed one by one on the ground. I think that it would be better to just sever our depandance on oil with new energy sources. This whole regions seems like a money pit to me.
I polished my right wing nutcase cred the other day. When I saw the headline “Peace Talks Collapse,” I said “good.”
The coalition forces are superb at military victory. But I do not have the same confidence in our peace negotiators. As I recall Al-Sadr used the previous truce to raise an army. Long term peace will come only after military victory.
I don’t like having to say it (as it is tragic people will die) but I think you’re right!
Sadly you are right But i somehow doubt that it will be our armies that will be victorious
Well the attack (either by American or Iraqi forces – or both) could be going in even as type this.
However, so far, city of N. has been like the city of F.
Remember that one – “we will get the people who killed and mutilated the Americans” – the trash still infest the city. Deals, pull outs (the usual stuff). “We want to deal with the enemy, without hurting the civilian population of the city” is not possible (partly because the enemy is made up, in part, of civilians from the city)
I am not snearing, nor do I have a plan for dealing with either the city of F. or the city of N.
Although the population is a VASTLY bigger than it was, Iraq is still the same pest hole that it was when my old Uncle Bill served there in between World War I and World War II.
That was liberation to (liberation from the Turks) and the goal was the same (to set up an independent constitutional government – actually that it is better than the present aim of setting up a social democracy, lots of “public services” and other such stuff).
There was a lot of hard fighting (never show emotion – cold indifference seems to confuse and unnerve the locals, they seem to be used to shouting and screaming as they kill) and there was even a victory of sorts. But a few years later it all fell apart.
I suppose there is the hope of local autonomy under local leaders (Kurds in Kurdish areas etc). Certainly strong central government has been tried and has never worked well for long.
Still (as I said) a pest hole (oil or no oil), but we are in the bloody place now, so let us hope for the best.