 |
| |
|
|
lord of the mark
|
 |
FUKCOV - Former United Kingdom Colony of Virginia
Dec 2000
time: 00:35
|
|
From BBCArabic.com: The main factor behind the escalation of events in Najaf is the muteness of Ayatollah Sistani. If he had spoken positively - or even negatively - the problem could have been resolved, because he has many deluded followers.
Essam Al Hussainy, Baghdad, Iraq
From BBCArabic.com: Moqtada Sadr capitalised on his father's reputation and deluded his followers, who are mostly poor and uneducated. He is himself manipulated by a group of extremist clerics to make him serve their own political ambitions. This is happening at a time when we all strive for a stable life and want to rebuild what Saddam Hussein has destroyed.
Bassem, Iraqi in Oman
From BBCArabic.com: If Moqtada Sadr was a real nationalist, he would have turned his father's followers to a loyal electorate. But his anarchic tendencies are reminiscent of Saddam's infamous reign of terror, which will prevent him from taking on any political position in the future. We have to work together to re-educate Moqtada's followers in order to join forces for the benefit of our country.
Aseel, Najaf, Iraq
From BBCArabic.com:The current crisis in Najaf will have a dramatic effect on the democratic process in Iraq. Moqtada's men turned to dangerous outlaws when the government tried to hold them back. The case would have been entirely different if the confrontation was with any of the well-established political parties in Iraq. These parties that have long suffered from Saddam's tyranny would never resort to violence. They are people of principles and know how to maintain a sensible political dialogue, reflecting a clear ideology. This is why we have to eliminate the likes of Moqtada first before starting any democratic process in Iraq.
Ali Al-Dabbagh, Najaf, Iraq
From BBCArabic.com: I appeal for the Mehdi Army to walk out of the Holy Shrine and for Moqtada to surrender to the Iraqi authorities and apologise to the people of Najaf for all the destruction he caused.
Ahmed, Najaf, Iraq
This whole issue has compromised the government in the eyes of Iraqis because of its blatant impotence in the Najaf crisis
Tark Ali, Iraq
From BBCArabic.com: The events in Najaf have proved without any doubt that the Iraqi government is an extension of the occupation and showed that it readiness to sacrifice its very own people if necessary. This whole issue has compromised the government in the eyes of Iraqis because of its blatant impotence in the Najaf crisis. Najaf events will not compromise the so-called democratic process in Iraq, simply because such process doesn't exist to start with.
Tark Ali, Iraq
From BBCArabic.com: These actions are intended to divert the public's attention from what is going on in the rest of Iraq.
Ahmad Hassan Al Banna, Iraq
From BBCArabic.com: Events in Karbala have proved that democracy and armed militias don't go hand in hand. How can democratic elections be held in Najaf under Moqtada and his men? All militias should disbanded and incorporated in one National Army, including the Kurdish Peshmergas.
Haydar Al Karbala'i, Iraq
From BBCArabic.com: I have become convinced more and more that oil has everything to do with the war in Iraq.
Nasser Kabbara, Worcester, UK
From BBCArabic.com: The people of Najaf are far more afraid of Moqtada's men than of American attacks. Most of them want to see his army leave as soon as possible. No one here dares criticising him they fear his fierce reprisals.
Bassem Al Najafi, Iraq
|
|
| |
|
|
|
Ramo
|
 |
Austin, Texas, USA
Oct 1999
time: 23:35
|
|
Regarding who won, I'll have to go with Cole's analysis on this:
quote:
Winners and losers:
I think the big losers from the Najaf episode (part deux) are the Americans. They have become, if it is possible, even more unpopular in Iraq than they were last spring after Abu Ghuraib, Fallujah and Najaf Part 1. The US is perceived as culturally insensitive for its actions in the holy city of Najaf.
The Allawi government is also a big loser. Instead of looking decisive, as they had hoped, they ended up looking like the lackeys of neo-imperialists.
The big winner is Sistani, whose religious charisma has now been enhanced by solid nationalist credentials. He is a national hero for saving Najaf.
For Muqtada, it is a wash. He did not have Najaf until April, anyway, and can easily survive not having it. His movement in the slums of the southern cities is intact, even if its paramilitary has been weakened. |
The people of the urban slums still feel disenfranchised by the American occupation, by the Allawi gov't. They're not magically going to want to play ball with an inept, American-dominated (reinforced by the artillery barage in the area surrounding the Shrine, with who knows how many civilian casualties in addition to the damage to the Valley of Peace cemetery) elitist (further reinforced by the actions National Congress) gov't. So Sadr's base is still there, and is still quite antsy. And is feeling far more antsy than before this siege.
Of course, Sadr was outmaneuvered by Sistani, who stole some of his nationalistic thunder and perhaps some sway over his constitutency. He also alienated the people of Najaf, but the city has always belonged to the clerical establishment anyways. Also, his milita has been depleted, so it might be a short while till it can be reinforced. Hopefully, there'll be a free and fair democratic election before that could happen.
|
|
| |
|
|
|
Ramo
|
|
Austin, Texas, USA
Oct 1999
time: 23:35
|
|
The mission to better the lives of the poor is not one the authorities have attempted to fulfill in the least. They have consistently disenfrachised the poor economically and politically. Through breaking unions, through a contracting policy that exclusively favors the wealthy of Iraq and abroad, through massive privatization at a time of immense unemployment, through giving exiles almost exlusive political power, through preventing elections at every turn. So, yes, the slums will back anyone who stands against the Allawi gov't's and the Americans' authority since their influence has been invariably antithetical to their interests. The slums may have "always" been lost, but that's only because we've ignored them.
As for whether their support is needed, of course it's needed. An Iraqi state isn't viable as long as the poor see it as their enemy to the extent that they're willing to fight against it.
|
|
| |
|
|
|
Ramo
|
|
Austin, Texas, USA
Oct 1999
time: 23:35
|
|
This isn't a step process, again. I don't know where you've learned your economics, but there isn't some magical level such that before it labor unions tank an eecoomy. Labor unions are instrumental in terms of developing a healthy middle-class dominated economy, and developing a civil society, both things Iraq desperately needs. As for proving why a prohibition against unions is necessary for economic development, you'll have to do better than saying "Africa." What the hell does that mean? The US, BTW, has had legal labor unions for well over a century and a half, and they've played a huge role. Particularly since the Great Depression. I guess according to your theory, the US' economy should've failed. Funny thing that it hasn't. 
|
|
| |
|
|
|
Ramo
|
|
Austin, Texas, USA
Oct 1999
time: 23:35
|
|
quote:
That is because our current industrial foundation was laid in 1865-1890 not the great depression, and at that time there were few labour unions. It was the events of those years that percipitated the formation of unions, which AFTER we were now an industrial economy with boming production and output found their rightful place in bringing some of the generated wealth to the people. Note there had to be weath for the unions to fight for their share. |
The point again is that they were LEGAL in this era. And they played in important part in the economy. They won us the 8-hour working day in 1886. They provided an important social benefit for farmers of the period (see the Farmers' Alliances). You still haven't put forth a reason why trade unions should be illegal. BTW, if there's no economic basis for them to form, they won't form.
The only thing you've said is "Africa." That ain't an argument. South Africa, BTW, probably the most developed state in Africa has the most vibrant trade union movement in the continent, going back decades.
quote:
Tell me the nation that skipped industrialization with its great pain on the lower classes and went straight to a successful starbucks bound middle class? |
This doesn't have a single thing to do with what I was discussing. If having legal trade unions means "skipping industrialization," then the US "skipped industrialization."
quote:
So are labor unions bad. No. Are the the universal solution to the development of the Iraqi economy as you worshop then as idols. No. Are you economic performance expectaions of Iraq unrealistic. Yes. And the lower class of Iraq share your impossible goals. |
Do you make **** up? Yes.
|
|
| |
|
| |
|
|
|
Ramo
|
|
Austin, Texas, USA
Oct 1999
time: 23:35
|
|
quote:
The locations were not in response to "trade unions" as you deliberatly restrict the arguemnet. It was Western powers introducing advanced economic and social institutions into areas who are not ready for them (Iraq). Basically I think Iraq should naturally progress through all phases of economic activity, to include the less pretty forms. |
You're changing the argument. Here's what you originally wrote:
"I didn't say that the government was trying to alleviate the problems of the poor, they are in no position to do so, like I said earlier your skipping steps. Labor unions at this juncture! You have no idea what stage they are at, and what has to happen first that might not fit your ideal views before things can reach the level you want. Economic foundations are never pretty, look at all the West's struggles. And look at all the failed economies where we tried to do what you are advocating in Iraq (ie Africa)."
If you didn't mean unions in the argument, it was completely nonsensical.
quote:
You want us to impose concepts on them like preventing natural privitization (anything besides that is unnatural, unless you think Iraq is not even at that econimic phase, where unions are even more ridiculous) and following lowest bider contracting policies |
Jeebus!
1. Unions aren't rediculous. They played a huge part in the Iraqi economy half a century ago before Saddam's rise. And they'll play a huge part nowadays, if the state doesn't get in the way. Iraq has plenty of industries, and unions are an important part in nonindustrial economies (again, in the US, look at the Farmers' Alliances of the 19th century).
2. I have no idea what you mean by "natural privatization." The point, again, is that Iraq's unemployment is astronomic, so privatizing state businesses, which could've been a social net, at this moment puts lots off people without any food or shelter, not to mention making Sadr's ideas much more appealing to them. In principle, I oppose state ownership of nonessential services, but this is a time that necessitates a broad social welfare net.
3. There isn't a lowest bidder contracting policy. To bring up the most prominent example, there are Haliburton's no-bid contracts.
|
|
| |
|
| |
|
|
|
Berzerker
|
 |
topeka, kansas,USA
May 1999
time: 23:35
|
|
quote:
Labor unions are instrumental in terms of developing a healthy middle-class dominated economy, and developing a civil society, both things Iraq desperately needs. |
I'd say the GI Bill was much more instrumental... But neither were necessary. Economies advance when they are ~free to advance. And that means more and more people with specialised skills and that translates into wealth and a strong middle class. Unions have been on the decline in recent decades and the reason is they have been a drain ever since the world recovered from WWII...
As people become more specialised they demand more pay. But consider this, "supply-side" economics says reduce taxes, even for the rich, and that will "trickle-down" to the working class by spurring investment. Many liberals et al say this is nonsense, so what do they want? They want government, the epitome of rich, to "invest" in the economy. Hmm...
quote:
The US, BTW, has had legal labor unions for well over a century and a half, and they've played a huge role. Particularly since the Great Depression. |
But you've repeatedly pointed out how unions were getting stomped on ~100 years ago. Since the Depression we had a few wars with the first devastating much of Europe's economy. Remove that much competition for US producers and labor unions are a luxury, not a necessity. Once the world recovers and has more options, our advantage disappears.
|
|
| |
|
|
|
The Mad Monk
|
 |
of Ice Cream
Mar 2000
time: 23:35
|
|
The looting has made it to the web:
quote:
Sistani Returns to Najaf
Naseer Al-Nahr
Arab News
NAJAF, Iraq, 26 August 2004 — Iraq’s top Shi'i cleric returned to the country yesterday and said he had a plan to end the fighting in the “burning city” of Najaf, as the crisis around one of its holiest shrine neared a climax.
Aides to Grand Ayatollah Ali Al-Sistani said the cleric would unveil an initiative to get Shi'i fighters out of the revered Imam Ali Mosque. They gave no details. Sistani also called on Iraqis to march to Najaf to save it.
Sistani arrived in the southern city of Basra from Kuwait, having undergone heart treatment in London. He plans to head to Najaf today. Iraqi ministers and members of the national assembly held talks yesterday with Sistani on the Najaf conflict, a source close to the ayatollah’s representative in Basra said.
At the request of Prime Minister Iyad Allawi, Minister of State Kassem Daoud and Minister of State for the Provinces Wael Abdel Latif flew into Basra to meet with Sistani, the source said. They were accompanied by members of the newly elected Parliament, including Sheikh Hussein Al-Sadr, a distant relative of cleric and militia leader Moqtada Al-Sadr, who led a national conference peace delegation to Najaf last week. “The talks were positive and valuable and soon you will be hearing something cheerful,” Al-Sadr said. “Grand Ayatollah Sistani is to offer an initiative as soon as he’s in Najaf,” he added.
His return came as US and Iraqi forces tightened their grip around Mehdi Army of Al-Sadr holed up in the mosque, advancing to within 300 meters (yards) of the shrine.
Meanwhile, a spokesman for Al-Sadr said that the Mehdi Army had lost control of significant parts of Najaf, following heavy US-led attacks in the Iraqi city. “It’s not like before. The area we control has significantly shrunk. They (the Americans) are trying to maintain their control on Najaf because they have failed everywhere else in Iraq,” Sheikh Ahmed Al-Shaibani said.
On the 21st day of fighting, US planes fired missiles within meters (yards) of the shrine. A US military plane launched air strikes last night on positions in Najaf held by the Mehdi Army, a witness said. The AC-130 gunship fired its cannon on positions near a shrine where the fighters are holed up.
US armor held the shrine in a pincer grip from the west and east and heavy artillery pounded areas to the south as snipers fired on all those coming or going from the shrine. The closest US vehicle was 20 meters (yards) from the western gate of the complex, one of the most important Shi'i sites in the world. All four gates of the compound were bolted by militiamen inside.
“We ask all believers to volunteer to go with us to Najaf,” Sistani said in a statement read out by his aide Hayder Al-Safi. “I have come for the sake of Najaf and I will stay in Najaf until the crisis ends.”
Sistani’s aides said he would leave for Najaf at 7 a.m. today with his supporters. They urged US forces encircling the gold-domed mosque to withdraw.
Al-Sadr has also called for his own followers to march on Najaf, sparking fears that the influx of thousands of rival Shi'a into the tense city could ignite renewed violence.
Police also arrested senior Al-Sadr aide Ali Sumeisim in Najaf, and said they had captured a number of Al-Sadr supporters who had stolen sacred items from the mosque. Al-Sadr’s aides denied the accusation, saying it was part of a smear campaign. Al Jazeera television said Mehdi fighters had seized two relatives of Iraqi Defense Minister Hazim Al-Shalaan, and had demanded that US forces leave Najaf and that police release Sumeisim.
Elsewhere, US aircraft attacked targets in the city of Fallujah yesterday, killing three people and wounding four, a hospital official said. Three others were killed and 10 wounded in gunfire and mortar attacks in a residential district of Kufa late yesterday, medical sources said.
— Additional input from Agencies
|
http://www.aljazeerah.info/News%20a...0to%20Najaf.htm
Oddly enough, none of the major news organizations have brought up this small point, which could damge Sadr's reputation immensely. Oddly enough.
|
|
| |
|
|
|
Ramo
|
|
Austin, Texas, USA
Oct 1999
time: 23:35
|
|
quote:
I'd say the GI Bill was much more instrumental... But neither were necessary. Economies advance when they are ~free to advance. And that means more and more people with specialised skills and that translates into wealth and a strong middle class. Unions have been on the decline in recent decades |
And working class real wages have declined in the past few decades. What a cooincidence.
quote:
and the reason is they have been a drain ever since the world recovered from WWII... |
Not at all. The reason for their decline is an increase in state repression of them.
quote:
As people become more specialised they demand more pay. But consider this, "supply-side" economics says reduce taxes, even for the rich, and that will "trickle-down" to the working class by spurring investment. Many liberals et al say this is nonsense, so what do they want? They want government, the epitome of rich, to "invest" in the economy. Hmm... |
According to generally accepted economic theories, both cutting taxes on the rich as well as gov't investment can spur the economy. However, the latter, properly targetted, can spur the economy much more rapidly.
quote:
But you've repeatedly pointed out how unions were getting stomped on ~100 years ago. |
Yes. And much more recently than that. I've never asserted that they were completely legal or that they were never harrassed by the state.
quote:
Since the Depression we had a few wars with the first devastating much of Europe's economy. |
Actually, the Depression-induced rapid increase in unions started several years before WW II.
quote:
Remove that much competition for US producers and labor unions are a luxury, not a necessity. |
What does that mean? What makes them a luxury and not a necessity? And you do realize that there are unions and unionizing movements in other countries, don't you?
|
|
| |
All times are GMT. The time now is 05:35.
Apolyton Time is 00:35. |
top of page
|
| archivepost |
|
Forum Rules:
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts
|
HTML code is ON
vB code is ON
Smilies are ON
[IMG] code is ON
|
|
|
|
|
|
28-08-2004 01:43
Alright, find me all these places where the gov't fostering trade unions' "prematurely" has tanked their economy.
)
|