Iraqi attitudes to US foreign policy - hostile?

[little grey rabbit]

Does the Iraqi government secretly dislike or resent US foreign policy?

Despite the billions spent in liberation and reconstruction there are two recent signs that the new Iraq is not a fan of the US.

1. The refusal to provide immunity to allow any US forces to remain in Iraq. As I understand it (and I may be wrong) there will be no US base in Iraq.

2. The recent silence over Syria and the abstention or voting against of the recently imposed Arab League's sanctions on Syria. As I understand it, Iraq says it will not enforce this resolution either.

Hillary Clinton and the US media are running a strong pro-civil war in Syria campaign and the refusal of Iraq to join in the chorus will have been noted. Possibly this is because Iraq of all countries knows the horror that a civil war brings. But Bosnia also knew the horror of civil war and the EU protectorate voted in favor of the Security Council resolution authorising the Libyan Civil War.

Am I reading too much into this, or has Iraq become covertly anti-American?

 

[SezMe]

Secretly? Covertly? Don't be daft. Iraq is openly not a fan of the USA.

 

[little grey rabbit]

Secretly? Covertly? Don't be daft. Iraq is openly not a fan of the USA.

Fair enough. I wasn't aware of it.

Perhaps Afghanistan will prove more grateful. It probably could do with the economic resource US occupation brings.

 

[JJM 777]

Grateful? Holy #¤&¤%&¤&.

How grateful would Americans be if the Soviets accused them of possessing weapons of mass destruction, liberated USA from the rule of Obama, killing a million people and devastating the whole region, then starting to rebuild some of what they originally had.

 

[pilot padron]

Actually, I doubt it

Fair enough. I wasn't aware of it.

Perhaps Afghanistan will prove more grateful. It probably could do with the economic resource US occupation brings.

Any country there that has strong majority of anti Israel inhabitants is never going to be too friendly toward the USA

Regardless of how much of our much needed elsewhere money we give them or even how much of our youth we bury for them

 

[Sword_Of_Truth]

Grateful? Holy #¤&¤%&¤&.

How grateful would Americans be if the Soviets accused them of possessing weapons of mass destruction, liberated USA from the rule of Obama, killing a million people and devastating the whole region, then starting to rebuild some of what they originally had.

The US didn't kill a million people in Iraq.

 

[Sword_Of_Truth]

Any country there that has strong majority of anti Israel inhabitants is never going to be too friendly toward the USA

Coincidentally, Little Grey Rabbit is himself a Holocaust Denier.

 

[JJM 777]

The US didn't kill a million people in Iraq.

They didn´t? Then they actually do have a reason to be grateful.

 

[gumboot]

Secretly? Covertly? Don't be daft. Iraq is openly not a fan of the USA.

First reply in the thread pretty much nailed it.

Can't imagine why Iraq wouldn't be a fan of US foreign policy...

 

[NoahFence]

There are a great many Americans who aren't a fan of our Foreign Policy. I consider myself among them.

 

[Aepervius]

Does the Iraqi government secretly dislike or resent US foreign policy?

Despite the billions spent in liberation and reconstruction there are two recent signs that the new Iraq is not a fan of the US.

1. The refusal to provide immunity to allow any US forces to remain in Iraq. As I understand it (and I may be wrong) there will be no US base in Iraq.

I don't hate the US , but my skin crawl at the thought of giving *immunity* to any *foreign* force remaining, no matter how the security is. That invite the question : why the heck do you need immunity to begin with, and not , say , a bipartisan process looking at all claim and applying law when a claim of abuse is found to be true ???

I can't speak for point 2.

 

[Aepervius]

The US didn't kill a million people in Iraq.

Irak doesn't not have 300 million inhabitant either. 120 thousand victim, 30 million inhabitant => 1 million victim 300 million inhabitant, seems fair as comparison.

 

[SonOfLaertes]

The Sunni/Baath Iraqi's are obviously not going to be a fan.

The Shia - well, I guess they would have mixed feelings if they weren't so closely tied to Iran and so fundamentalist in their faith. If America had invaded before Hussein obliterated the southern watershed they might be more willing to forgive and forget.

The Kurds - from all accounts the Kurds love American foreign policy in Iraq.

 

[Debaser]

http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-middle-east-15936813

The ins and outs of who loves who and who hates who in Syria's neighbourhood.


Quick summary;

Lebanon (govt./Sunni) - Anti Assad
Lebanon (oppos./Shia) - Pro Assad

Turkey - Anti

Iraq (govt./Shia) - Pro
Iraq (oppos./Sunni) - Anti

Jordan - not telling

 

[IDB87]

Grateful? Holy #¤&¤%&¤&.

How grateful would Americans be if the Soviets accused them of possessing weapons of mass destruction, liberated USA from the rule of Obama, killing a million people and devastating the whole region, then starting to rebuild some of what they originally had.

I think of it like this:

If the Russians came into the United States and deposed Obama and the federal government, much of the violence in the aftermath would come from religious extremists extrajudicial killings, militias out west, drug gangs and perhaps foreign agents from Canada and South America doing whatever. While the Russians will kill their share of "insurgents" who are actually resisting the occupation, most of the violence done would be American on American.

 

[gumboot]

I think of it like this:

If the Russians came into the United States and deposed Obama and the federal government, much of the violence in the aftermath would come from religious extremists extrajudicial killings, militias out west, drug gangs and perhaps foreign agents from Canada and South America doing whatever. While the Russians will kill their share of "insurgents" who are actually resisting the occupation, most of the violence done would be American on American.

Russia would still be responsible for the violence as they have a legal obligation to maintain law and order as the occupying authority. Maybe if the US hadn't disarmed the entire Iraqi army and police force, seized private weapons, told the civilian population "don't worry, we'll keep you safe" then sat in their bases and watched while roving bands of criminals ran amock, the situation wouldn't be quite so bad now, hmmm?

 

[IDB87]

Russia would still be responsible for the violence as they have a legal obligation to maintain law and order as the occupying authority.

Definitely.

Maybe if the US hadn't disarmed the entire Iraqi army and police force, seized private weapons, told the civilian population "don't worry, we'll keep you safe"

It was a matter of reform. I don't think the Coalition would be wise to go into Iraq expecting an insurgency and then leave the army and police hierarchy intact and untouched. But this isn't to say the Iraqi police and ISF were not active during this reform. In one year alone, 2005-2006, the Iraqi police suffered something like 5000 casualties. Can this high attrition rate be attributed to lax security on behalf of poor training at the hands of the coalition, or perhaps to the intensity and nature of the combat?

then sat in their bases and watched while roving bands of criminals ran amock, the situation wouldn't be quite so bad now, hmmm?

Perhaps some of our veterans here can speak to this statement.

 

[gumboot]

It was a matter of reform. I don't think the Coalition would be wise to go into Iraq expecting an insurgency and then leave the army and police hierarchy intact and untouched.

They didn't expect an insurgency. They expected Iraqis to cheerfully welcome them (which they did), allow their entire government to be deconstructed (which they did), and then magically live in peace and harmony (this is where the entire plan fell down).

But this isn't to say the Iraqi police and ISF were not active during this reform. In one year alone, 2005-2006, the Iraqi police suffered something like 5000 casualties. Can this high attrition rate be attributed to lax security on behalf of poor training at the hands of the coalition, or perhaps to the intensity and nature of the combat?

You're talking a year or more into the insurgency. The USA screwed up in the weeks and months immediately after the defeat of Iraqi forces. That's when they needed to establish firm occupational control over the conquered territories. They didn't. They created a vacuum and it was filled with common criminals, insurgents, and anyone else smart enough not to hand in weapons.

By the time they realised their mistake and put Iraqi government back in place the problem had grown so large it was impossible to control.

Perhaps some of our veterans here can speak to this statement.

There's plenty of books available on the invasion and immediate occupation. The soldiers on the ground were well aware of what was happening, and their accounts are filled with frustration at the ridiculous policies applied by those in command.

An excellent pair of books that recounts the experiences of a platoon of the 1st Reconnaissance Battalion‎, USMC is "Generation Kill" and "One Bullet Away".

1st Recon were part of the initial invasion and some of the first forces to enter Baghdad and move into an occupation role.

These books perfectly illustrate the problems with the US's lack of occupation forethought, and the problems it was already causing within a matter of weeks.

"Generation Kill" is the account written by Rolling Stone reporter Evan Wright, who was embedded with the platoon, while "One Bullet Away" is the autobiography of Lt Nathaniel Fick - the platoon commander.

 

[Robrob]

Secretly? Covertly? Don't be daft. Iraq is openly not a fan of the USA.

Fair enough. I wasn't aware of it.

Perhaps Afghanistan will prove more grateful. It probably could do with the economic resource US occupation brings.

If this is supposed to be humor, shouldn't you use more emoticons?