No one seems to be writing opinion pieces quite the way I would, so I decided to do it myself.

The name? Taverns are places where one goes to discuss the interesting events and things in the world, so this is my tavern.

I will offer my views on politics, economics, and whatever else strikes my fancy.
I will occasionally publish the entire article from another journal for purposes of causing discussion.

 

Who is attacking US Troops in Iraq?

Jonathan Steele in the Guardian has a view of who is attacking US troops and why that is very different from that we get from the Bush administration or the American Media. What he says makes a lot of sense. Unfortunately.

Here is one excerpt:

Before the war critics argued that invading Iraq would encourage fundamentalism throughout the Islamic world. This seems to be happening, as al-Qaida elements and other antiwestern groups see the American presence in Iraq as a new source of easy targets.

If he is closer to right than the bush administration, then the problems in Iraq will be getting larger, not smaller. Considering the track record of accurate predictions by Bush/Cheney/Rumsfeld/Wolfowitz ....

The Bush people like clarity and simplicity. The story they want us to buy is a simple "Us versus Them" story, with us as the good guys and "them" as the bad guys. Iraq is in the middle east, however. There aren't two clear groups. There are all kinds of groups with all kinds of goal, motives, and methods. Some are with us, some are against us, some don't care either way - and the mix will be different by sundown. It doesn't make the kind of story the Neocons will be able to sell to the media and the American people, even if they are able to step out from behind their ideologies long enough to get a grip on it themselves.

Anyone who makes a long-term prediction regarding what is going to happen in Iraq will be wrong.
posted by Richard at 12:25 PM