Quote:
Originally Posted by Barefootsies
|
thanks for the links... one of them IMO summed up what I said pretty well.....
When Iraqis went to the polls in January 2005 the administration pointed to the election as a sign of success. But with an almost complete Sunni boycott of the election, the resulting government had, as one officer described it to FRONTLINE, "tenuous legitimacy."
In many ways it was the definitive moment in the Iraq war. "The die was cast once the Sunni Arabs did not participate in the elections. Everything that has followed that has been a logical consequence," Casey strategist Maj. Thomas Mowle tells FRONTLINE.
Sectarian violence in Iraq was growing and came to a head in February 2006, when Sunni insurgents bombed the golden dome of the Askariya shrine in Samarra. "The Shi'a begin to fight back with the Sunni," author Lawrence Kaplan tells FRONTLINE. "And what was one-sided insurgency becomes a two-sided civil war."
So it's completely the fault of the Administration that the Iraqis didn't play along as hoped, right? Again... should we give them back Saddam, Uday, Husay and the Baath Party? Things were "better" then?
I'm not saying GWB did everything right... but come on... the whole fucked up situation was the fault of the administration and by default the US of A???
I have a hard time with that one.