In an effort to curb some of the violence of muslim Shi'ite terrorists, Iraq will be closing the border with these two countries for 72 hours....I am not sure that is long enough though... Link
72 hours, 72 years, 72 virgins. There's something mystical about the number 72 I agree, close them off for good and keep gworld's buds out!
Borders are not like door to close them. If it was that easy US would close its border with Mexico without spending billions.
In ways they are doors. Israel's 'door' has been fairly effective in ways. As far as US and Mexico go, there's far too many internal (and external) interests involved...regardless of the law and will of the people. We could shut-down illegal immigration in a split second if we had the thumbs-up.
Thats right because Isreal has literally put walls there. I don't think the Iraqi government is ready to put enough money for a wall not mentioning that they don't have that money in the first place. .
The borders should have been tightly shut years ago. That would have eliminated lots of the weaponry in Iraq. It would have taken 10's of thousands of additional US troops at the borders. 72 hours/3 days. That is just wierd.
Some of it's a wall,...but most of it's a dual length security fence. Both are secure (for the better part). Some people attempt to dig tunnels, but that takes months of work.
So how would you analyze it? Would you say president agrees with controling the borders but congress isn't? Or perhaps Republicans are more in favour of walls?
I was looking at this 3 day border closing situation again and thinking what a minimalist response it is...and a testimony to how poorly this whole war in Iraq has been pulled off by the US from beginning to now. After Desert Storm, G Bush Sr. and administration encouraged the Shiite population to revolt against Saddam Hussein and they did to a certain extent. Saddam crushed them. They never got support from any outside source of any level, be it the US or Shiites from Iran. Weaponry was not imported to enable a native group to challenge Saddam. He was able to continue to rule the country w/an iron hand. The opposite occurred after the US defeated the Iraqi military and overthrew Saddam. There were no controls on weaponry. Obviously the borders weren't sealed. The result was all factions throughout Iraq armed themselves to the teeth and the level of violence, the anarchy, the civil war, etc. has reached significant levels. This 3 day closure is a joke!
Yeah, America really sucks and democrats will work hard to make sure the world knows! In fact, our country and especially our military is so inept that it's amazing al qaida hasn't taken over the country. The good thing is, that not all democrats blatantly use GWB as a proxy to put our troops down. Some are just coming out of the closet to do it directly now. Viva Saddam! /sarc off
Heck yeah Republicans are more in favor of walls...because they don't rely on the votes of thousands of illegals...the dems do. On topic, the 72 hours should be about up...also, I read a story this mornign saying the crackdown in Baghdad was working, crime was down 35%!! I'll see if I can find that story again and post a link.
As I look back at this thread I agree w/ d16 on this point....I think the 72 hours is too short. Its been astounding to me how well armed all factions in Iraq have become. Its been a horrible lesson, and a deadly one. We should have sealed off the borders from the beginning and we should have immediately secured all arms and weapons caches. My impressions of this surge are as follows: Early January--Bush announces the surge. Reactions in Iraq have been many. It seems as if the shiites in Iraq started disarming and removing their militia presence pretty soon thereafter. Then the Sunni's went on a splurge with car bombs in shiite areas. I guess this happened from late January to the last week or so. In fact I read one account where shiites blamed the US for announcing this early. Of course they didn't take responsibility for reducing their own militia's and checkpoints. Now, with the reduction of violence within the last week as referenced by d16 possibly all Iraqi sides are withdrawing and slowing violence down as the forces for the surge w/in Baghdad come into town or draw near. I guess the impact of this whole thing will play out over time. We possibly won't understand impacts of the whole thing for some time.
This thread points out the disconnects between politics and reality. d16, Gtech, and I have all said in one form or another the borders between Iraq and other countries should be shut for longer than 72 hours. (can't believe we agree ) Now here is a disconnect. The US military and the administration just recently (since early Feb) have announced weapons from Iran coming into the country. Military officials say they have known about this for 2 years. There were news reports about it for some time. the administration briefed congress about this. Recent reports say that 170 US soldiers have died due to these weapons w/over 600 injured. At the same time there is a report saying that the rearmoring of humvees is way behind schedule. Way behind. How can that be. If the administration really intends to Win, as they say, and protect soldiers, as they say, why isn't rearmoring humvees and dealing with this of far greater concern and a priority. Afterall these weapons have been visible to the military and I have to assume the administration for 2 years. Where is the action? Clearly, with all the weaponry in Iraq it should have been a priority to shut off borders. Not doing that just ends up killing American soldiers. meanwhile in the political arena...after Bush announced the "surge" the democratic response was to debate it or renounce it. The debate flows around and it at times gets to funding the war and gets to the political point of supporting troops. If we fund the surge...troops are protected....and if funding is cut off troops would be sacrificed. Well that is political bs and hogwash. Right now american troops are dieing because they are not well-enough protected...and because weapons are flowing unimpeded into Iraq and have been for years. Several years ago Rumsfeld had to be goaded by a soldier about the lack of armour on vehicles. His response was "you go to war with the army you have" There is a huge disconnect between the words about winning the words about protecting the troops and the actual implementation.
One more comment on this closing borders and trying to comment on levels of violence in Baghdad. violence levels have increased again after a period where violence was down. I think it will take a while before anyone will see if this surge is effective in quelling violence. I'm not for it. But I don't think Congress is going to stop it. I think it will play out over a many month period.