Centerfield

The General makes a good point. I've read that the Pakistani military is particularly professional. Moroccan troops also have a reputation for professionalism. I've not heard much about the Tunisian forces.

One important aspect of this suggestion that can't be overstated is that the General mentioned troops from countries which don't border Iraq. Troops from her neighbors would be perceived very differently by the Iraqi's.

I think the idea that anyone can enforce a western style democracy on Iraq is a pipedream. How many examples in history do we really have of any outsiders being able to instill a long-term style of government on a people without it being adapted and changed to fit with the local culture?

The recent polling out of Iraq shows that they are turning against us. It seems to me that the primary reason for this is rooted in culteral insensibility on the part of our troops. A lot of things that to us would seem relatively minor irritants are viewed by the tribal cultures in Iraq as gross insults. Keep in mind that the honor of the extended family is king in that part of the world. Even in Turkey honor killings are relatively common.

Just yesterday I was reading a story in yahoo about a Turkish woman who had been raped by a man from a neighboring village and impregnated. At first her family forced the couple to marry as a means of trying to salvage the family's honor. But, even that wasn't enough and the woman's five brothers ended up stoning both the rapist and their sister to death on the outskirts of the village as the couple was attempting to move to the rapists village. In Islam all sins are wiped clean by death. Thus, these people felt that the only way to salvage their honor was to kill those who had offended it. Simply allowing the couple to move away wouldn't stop their neighbors from gossiping about how their honor had been tarnished.

That way of thinking is so totally foreign to us here in the west that it's difficult to wrap our minds around it. Yet that is a very, very pervasive way of thinking in Iraq and the rest of the Islamic world. Our troops unintentionally besmirch the honor of families all the time... leading to unintended consequences like revenge attacks. Muslim troops would, in theory, not be prone to making such basic, simple mistakes.

> I think the idea that anyone can enforce a western style democracy on Iraq is a pipedream. How many examples in history do we really have
> of any outsiders being able to instill a long-term style of government on a people without it being adapted and changed to fit with the local culture?

None. No examples atall. The great hope of the Iraqi occupation is that they will create a culturally Iraqi democracy. That would necessarily also be a culturally Arabic, islamic, and conservative democracy, something catchy to people in neighboring countries.

> [story about honor killing]
> wiped clean by death. Thus, these people felt that the only way to salvage their honor was to kill those who had offended it. Simply
> allowing the couple to move away wouldn't stop their neighbors from gossiping about how their honor had been tarnished.

Just because that's how it's done now doesn't mean that people don't find a more egalitarian society, with a higher value placed on indiviual life and liberty, quite attractive. I'm sure that those who did the killing will insist that it's the right thing. But what about the younger friends of the woman, and her sisters? Surely these ideas of equality, liberty, and justice for women must be rather attractive to many who've had friends and relatives killed this way.

The same reasoning proceeds for other restrictive and retributive religious ideas - their free play must needs produce opponents of tradition.

> Muslim troops would, in theory, not be prone to making such basic, simple mistakes.

...yes. They probably wouldn't try to stop honor killings. Or torture. Or maybe rapes and executions by fellow soldiers (definitely not by officers). And they wouldn't serve as models of how an individualistically-oriented society can work.

I can see advantages to other muslim troops but under the UN? I fail to see that UN control would accomplish much of anything positive for us or the West.

Kevin, I share your concerns. There is a cultural gap. But I agree with much of what John suggests. The battle here is in getting those who are attracted to the idea of respect for individual rights to stand up and fight for a future, a dream that they themselves may not live to truly enjoy.

There are some in islamic nations who embrace a culture of focus on family honor and violent response to slight, as well as basic authoritarianism and dominance of women. But I believe this is in large part fostered by the lack of socioeconomic opportunity to better one's lot. I think that a global commonality among the impoverished in 3rd world nations is for something pretty close to what we call the American dream, the chance to work hard and get something of your own that can't be taken away, food in your mouth, a roof overhead, and a culture which allows you to sleep at night without fear of a boot on the door in the middle of the night.

We're fighting against rule by those who favor the boot on the door in the night (even though we may be doing it right now in Iraq, ironically and problematically). I think there are many who are now turning against us not from a sense of fealty to this culture, but from as sense that we're in the process of some sort of gradual bail that in the end will leave things to the boot-in-the-nighters.

Much as people don't like facing it, the success we are talking about in Iraq rests on the successful selling of a dream in some form. I honestly think it's a dream that is a common impulse to mankind, but it's one that large parts of the world believe can't ever be more than a dream.