Originally Posted By Beaumandy <a href="http://blogs.washingtonpost.com/thinktanktown/2005/11/a_cheerier_view.html" target="_blank">http://blogs.washingtonpost.co m/thinktanktown/2005/11/a_cheerier_view.html</a> But..But... it's a quagmire!!!!!!!! A Cheerier View of Iraq Would you believe – an economic boom in Iraq despite the on-going insurgent attacks? Well, you might believe it after you read an analysis by Michael Rubin, a resident scholar at the American Enterprise Institute, who contends that the reason you haven’t heard the economic good news is because opponents of the American involvement in Iraq want you to think there’s only bad news there. Here’s Rubin’s case: Many Iraqis who couldn’t get jobs under Saddam Hussein because of their ethnicity, sectarian identity, or refusal to join the Baath party, are now working. The private sector economy is booming because Iraqis are investing in it, with some of the money coming from family members abroad. Thriving banks, restaurants, and furniture stores now occupy what were abandoned stores last year. Further: In August, new business startups in Iraq exceeded 30,000. Individual Iraqis are better off financially than they have been for 20 years. According to the World Bank and International Monetary Fund, per capita income has doubled since the United States toppled the Saddam regime. There are more than 3.5 million cellular phone subscribers in Iraq, up from zero when Saddam ruled. Internet cafes are thriving in even small towns, And so, on and on, according to Rubin, who has actually visited Iraq, unlike some of the harshest critics of the American involvement. His paper was dated yesterday, November 1st. The think tanker writes that on the political front the situation is also better than it is depicted by critics. He acknowledges that ethnic strife among Sunnis, Shiites, and Kurds remains a possibility. He also acknowledges that the Bush administration has been “inept†in making the case for its Iraqi policy. But, he says, “Iraqis debate. They tolerate dissent. Politicians hash out compromises. The constitution may not be ideal, but it is fair.†He contrasts those hopeful steps with the harsh dictatorships in Saudi Arabia, Syria, Iran, Tunisia, and Egypt. Rubin urges patience and a longer view of what’s going on in Iraq: “Democracy and reconstruction are processes. Progress is slow, but to those who know Iraq, it is there. Iraqis criticize certain Washington decisions and embassy strategy. Few, though, see any merits in abandonment.†This think tanker’s balanced, thoughtful, first-hand account of what’s really going on in Iraq is like a fresh breeze blowing away the heavy smog of negativity we usually hear.
Originally Posted By cmpaley Looks like someone reprogrammed Darkbeer's Google-bot to post as Beaumandy. At least this one leaves an opinion.
Originally Posted By Spree Geeeezz...even in threads where Darkbeer hasn't a single post he's being attacked. That's the fair minded left for you.
Originally Posted By cmpaley First, I'm not on the left. I'm more in the middle. Of course, when you're on the extreme rabid right, EVERYONE who doesn't agree with you about every single iota of Republican dogma is on the left. Second, it was a joke and I think most people here get that.
Originally Posted By RoadTrip <<Second, it was a joke and I think most people here get that.>> Probably not. I've noticed time and again that the conservatives on this board have absolutely NO sense of humor.
Originally Posted By cmpaley Well, when most of your information about current events is delivered in a way intended to make you angry (a la FOXNews and talk radio), it kind of comes with the territory.
Originally Posted By patrickegan I guess people really don’t get that emotional about things when it’s spoon fed to them with mild classical bed music and monotone voiceover’s.
Originally Posted By cmpaley Nah, it's more like people actually go to original sources or sources that report facts without bias or spin and make up their own minds about thing.
Originally Posted By cmpaley Frankly, I wouldn't know because I'm not an NPR listener. But I imagine that *anything* would seem to be biased against the right if all you ever listen to is FOXNews or talks radio.
Originally Posted By cmpaley Nope. Sorry to disappoint you. I actually get my news from a variety of sources. I tend to look for what is factual and toss the spin and other garbage. It's unfortunate that the current standard in news is what use to be the standard for opnion ("fair and balanced"). The standard for news should be accuracy and objectivism, not whether both "sides" are represented. Too bad that's gone by the wayside.
Originally Posted By cmpaley So, you only get your news from FOXNews and talk radio. Would you like to buy a nice red bridge? There's one in San Francisco that's for sale.
Originally Posted By ElKay I'd take Michael Rubin's optimism with a little more than a grain of salt--maybe a pound or two. Check out his background: <a href="http://www.sourcewatch.org/index.php?title=Michael_Rubin" target="_blank">http://www.sourcewatch.org/ind ex.php?title=Michael_Rubin</a> Rubin's background clearly shows he isn't a non-partisan expert on Iraq. He was a staffer in Rummy's Office of Special Planning that was "ground zero" in creating the Admin's discredited justifications (excuses?) in attacking Iraq. Later Rubin served as a political advisor in the Coalition Provisional Authority. If he wasn't sympatico with the Admin's policies he would NOT been hired to work for the CPA. Rubin also was a supporter for Chalibi, Rummy's pick to be installed as Iraq's president before the start of the war. Even working for the American Enterprise Institute, shows his political orientation. Clearly, Rubin has a vested interest in being overly optimistic for the "success" in US occupied Iraq. If things go bad, then the policies he advocated would be discredited. Even the figures of per capita income doubling might be questioned. What percentage of that figure is based in the peaceful Kurdistan area of Iraq? Because there isn't too many Sunni or Shia in that region, there could very well be great economic expansion without any violence. It's without question that after a war, enterprising "survivors" are going to try to generate more and more income. However, don't forget that figure of better economic performance in Iraq doesn't mention the fact that much of that period Iraq was fighting a horrendous war against Iran, fought the US twice and was under tight embargos by the UN. What sorts of businesses are being generated? Does it include kids peddling liter bottles of blackmarket gas to motorists who can't buy gas on the open market? Does it include individuals selling their personal possesions in local swap meets to try and buy food? Does it include 1,000 of US contractors getting huge salaries for working in a combat zone? This article has very little specific info on Rubin's optimism. Even the report from the World Bank is questionable, since it's head was former Deputy Secty. of Defense, Paul Wolfowitz who wasn't beyond spinning facts or rumors to suit his pre-concieved perspectives.
Originally Posted By Beaumandy Hey Elkay, why not talk to soldiers who have been in Iraq and get their opinion. For some crazy reason, the vast majority of these heros reject your side and are proud of what they are accomplishing. Do you ever wonder why the militarty would vote for Bush in huge numbers even while you claim Bush sent them to Iraq for underhanded, evil reasons and to make Halliburtan more cash?? It's because bush is doing the right thing and they can see it with their own eyeballs as they have boots on the ground. I think I will listen to THEM instead of the Cindy Sheehan crowd.
Originally Posted By TomSawyer Was "boom" really the best word to use in the headline? Beau, if you think that Muslims are really out to get all of us, why are you so excited about a stable and prosperous Iraq? Wouldn't that still be a threat to the US, since their new constitution sets up an Islamic theocracy?
Originally Posted By Disneyman55 If I said it once, I will say it a million times. Shoot the message and not the messenger. If all the defense you have against an article like this is to shoot the poster and question the writer...then it is a poor defense. Come on, someone refute what this guy is writing with first hand experience or an article from someone else.
