Sunday, April 8, 2007

circa 1920 -- the times of london -- on iraq occupation. . .

87 years ago, then by britain. . .

proving yet again that those
ignorant of history are doomed,
entirely doomed, to repeat it. . .

". . .How much longer are valuable lives
to be sacrificed in the vain endeavor to
impose upon the Arab population
an elaborate and expensive administration
which they never asked for and do not want?. . ."

-- from the times of london (circa 1920)

i saw this, reading hugh
dellios, on this morning's
chicago tribune editorial page.

go read it all, but here's a teaser. . .

". . .The Sunni nationalists wanted an Arab kingdom; the Shiites wanted an Islamic state; the Kurds in the north sought an independent Kurdish entity; the business community that has prospered under the [Ottoman] Sultan wanted a return to the Turks. . .

Britain was granted a mandate to rule Iraq in 1920 by the newly formed League of Nations. . .

But the region's various peoples had never considered themselves a nation. . .

Britain drew the borders, sided with secular Sunnis and hastily installed a king, Faisal I, who had never been to Iraq. The monarchy ended in turmoil. Faisal's grandson, Faisal II, was overthrown in 1958 in a military coup that ultimately led to the barbarian dictatorship of Saddam Hussein. . ."

there is a saying, in iraq:

"a wet man is not
frightened of the rain. . ."

it conveys the sense that
many iraqis are accustomed
to numerous hardships -- in-
cluding those occasioned by
outside rulers -- going back
well-beyond the beginning of
the twentieth century. . .

why can't we make them
a lean-to shelter, instead
of bringing more monsoons?
i wonder. . .

No comments: