Falluja

The U.S. is vowing an "overwhelming response" to the brutal killings of four security contractors in Falluja. A group calling itself the "Group of Shaykh Ahmed Yassin" has taken responsibility, though such claims are difficult to verify. I have misgivings about this. Falluja has always been the worst spot for American troops. It will be difficult to craft a response that does not lead to more civilian deaths of the kind that have angered Iraqis in the first place. The bottom line is that if Iraqis - even if only in certain regions - believe the U.S. is an occupation force that must be resisted and ultimately driven out, we can do nothing about it. Those who wish a more familar study of the dynamics between armies of occupation, civilian casualties, and popular opinion might want to review these events.

See also Angry Arab's posts yesterday and today. In fairness, I didn't see Americans actively cheering for civilian deaths, though some people did get upset when others mentioned them. The U.S. has, however, had its brutal lynchings. And as far as American motives for being in Iraq, I believe that the American people believe they are there to build a free and democratic Iraq, and that the soldiers hope to fulfill that mission. However, the Iraqis have no particular reason to actually believe that, since it does not fit with the history of our foreign policy in the Middle East. And I also question President Bush's commitment to his stated objectives, which is part of why I'm angry when I see the harsher results of his policies.