So at the end of the reading there were suggestions for the government of iraq, the military forces, and the NGO's that are involved in the country, and as nice as all of these suggestions were, I found them to be rather unfeasible. I mean first, what government of iraq? and how much respect will the troops really gain for the citizens and their property and "essential infrastructure".
Also did anyone else hear about how mccain confused sunni and shite in a speech last week in iraq??? (what?)
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
3 comments:
Isn't it a bit dismissive to say "What Iraqi government?" Just because the activities of the Iraq National Assembly aren't on the front page of our American newspapers doesn't mean they don't exist or they're not capable of doing anything at all.
I think that the difficulty remains with accountability. It is all a question of who is or is not claiming to be responsible, and since clearly there are not too many countries/governments/groups that are ready to accept some responsibility for these civilians' living conditions, the miscommunication and lack of initiative causes the discrepancy between the resources and funding that should go to humanitarian aid, and the amount that actually gets to these people. long sentence, possibly a run-on. My only point with this is that though it is easy to condemn fairly quickly, it is not as easy to convince the people with the resources to go along with these plans of action, and that will be the ultimate challenge. Rather that straight up admonition, a more active stance should be taken, especially when looking for cooperation and attempting to rectify these situations.
Well, (yes, im blogging; do not be harsh on my lack of skill), to comment on anna's point, the new system of government (established in 2006) in Iraq is most likely too unstable to both design a functional system of government and also stop the brutality. Obviously the extremity of the violence inflicted on the civilians (and sickness, displacement) is not to be desired (by that i mean, its horrible and should be eradicated as soon as possible, but without a functioning and sound government, the problems wont ever be fixed. "the government of iraq, international doners, and the UN system have been focused on reconstruction, development, and building political institutions and have overlooked the harsh daily struggle for survival now faced by many. (in the Oxfam article). Of course they are. Its necessary. But then its hard to decide which should come first, the people or their country...its sort of like the issue of deciding between focusing on the environment or current issues; without a world to live on, these issues wouldnt exist. So im not sure where i stand, its just a thought. i dont think it makes sense. string of consciousness.
Post a Comment