Reddit reviews Imperial Life in The Emerald City: Inside Iraq's Green Zone

This is wrong on multiple levels, built the most galling one is that somehow you're suggesting that radical Islam is a direct result of Western involvement in Muslim countries.

That's incomplete at best and dangerously ignorant at worst.

First off, some of the biggest state sponsors of terrorism are allies with the US (re Saudi Arabia, Pakistan, the UAE) and have experienced fuck all in terms of bombing and aggression. There's a lot of money to be made in warfare and chaos.

Also, the main cause of radical Islam is the religion itself above all else. You're insane if you think otherwise. This isn't a bunch of ragtag fighters battling imperialism and defending their innocent families from Western bullies. These are bloodthirsty scumbags who cross borders and slaughter civilians in an effort to spread their monstrous ideology and attain power.

And finally, if the West is so oppressive, corruptive, and murderous why do so many Islamic governments cry out when we threaten to cut off revenue streams and support?

EDIT: Here are some suggestions:

http://blogs.wsj.com/speakeasy/2015/11/17/10-must-read-books-on-terrorism/

http://www.amazon.com/Ghost-Wars-Afghanistan-Invasion-September/dp/0143034669

http://www.amazon.com/Imperial-Life-Emerald-City-Inside/dp/0307278832

http://www.amazon.com/Hatreds-Kingdom-Arabia-Supports-Terrorism/dp/0895260611

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Contents_of_the_United_States_diplomatic_cables_leak_(United_Arab_Emirates)

Quicksand, by Geoffry Wawro

Power, Faith, and Fantasy by Michael Oren

The Coming Anarchy by Robert Kaplan

The Revenge of Geography by Robert Kaplan

The Shia Revival by Vali Nasr (although to be honest I found this one a little dull)

Imperial Life in the Emerald City by Rajiv Chandrasekaran

Little America by Rajiv Chandrasekaran

Soldiers of God by Robert Kaplan

Sleeping with the Devil by Baer

Dirty Wars by Jeremey Scahill

Ghost Wars by Steve Coll

Charlie Wilson's War by George Crile

The Way of the Knife by Mark Mazzetti

Eastward to Tartary by Robert Kaplan (I actually haven't read this one yet but it's definitely on my to do list and I'm a huge fan of Kaplan's writing, observation, and analysis.)

The Ends of the Earth by Robert Kaplan

This is a partial list of some books I've read in the past couple of years. I put stars next to the ones that I think are the really really excellent ones. Some of them aren't entirely about the Middle East but the concepts in them are really important if you want to understand the region. I hope you look through the list and at the very least look at some of the books that Amazon recommends to go along with these books.

Oh, you should also check out this essay. I like to think it's decent reading if you want to understand what motivated Bin Laden and the context surrounding his life.

If you manage to read just a few of these, and also keep up with the news (I recommend a subscription to the Economist and to the New York Times) you will be a phenomenally well educated person about the Middle East.

I can recommend this one then. It describes the foul up pretty well.

"Imperial Life in The Emerald City: Inside Iraq's Green Zone"

http://www.amazon.com/Imperial-Life-The-Emerald-City/dp/0307278832

This is a pretty damning account of what happened in the green zone after the invasion: http://www.amazon.com/Imperial-Life-The-Emerald-City/dp/0307278832

I don't think that the US war planners were really too interested in democracy in any real sense. They wanted democracy only insofar as they equated "democracy" with a government which would act as an "ally" to the United States--or rather one that would completely and utterly subordinate its political and economic interests to the US. The ultimate symbol of this was the absurdly immense US embassy complex planned for the "Emerald City." US interests were always primary during the entire process. They were so bent on making the liberated/conquered Iraq into a business bonanza for the United States, for example, that they opened the doors to legions of corrupt swindlers--criminals who emptied out the Iraqi treasury, leaving very little to show for it, all under US "supervision." Some of the "errors" made by the US--born of imperial hubris, and having little to do with the ability of Iraqis to govern themselves democratically--were detailed in this documentary: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/No_End_in_Sight

I remember reading this book, the incompetence of the Bush admin was incredible, they really thought they would be greeted as liberators, with cheers. State Department and The Pentagon were having turf wars on who gets to run the Iraq that America just bombed into their ownership. One of the greatest mistakes was disbanding the Iraqi army, instead of making them work under American control; this meant whole platoons of trained men and their weapons disappeared. One only has to wonder how many joined the insurgency, how many joined Al-Qaeda, and how many joined ISIS...

Heckuva Job, Dubya. Is it called abandoning if you went into it with faked WMDs (Remember Colin Powell's powerpoints?) because the dumbasses wanted to rule the Middle East (and therefore the world) but didn't even have a fucking plan for it?

And after a few years of this debacle, one of the rallying cries was "We have no beef with the civil war there, we should leave Iraq!", which was screamed by Democrats and Republicans alike. Fuck you, America, you made the mess, and then you scream "Not our fault!"? Now I get why you selected the "not my fault!" guy to be president...

Excellent book detailing the mismanagement of Iraq reconstruction

ok, This is funny and I don't mean ha ha.

>This is a worthwhile concern, and worth taking seriously, seeing as something similar happened when former President Obama pulled troops out of Iraq in 2011.

because that's some truthy news beside the big, fat embassy green zone. Anyone here read Imperial Life in The Emerald City: Inside Iraq's Green Zone yet? I have. It took me a few months, because I couldn't read it in one go without doubling over from stupid fumes induced nausea. Now look, Iraqi ministry says 104 killed in protests and it's still there, collecting pay checks.

>You can tell by the way they prefer dictators over democratic regimes. They are fine if they follow orders, but it's a risk they won't if the people are in charge.

I don't think this is necessarily true. I'd say the U.S. prefers regimes that are in line with U.S. goals, and whether it's a democracy or dictatorship is less important. (That said, I think the U.S. is much more wary of propping up dictators / overthrowing democratically elected governments then it used to be)

>And there is zero evidence that the US tried to bring about democracy. Democracy would inevitably harm US interests.


I disagree with the first point there. The failed occupation in Iraq would only go on to hurt Bush/Cheney and other Republicans. There was no point in going into Iraq if they didn't think they would create a U.S. friendly government there.

That said, they massively underestimated the difficulty of the task. Important appointments were too often based on party loyalty and ideological beliefs instead of qualifications. Iraqi concerns were ignored, and practical solutions were foregone because that's not how we do things in the U.S. Iraq was seen by some to be a chance to build a shining example of a free market economy from the ground up, and countless problems stemmed from putting this free market ideology above the current needs of the people.

There's an almost unending list of blunders I could mention, but I'll stop there... Anyway, the point was that the U.S. didn't go into Iraq with no intent of creating a democracy. The point made in your linked article is certainly a valid one though. I'd say it was pretty naive to think we could go in there and clear everything up.

Anyway, I'm no expert on Iraq, and I used to believe exactly what you've been saying, but I really believe things are never as black and white as we'd like them to be. Exploring the shades of grey in between is a worthwhile thing.

Sidenote: "Imperial Life in the Emerald City" Is a really great book! I think you'd like it even if you don't agree with my opinions here :D. It basically tells the story of how the U.S. occupation fell apart, fiasco by fiasco.

I mean, sure; but looking back it was a huge gaffe considering how much Iraq was mishandled. The first leg of the mission was accomplished, sure; but we shat the bed and locked ourselves in the green zone rather than actually build a real democracy.

I don't want to proselytize but I'd highly recommend Imperial Life in the Emerald City. Shows how completely the Bush administration and his lackeys dropped the ball.

Life in the Emerald City is an excellent work. It's written by a reporter that was there at the time of the post-op, and it's regular reading in most survey courses that cover the Iraq War.

Below podcast is really interesting concerning the post-invasion management of Iraq, and subsequent de-Ba'athification.

It makes clear that de-Ba'athification was an increadibly stupid thing to do, as even almost all teachers had to be members of the party, not to talk about the military officers who initially waited for instructions from the US command. Only the complete disbanding of the Iraqi Army created the insurgency as it unfolded.

edit: stupid me, forgot the podcast:
http://thedollop.libsyn.com/122-the-iraq-war

edit2: The podcast is based on this book: Imperial Life in the Emerald City.
Here is a nytimes review.