How bad does it have to get?

I am just speechless, how could any human do this?

Quote:

---

FOR the crime of staging a children’s show, Faud Radi and Haidar Jawad were executed by the new moral guardians of Baghdad.

The actors were part of the Happy Family Team, a troupe adored by millions of Iraqi children from its frequent appearances on television. The theatrical group and a dozen others were planning an 11-day festival to help youngsters to forget momentarily the curfews, bombings and other dangers of daily life in this city.

---

children

The father and grand-father in me just tells me this is wrong, in any context. I'm ashamed to be included in the same genetic group as these so-called human beings. :shame: :wall:

Well.. this is just.. shocking.

I'm speechless.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Tiberius

Well.. this is just.. shocking.

I'm speechless.

---

Same here!

How could anyone do something so… so horrifying?

MEh... :inquisitive:

There's worse things that happen in the world.

Edit: Worked now.

Pretty sad indeed :no:

Wow , Iraq has some really serious theatre critics nowadays .

i seriously doubt anyone in their sane mind would execute people for entertaining children.
Well you never know , I suppose there are plenty of people who would like to execute Jacko for entertaining children .

Sadening

*Holds candle*

Not to sound like an arsehole but..

Quote:

---

There's worse things that happen in the world.

---

Hits it on the nail. It is sickening when things like this happen, but it's sadly common, and as BP said, worse things have happened, are happening, and will happen.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Justiciar

Hits it on the nail. It is sickening when things like this happen, but it's sadly common, and as BP said, worse things have happened, are happening, and will happen.

---

Well then what can we discuss -what's the quality ?

Furthermore, as things go worse towards a civil war in Iraq, this is another significant indicator of how "liberation" plans messed up.

Thumb rule : Do not stick your nose into a geography of which you don't have the vital info about..Assuming that you reeeeally wanted to help.:inquisitive:

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by LeftEyeNine

Well then what can we discuss -what's the quality ?

Furthermore, as things go worse towards a civil war in Iraq, this is another significant indicator of how "liberation" plans messed up.

Thumb rule : Do not stick your nose into a geography of which you don't have the vital info about..Assuming that you reeeeally wanted to help.:inquisitive:

---

Ah I see so its somehow Americas fault these kill innocent men.

Well, certainly worse things are happening in the world (that we also are doing nothing about) - genocide in the Sudan for example. However, this happened on our watch and under our noses, because of our occupation.

It is our fault, because we didn't go in with enough troops, and remain below the military manpower limit needed to prevent such things.
Now the idea (Rummy, Cheney and the other Bushys') is that the Iraqi's have to do it (police) themselves - which is exactly what occured here. The mind police of the Taliban policing those that would make a child smile or laugh - by executing them. That, to me, is the real crime here. It demonstrates just how weak we are in Iraq, and how ignorant we are about the region.

More's the pity, that we did not (do not) see the importance of protecting such people. How else does one win the "hearts and minds", but through their children?

How bad does it have to get?

Before what? We have to start policing the whole world?

The country needs police, not soldiers. Sad

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Justiciar

Hits it on the nail. It is sickening when things like this happen, but it's sadly common, and as BP said, worse things have happened, are happening, and will happen.

---

Yes, many worse things happen, but we must never allow ourselves to become desensitised to the least suffering.

This incident is particularly poignant as it symbolises an attempt at the destruction of hope. Iraq needs all the hope it can get, and the courage of those who continued the events despite the killings should be saluted. It is they, not the men with guns of either side, who change the world. :bow:

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Byzantine Prince

MEh... :inquisitive:

There's worse things that happen in the world.

---

Following that logic, what is the worst thing that have happened, is happening or will happen, since that would be the only thing worthy of discussion.

:skull:

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Strike For The South

Ah I see so its somehow Americas fault these kill innocent men.

---

If you want a rough result, you may choose that option.

Whole West is rightfully crying out for the rise of Islamic terrorism, however the kingpins of the gang have mastered such a good plan in Iraq that the land had never been so convenient for Islamic terrorism to thrive and rule.

Well done.

Meh...

People who hold the glory of a god higher than human life should be killed in the name of humanity.

Well, the silver lining is, I suppose, that this is hardly going to curry support for these militias amongst the locals...

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Bopa the Magyar

People who hold the glory of a god higher than human life should be killed in the name of humanity.

---

Or perhaps we all just stop killing, for whatever reasons? :idea2:

Well, I remember that there was a man who taught along the lines of "Wouldn't it be nice if people were nice to each other" a couple of thousand years ago. Surprisingly, he got killed.

Well, if you mean genocides, that's just the same thing but on a massive scale really. Unprovoked killings.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by LeftEyeNine

If you want a rough result, you may choose that option.

Whole West is rightfully crying out for the rise of Islamic terrorism, however the kingpins of the gang have mastered such a good plan in Iraq that the land had never been so convenient for Islamic terrorism to thrive and rule.

Well done.

---

This men wernt infidels or westerners they were street performers this isnt about the west its about insanty.

This men wernt infidels or westerners they were street performers this isnt about the west its about insanty.
Is that the Pontius Pilate routine SFTS ?

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Justiciar

Not to sound like an arsehole but..

---

Get used to it if you are going to agree with me. :laugh4:

Quote:

---

Following that logic, what is the worst thing that have happened, is happening or will happen, since that would be the only thing worthy of discussion.

---

Well, it isn't worthy of discussion if 15-30 people have died from this type of sadly common event from the time this peice of news aired till now.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Strike For The South

This men wernt infidels or westerners they were street performers this isnt about the west its about insanty.

---

You still do not get the idea of my post, do you ?

Quote:

---

There's worse things that happen in the world.

---

Worse than the murder of hope?

Definitely agree with the fac that the logic "there are worse things..." is deeply flawed - for sooo many reasons, some of which (very good ones) were already stated.
It is a very sad event indeed.

oh, and btw, I remember there was a great big number of outraged posts when someone said "Meh" referring to the 9/11 deaths (following the same logic, that more people than that die every day in car crashes/Africa/whatever).

Misleading Vividness comes to mind. Look that up.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by LeftEyeNine

You still do not get the idea of my post, do you ?

---

I get it. Big bad America comes in and screws everything up. Which I might listen to if it made any bit of sense but these wernt troops or cops or goverment leaders they were men performing a puppet show America has nothing to do with this. Its sick men with a sick idelogy hiding behnid the guise of the infidel.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Tribesman

This men wernt infidels or westerners they were street performers this isnt about the west its about insanty.
Is that the Pontius Pilate routine SFTS ?

---

Youve lost me:inquisitive:

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Byzantine Prince

Misleading Vividness comes to mind. Look that up.

---

Sociopath. Look that up.

Youve lost me
Well strike , its like this .
Since there was a remarkable absnce of lawless thugs shooting up vans and dragging their occupants out to be beaten to death in the capital city , simply because they put on a show for kids regardless of their faith or ethnicity , before the west decided to make things better , then the west making things better is quite unsurprisingly a causual factor in this .

For you to say it has nothing to do with the west when it is the west that brought todays wonderful situation about , and is wandering round with its thumb up its arse instead of fixing the situation , is simply washing your hands of any responsibility for a situation they helped create .

Now you correctly say that it is insanity , but some silly buggers turned the whole country into a damn big lunatic asylum , and then helped put the lunatics in charge .
Since the silly buggers in question happen to be Western leaders then the west has some responsibilty for this doesn't it .:idea2:

Bring 'em on ...eh ?

So its the wests fualt for "unleashing' these men

Quote:

---

Or perhaps we all just stop killing, for whatever reasons?

---

Yes becuase these people are such reasonable chaps.

So its the wests fualt for "unleashing' these men
Its partly the wests fault for giving these things (men isn't really a good description) a nice little playground and letting them run riot .

Quote:

---

Western leaders

---

Yes because "they" all sat around one of those big wooden tables in shadow and rubbed their hands together in glee. BAD MEN IN BLACK SIUTS

C'mon I think we all feel that to be a little more specific and a lot less general helps.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Bopa the Magyar

Meh...

People who hold the glory of a god higher than human life should be killed in the name of humanity.

---

Yeah, all Nazis should be taken behind the chemical sheds and shot. :dizzy2:

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Bopa the Magyar

Yes becuase these people are such reasonable chaps.

---

Pot, may I introduce Kettle ? You ought to get along fine, being both black...
:stare:
Given that unreasonable people have been killing each other off since, oh, Stone Age - they only got organized about it sometime after someone invented agriculture - you'd think we'd have run out of them by now if that was a working solution.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Strike For The South

So its the wests fualt for "unleashing' these men

---

More like creating the conditions where they can run amuck. It's kind of sad the place actually was safer under Saddam and his bully-boys... Besides, in this particular case not really even the West's. The blame sits pretty squarely on the US, which after all did insist on pulling off a half-cocked invasion against just about everyone's frantic pleas and warnings...

And let's not even get started on why these nice folks already had a shedful of axes to grind with the West (and some other sides, but that's not really so important here). The topic is frankly rather depressing, virtually quaranteed to go off on tangent, and would most likely end up chasing its own tail.

All Nazis to be shot?
No they dint really have a God.
Do they?

I was simply stating that it is rather amazing that people can hold a God higher than a Human life. I got caught up in the heat of the moment.

...
...just a guess, but I take it you're not a big history buff ?

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Question

I get it. Big bad America comes in and screws everything up. Which I might listen to if it made any bit of sense but these wernt troops or cops or goverment leaders they were men performing a puppet show America has nothing to do with this. Its sick men with a sick idelogy hiding behnid the guise of the infidel.

---

No, you don't, SFTS.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Answer(1)

Its partly the wests fault for giving these things (men isn't really a good description) a nice little playground and letting them run riot .

---

And..

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Answer(2)

More like creating the conditions where they can run amuck. It's kind of sad the place actually was safer under Saddam and his bully-boys... Besides, in this particular case not really even the West's. The blame sits pretty squarely on the US, which after all did insist on pulling off a half-cocked invasion against just about everyone's frantic pleas and warnings...

---

Now you do :bow:

Thanks to all participated.

This debate is a little silly.

Of course, the even was a tragic horror, and the perpatrators should have very bad things done to them.

However, similarly evil things were perpetrated under Saddam's rule. Iraqi soccer players, anyone?

If anything, we've changed who is doing the killing.

There's plenty of Saddam-related sad stories to match insurgent-related sad stories, and it makes little sense to tout one or the other as an argument for or against the war.

Case closed. :juggle2:

Very exotic. Great culture :laugh4: This calls for dialogue, how is the weather in Baghdad?

Pax Britania ended many years ago. Our shift is over.

IMO there are two states a country can be in: a self governed soverign state or a colony / dominion of some description tied to another state. Both have their plusses and minuses. The third is an area of land in chaos of course.

Iraq and afghansitan are pretty much in limbo land at the moment. Just this side of completely falling to pieces, still requiring masses of foreign help and yet continuing to pretend they are sovereign states.

This IMO is not a sustainable situation.

Who made Iraq? The West. OK our mistake. Let's correct it and make something the people on the ground want, which is likely to be three states.

Why is does this have to be our problem? I don't see saudi Arabia yearning to help its fellow Muslims. Iran is positively making things worse.

Whilst we are there the West can be blamed for everything. If we start to get out now then it can again become a middle eastern problem. All those rich countries can work it out.

~:smoking:

There is a point where you have to take responsibility for yourself. The problems in Iraq were there long before the US butted in but with the US’s involvement the Iraq people have at least gotten the opportunity to do things the way they want thru a democratic process and some people still just don’t get it. They don’t get that they are a part of something bigger, they don’t get that their actions may not be acceptable to others and until they get it, the country is going to be a stinking mess.

The problems existed prior to US involvement and after the US’s involvement the people of Iraq have an opportunity to make a change for the better, that’s the part they need to get and they haven’t yet. The “west” does hold some responsibility for the current situation but it is lunacy to suggest that the “west” is responsible for creating the conditions or playground or whatever, that is there, when the conditions have always been there. Actually the difference is that now when something like this happens people actually get to know about it and express disgust and encourage a change, that’s something that wouldn’t have happened 5, 10, 20 or 100 years ago. The price has been ridiculously high but we are doing good there.

Actually, the West quite directly created the basis of the current conditions in the partitions after WW1. A few of the explorers with extensive hands-on experience on the region who'd been consulted in the process said as much in disgust. Until then the problems in the region had, indeed, been largely "middle eastern problems". After that the region was quite firmly in the colonial orbit for decades, and deeply entwined in shady and opportunistic geopolitics once the colonial empires evaporated. Which in practice makes the problems there somehting quite different from "middle eastern problems".

Putting down rebellions against the puppet regime in Iraq (occasionally with mustard gas) kept the British military more occupied than any other issue in the interwar period, for example.

So that "always been there" apparently takes "always" to be under a century...

Yes, I do dislike the simplistic "well they've always been fighting each other right?" explanation model. How'd you tell ?

Quote:

---

Why is does this have to be our problem? I don't see saudi Arabia yearning to help its fellow Muslims. Iran is positively making things worse.

---

Given that the Saudis are Wahhabis and the majority of Iraqis Shi'ites, I'm guessing the former would rather chew off their right arms than help the latter. Shi'ite Iran is doing its damnedest to make its Iraqi sect-brethren the dominant faction of the country. Syria and the rest are dirt poor (and the wealth in Saudi Arabia isn't exactly easy to mobilize for official purposes anyway) and probably not one bit interested. They have their own worries.

It has to be our problem because directly and indirectly we're responsible for the general degree of ****ed-upness in the region from quite a while back already, and quite explicitly and directly for the current bloody anarchy in Iraq.

Such irresponsibility. :shame:

Lest we forget that before the invasion. Iraq was similar to Disney land and Uncle Saddam would travel arounfd the country handing out candy to the kiddies and while he walked around, little birdies followed him and cute little fuzzy wuzzy bunnies nibbled on the buetiful green foilage all around. All the muslims were of the moderate voriaty, you know the peaceful one's that supposedly dominate the Islamic world, and they prayed hand in hand with Christians and Jews while Uday and Kusay sang hyms. Man those were thegood ol' days...

I love you guys, my nipples ache with anticipation for the next "We want Saddam back" post. Aching I tell you!!!!

So Muslims don't get on / refuse to help each other. Leaving aside why should we, how can we?

Iraqis have wanted us out of there since we were first there, to the extent we used mustard gas. The only thingg groups agree on is that they want the westeners out.

Whilst we are there supporting the regieme charges that it is a puppet regeime can be laid against us.

What are we doing there? The American's seem to want to fight fire with petrol. Since they are the biggest contingent they set the tone.

What is the plan?
"hold on until it gets better"?
"We caused 100 years of problems, so we deserve 100 years of them to equal the Karma"?

The UN needs to be involved in this. At least then it is the will of the world.

We caused the anarchy after stopping the state sanctioned killing. Religious murder rather than political.

~:smoking:

Well, what there was was a rank police state. What there is now is borderline anarchy, civil war, and warlords.

I'd say the improvement is marginal.

The important point, however, is that it didn't have to turn out that way. Thanks to the bungling of Bush and the Boys it did. Anyway, the exact only thing they can do that is even remotely ethical is to stick in and fix the mess they made, since the alternatives are worse. Plus it's generally considered proper to clean after yourself.

Wanting to get the UN and the "will of the world" involved strikes me as downright perverse, given that both were against the invasion in the first place and had their warnings not only ignored but a lot of rude insults thrown their way...

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Watchman

Well, what there was was a rank police state. What there is now is borderline anarchy, civil war, and warlords.

I'd say the improvement is marginal.

The important point, however, is that it didn't have to turn out that way. Thanks to the bungling of Bush and the Boys it did. Anyway, the exact only thing they can do that is even remotely ethical is to stick in and fix the mess they made, since the alternatives are worse. Plus it's generally considered proper to clean after yourself.

Wanting to get the UN and the "will of the world" involved strikes me as downright perverse, given that both were against the invasion in the first place and had their warnings not only ignored but a lot of rude insults thrown their way...

---

I agree with most of what you say, my only additional comment would be that the improvement is currently marginal but has the potential to be significant if we clean up after ourselves. :bow:

I agree that the UN was against the current situation occurring. But the UN has to deal with things as they are now, not sulk like a toddler. I agree that most of the blame can easily be placed on Bush.

I agree that this mess is mainly due to extremely poor planning.

I agree that it would be nice if the current forces were able to correct matters, but I feel that their inability to treat the locals as human, complete unawareness of the culture or almost any other facet of the local population is going to ensure that they alienate more, not less. Bombs from the air, mass arrests, a "shoot first and why question as we don't speak the language" again breeds hatred rather than hope.

The UN might have a chance at drawing something of a line under the past unmitigated failures. More troops and police from Islamic countries would again help dilute the "then and us" mentality that is currently in place.

I still feel that the hope for a united country is limited, especially as more and more wish for there to be at least 2, if not 3. And why should the West stop them? Havn't we intefered enough?

~:smoking:

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by yesdachi

I agree with most of what you say, my only additional comment would be that the improvement is currently marginal but has the potential to be significant if we clean up after ourselves. :bow:

---

I agree. It is the way it is, and the arabs are too busy building more palaces to celebrate the fact they were born. So it was a mistake to invade, I still don't believe it was mind you, but it aren't the allied forces that are currently beheading just about anything that has a neck to set a blade on. If Saddam was good at keeping things together then it was only a matter of time before these necrophiles did their sick thing anyway.

Anybody knows if those two victims were performing in times of Saddam as well ?

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by LeftEyeNine

Anybody knows if those two victims were performing in times of Saddam as well ?

---

My nipples thank you.:2thumbsup:

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Fragony

I agree. It is the way it is, and the arabs are too busy building more palaces to celebrate the fact they were born. So it was a mistake to invade, I still don't believe it was mind you, but it aren't the allied forces that are currently beheading just about anything that has a neck to set a blade on. If Saddam was good at keeping things together then it was only a matter of time before these necrophiles did their sick thing anyway.

---

Please don't be tendentiously dumb, it's unsightly. Under Saddam many of the nice folks who now chop heads off weren't even in the country (they came later specifically to mess with the Americans and their efforts), and even those who were weren't doing it (since Saddam's goons would have taken them in for disturbing the peace, insurrection, or whatever charges they'd now have bothered thinking up - these kinds of systems tend not be overly pedantic about the details).

Police states are kind of funny in that they're often quite jealous about being the only ones allowed to brutalize and terrorize their populace. They don't seem to like the competition or something. Could also be that letting some wonks run around unchecked would kinda kill their credibility, as they usually try to make a point of claiming they're trying to protect the common folks, honest.

That overall they tend to be the biggest threat to the common folks tends to be generally realized by everyone involved, but obviously not said out loud (without getting visits from the secret police, anyway).

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by LeftEyeNine

Anybody knows if those two victims were performing in times of Saddam as well ?

---

I should add I assumed them to while making my previous posts.. So anyone ?

How is bringing in the guns, killing civilians, attracting radicals, toppling the government, leaving the state in anarchy and chaos not causing this situation?

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Tribesman

So its the wests fualt for "unleashing' these men
Its partly the wests fault for giving these things (men isn't really a good description) a nice little playground and letting them run riot .

---

"....if you break it, you own it." Collin Powell

We (USA) broke it, ergo we own the problems of and in Iraq. There were other solutions aside from invasion, instead our government's leaders chose the path of war. They did so with arrogance, without understanding the culture(s), and without the approval of their military, or the UN ("We can go it alone", Bush). It was ill conceived, poorly planned, and a fubar from the get go. And now, the Bushys' are blaming everyone but themselves for the messopotamia they have us in.

We broke it, we are responsible for fixing it - not some brand new inexperienced government we installed.

I should add I assumed them to while making my previous posts.. So anyone ?

No it was a new group funded in part by the government and the Red Crescent .

I love you guys, my nipples ache with anticipation for the next "We want Saddam back" post.
Strange fantasy land you live in there Dave , can you find any posts anywhere on this forum that fit your lala land perceptions ?

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by KafirChobee

"....if you break it, you own it." Collin Powell

We (USA) broke it, ergo we own the problems of and in Iraq. There were other solutions aside from invasion, instead our government's leaders chose the path of war. They did so with arrogance, without understanding the culture(s), and without the approval of their military, or the UN ("We can go it alone", Bush). It was ill conceived, poorly planned, and a fubar from the get go. And now, the Bushys' are blaming everyone but themselves for the messopotamia they have us in.

We broke it, we are responsible for fixing it - not some brand new inexperienced government we installed.

---

Doesn’t change the fact that the individual citizens have a personal responsibility to carryon in a civil manner and act according to the law. I doubt that the interim government condones executing people for trying to help children. It’s not the US’s fault these guys are dead; it’s the moral lacking “moral guardians of Baghdad” who have decided to take this opportunity of unrest as an excuse to try and further their twisted goals.

If you go and dismantle the extant law-enforcement system without setting up a decent replacement, the resulting anarchy is pretty squarely your fault. Human societies have developed more or less extensive systems for enforcing the assorted rules of behaviour that keep people from murdering each other at the drop of the hat for the quite simple reason that without those, they will and do. There's always enough violent assholes around for that, even without the pre-existing tensions Iraq had. "Doesn’t change the fact that the individual citizens have a personal responsibility to carry on in a civil manner and act according to the law" is nothing more than a cheap cop-out in the context.

...It has taken three years but Iraq is such a better place now isnt it?

...When you sow winds you reap storms

Its not gonna get any better. This nation was murdered.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Watchman

If you go and dismantle the extant law-enforcement system without setting up a decent replacement, the resulting anarchy is pretty squarely your fault. Human societies have developed more or less extensive systems for enforcing the assorted rules of behaviour that keep people from murdering each other at the drop of the hat for the quite simple reason that without those, they will and do. There's always enough violent assholes around for that, even without the pre-existing tensions Iraq had. "Doesn’t change the fact that the individual citizens have a personal responsibility to carry on in a civil manner and act according to the law" is nothing more than a cheap cop-out in the context.

---

You don’t think people should be responsible for their actions? Even children without parental supervision know the difference between right and wrong and understand that there will be consequences if they do something considered wrong. It’s hardly a cop-out to say that people should act responsibility if given a little freedom. It may be a bit presumptuous given the circumstance but hardly a cop-out.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by yesdachi

It’s hardly a cop-out to say that people should act responsibility if given a little freedom.

---

I don't think that "people who cannot responsibly handle a little freedom" are the current problem in Iraq...

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Ser Clegane

I don't think that "people who cannot responsibly handle a little freedom" are the current problem in Iraq...

---

But these moral guardians have been given some freedom and chose to murder rather than take a civil approach. :shrug:

May they rest in peace.What else can i say.There are lights and then there are darkness in this world.If people who made a living to make children happy had to die becouse of that,i can only hope that they are in better place now.:shame:

We're talking about a country that has been sliding towards the edge of complete sectarian strife for the past few years, with escalating levels of violence and lines being drawn. Nevermind now hardocre fanatics form both home and abroad running amuck around the place. And wasn't one of the few things the Iraqi legislation has been capable of the dissolving of some of Saddam's actually progressive laws...?

Quote:

---

You don’t think people should be responsible for their actions? Even children without parental supervision know the difference between right and wrong and understand that there will be consequences if they do something considered wrong. It’s hardly a cop-out to say that people should act responsibility if given a little freedom. It may be a bit presumptuous given the circumstance but hardly a cop-out.

---

Vous must be kidding. Regardless of what they should and ought to be doing, it is pretty much a fact that in the absence of credible enforcement people will all too often simply ignore "the rules" even in less extraordinary circumstances as have reigned in Iraq for a while now. Assuming anything else is simply naive. You said it yourself: "understand that there will be consequences if they do something considered wrong". Well, the thing is, among the many really bright things the US did was entirely dismantling all the existing institutions charged with taking care of these things and not building working new ones to fill the vacuum...

Of course people are responsible for their actions. That just isn't worth a rusty tin can full of slimy rainwater in practice if nothing exists to keep them from doing as they will to each other. Nature and human societies hate vacuums. Social power vacuums will shortly be filled, and rarely by very pleasant people. It could be argued that just about the foremost duty of any ruler is specifically to keep this from happening, in order to avoid a Hobbesian Jungle situation where, as it were, "the strong did what they could, the weak suffered what they must".

Ultimately, the whole thing traces back to the rank inability of the US to do a decent job about occupying the place. If whoever is in charge isn't doing his job right criminals, extremist groups and other such unpleasant elements will be running amuck, and this is universally regarded as a shortcoming of the ruler(s).

I guess when given some freedom it is easier to take advantage of the situation that to act responsibly. Sad that they will have to be watched over like children, or abandoned if they cause too much trouble to their less than patient guardians.

It's not just "some" freedom. The practical absence of rules enforcement in a sense creates total freedom - which includes the freedom to harm others. A rather major point of all law-enforcement systems - be they peer pressure, uniformed police, ancient custom or whatever - tends to be the idea that "your right to throw a punch stops at your neighbor's nose". Where enforcement is lacking and the society disintegrated, however, the normal restrictions rapidly cease to apply and people are increasingly likely to not adhere to them at all, or only in a particularistic (ie. own-group) fashion.

The worse slums actually work kind of the same way, I understand.