The real reason for constant black-outs in Baghdad (and it ain't the insurgency)

[Pangloss]

ABC News's David Kerley reported tonight that electricity production in Iraq exceeds that of before the war! The reason for current blackouts is the vast purchasing of home electronics, like Internet-capable computers and satellite television receivers, items BANNED under Saddam's rule.

 

Don't get me wrong, I'm not saying everything's great in Iraq. But SURELY this is an *overwhelming* indication that naysayers on the far left are spinning things out of proportion when they talk about underdeveloped and unrecovered infrastructure.

 

A print version of the story may be found here:

http://abcnews.go.com/WNT/IraqCoverage/story?id=890243&page=1

[Mokele]

like Internet-capable computers

 

Out of curiosity, if net access was banned, wouldn't there be no infrastructure to connect these to? Or was it just banned for the general public, or recently installed?

 

Mokele

[john5746]

ABC News's David Kerley reported tonight that electricity production in Iraq exceeds that of before the war! The reason for current blackouts is the vast purchasing of home electronics' date=' like Internet-capable computers and satellite television receivers, items BANNED under Saddam's rule.

 

Don't get me wrong, I'm not saying everything's great in Iraq. But SURELY this is an *overwhelming* indication that naysayers on the far left are spinning things out of proportion when they talk about underdeveloped and unrecovered infrastructure.

 

A print version of the story may be found here:

http://abcnews.go.com/WNT/IraqCoverage/story?id=890243&page=1[/quote']

 

Great! Now, can we leave?

[ydoaPs]

Out of curiosity' date=' if net access was banned, wouldn't there be no infrastructure to connect these to? Or was it just banned for the general public, or recently installed?

 

Mokele[/quote']

good question

[-Demosthenes-]

Great! Now, can we leave?

Why would we be able to leave if people were using more electricity?

[Dave]

I think he was suggesting that the trend in buying consumer electronics "shows" that Iraq is becoming more self-sufficient, hence not needing US support anymore.

 

I don't think he was being particularly serious though

[atinymonkey]

Don't get me wrong' date=' I'm not saying everything's great in Iraq. But SURELY this is an *overwhelming* indication that naysayers on the far left are spinning things out of proportion when they talk about underdeveloped and unrecovered infrastructure.

[/quote']

I'm sorry, David Kerleys view of the electricity infrastructure is either childishly simple or oversimplified to paint a positive picture. The ability to generate power is simple, the creation of a stable national grid is the immensely complex task left ahead. I'm aware that they don't have half of the substations necessary to facilitate a stable supply, and the metering they have recently put in place is dangerously obsolete (in some cases it's over 60 years old).

 

The reason for current blackouts is the vast purchasing of home electronics, like Internet-capable computers and satellite television receivers, items BANNED under Saddam's rule.

The blackouts are not just due to a shortage of power, they are caused by the power surplus and the resulting blowouts at the substations. Because the national grid is not stable, there is no accurate method of monitoring demand, and the ancient infrastructure is unable to cope with the fluctuations. The surplus of power causes a great deal more damage to the infrastructure than anything else could.

 

To put it simply, the generation of power and the purchase of white goods do not affect the electrical infrastructure in Iraq. It doesn't improve the cabling, the substations, the pylons, the phases, the fuses or the stability of the grid. I'm not saying the situation isn't improving, just that David Kerley picked a rather obtuse method for demonstrating it.

[Pangloss]

Yup, those are valid points, IMO.

[atinymonkey]

Which is unusual for me, at the moment.

[john5746]

Why would we be able to leave if people were using more electricity?

 

I don't know. How are we ever going to leave? Rumsfeld has said only Iraqis can stop the insurgents(terrorists). Will we be closer to leaving a year from now?

 

Who knows? Don't ask questions or complain. The military is made for Nation Building. Surely they are doing a great job with no oversight needed.

[-Demosthenes-]

I meant to imply that there are more factors to pulling out military forces from an invaded country other than how much electricity is being used. Was this not understood?

 

I do not understand, however, how you got the idea that the government should not questioned or that the military should be unconditionally trusted from my post:confused: . But I suppose you can draw whatever conclusions you wish.

 

Further, I think it would be nice to know if you are trying to turn this into another Iraq invasion thread, because I tire of them.

[atinymonkey]

Rumsfeld has said only Iraqis can stop the insurgents(terrorists)

*cough*

The insurgents are more akin to freedom fighters, or rebels, as they are only attacking a foreign invading army. In fact, let's face it, they have the same motivation and methods as the rebels who fought the English in the American War of Independence. Labeling them terrorists is spitting in the eye of the founding fathers and everything they stood against. Democracy is freedom for all, not freedom for only those people who agree with the whimsy of the current political regime.

[Severian]

*cough*

The insurgents are more akin to freedom fighters' date=' or rebels, as they are only attacking a foreign invading army.

[/quote']

 

No they are not. They are attacking civilian targets too. Almost every day on the news they are telling us about another police station that has been bombed.

 

In fact, let's face it, they have the same motivation and methods as the rebels who fought the English in the American War of Independence.

 

Erm... well... they were terrorists!

 

Labeling them terrorists is spitting in the eye of the founding fathers and everything they stood against.

[my empahasis]

 

lol! That is an interesting way to put it. Don't you think they stood for anything?

[YT2095]

Cool, Insurgents with I-Pods, whatever next?

[atinymonkey]

No they are not. They are attacking civilian targets too. Almost every day on the news they are telling us about another police station that has been bombed.

The Police are currently extensions of the UK/US efforts, and are a 'legitimate' non civilian target for rebels during an occupation.

 

Erm... well... they were[/b'] terrorists!

That's debatable. They utilised guerilla tactics, by all accounts, but I don't think they would attempt to scare the British into withdrawal (it had no precedent, you would have to scare the King to withdraw the troopts). I'd lable them Rebals or Insurgents, but not terrorists.

 

lol! That is an interesting way to put it. Don't you think they stood for[/b'] anything?

Er, tbh I've never really been sure that they stood for anything more than relief from taxation. The whole 'democracy' thing was apocryphal, as the UK was already democratic (you couldn't rally the troops to fight for and against the same principle, but you could rally them to fight taxes).

 

I suppose they stood for a deepseated hatred of tea.

[Pangloss]

The main point I wanted to make with this thread is that there *is* good news coming out of Iraq, it's just that it's often overshadowed by the bad news. I don't mean to suggest that the purchasing of home electronics in any way offsets the deaths of thousands of innocent civilians. What I mean to suggest is that these people (a) care very much about their freedom, and therefore (b) are probably fighting very hard to keep it.

 

In other words, it's not a "quagmire". It's a promising, developing situation. So long as we keep the pressure on, and keep moving in the right direction, things may actually work out. So far as I can tell, we're actually on the right track, grim though it may be.

[john5746]

I meant to imply that there are more factors to pulling out military forces from an invaded country other than how much electricity is being used. Was this not understood?

 

I do not understand' date=' however, how you got the idea that the government should not questioned or that the military should be unconditionally trusted from my post:confused: . But I suppose you can draw whatever conclusions you wish.

 

Further, I think it would be nice to know if you are trying to turn this into another Iraq invasion thread, because I tire of them.[/quote']

 

Sorry, didn't mean to unload my frustrations on your post.

 

The Iraq war happened, case closed.(until the US starts talking about another invasion)

 

My point is why are we there? I don't understand why it takes so long to create a sizable, decent army for Iraq. They may have problems with insurgents for a decade. They may have a civil war. Is that our problem?

 

I think the foreign freedom-fighters(terrorists - depending on frame of reference) will diminish once the US begins pulling out. So, I hope they have some internal time table or goal to have soldiers trained and begin pulling troops out. I don't think it would have hurt for Bush to say the troops will be there at least another year, we hope to have x many trained by then, etc.

 

It is amazing to me that many of the people who whine about government not being able to do anything right - education, soc security, libraries, etc. seem to have complete confidence that the military can rebuild a foreign nation.

[-Demosthenes-]

Sorry, didn't mean to unload my frustrations on your post.

It's all good.

They may have a civil war. Is that our problem?

Seems to be the question... why should we care what happens thousands of miles a way. Some people do, some people don't.