“This site is dedicated to preying on peoples vanity, ignorance, or loneliness, gaining their trust and betraying them without remorse.”

Sunday, March 30, 2008

The Folly of DeBaathification and the Basra Insurrection.

"In the past five years America has suffered 4,000 combat deaths and spent the astronomical sum of $3 trillion trying to get post-Saddam Iraq to a position where an elected Iraqi government is capable of running the country on its own."

There are now 30,000 Iraqi troops trying to undo the lawlessness of Shiite militias in Basra. There are 300 killed. Iran has a hand involved. The results of five years of American nation building hang in the balance of the outcome. George Bush and his hand picked team knew what was best to run Iraq. DeBaathification and the disbanding of the Iraqi armed forces was the doctrinaire strategy imposed by Bush. We may be witnessing the logical outcome of that decision.

Westhawk sees it as a test of America's exit strategy. We shall see:

President Bush has called the current battle between Iraqi security forces and Sadr militiamen in Basra “a defining moment.” In his mind, President Bush probably likens the Basra battle to America’s Whiskey Rebellion, when President Washington had to defend the new constitution against a militia uprising. Of course, many other observers interpret the violence in Basra as Shi’ite factions, some in government uniforms, battling for economic spoils in Basra and the surrounding oil patch.

For the U.S. military in Iraq, the battle for Basra is a defining moment for its exit strategy from the country. Namely, will,

Indigenous soldiers + U.S. advisors + U.S. ISR, logistics, and air support = battlefield dominance?

The current battle in Basra is the purest test of this model; to my knowledge there are no U.S. general purpose ground combat units yet engaged in this action. If the Iraqi conventional ground forces, with U.S. indirect support, can prevail against the stubborn Sadr militia in Basra, the U.S. military command will see a quicker way out for U.S. general purpose units in the country.

More importantly, success of this advisor-support model will encourage various factions in Iraq to ally themselves with the U.S. – they won’t want to be on the wrong side of this model when it is used in the future. Demonstrating a technique that works will indicate that there is at least one useful tool in the toolbox. When everyone witnesses that, the incentive for being a troublemaker will drop

____________________________

New Iraq receiving baptism of fire in Basra

By Con Coughlin Telegraph

This time President George W Bush has got it right. He describes the latest flare-up in the oil-rich southern city of Basra as a "defining moment in the history of a free Iraq", and no one can argue with that.

The US President's record of public declarations on Iraq's future has not always been happy. He will certainly never live down his confident prediction on board the USS Abraham Lincoln in May 2003 that major combat operations had ended. While it was true the military campaign to overthrow Saddam Hussein's regime (which, incidentally, was a stunning success) had achieved its major objective, the actual task of winning the "battle of Iraq", as the President termed it, had only just begun.

In the past five years America has suffered 4,000 combat deaths and spent the astronomical sum of $3 trillion trying to get post-Saddam Iraq to a position where an elected Iraqi government is capable of running the country on its own.

At the time of Saddam's demise, the general assumption within the British and American governments was that it would take about three years to get Iraq back on its feet. The country needed a new constitution and the opportunity to elect a government for the first time in its history. But it also needed military and security resources, and they basically disintegrated after Mr Bush had given his blessing to the disastrous deBaathification programme that removed military and security personnel who had held office under Saddam.

While tangible progress was possible on political reconstruction - the constitution was approved and a government duly elected - providing Iraq with the means to protect itself and enforce the rule of law has been deeply challenging, and the burden of preventing the insurgent and terrorist groups sabotaging the Pax Americana has mainly fallen to the US-led coalition.

Until, that is, last week, when for the first time since Saddam's overthrow, the Iraqi government made what could prove to be the historic decision to assert its authority by laying down a direct challenge to the lawless militia groups that have turned large swathes of Iraq's second city into a no-go zone. In military terms, Basra has been a confrontation waiting to happen since British troops withdrew from the city centre to the air base last September.

Rather than being - as the anti-war brigade claimed - a humiliating retreat, the tactical withdrawal from Saddam's old summer palace on the banks of the Shatt al-Arab was undertaken on the basis that the continuing presence of British troops was exacerbating, rather than helping, the local security situation. The fiercely nationalistic Iraqis did not want outsiders telling them how to run their affairs.

Formal control of the city was returned to the Iraqis in a short ceremony at the air base last December, but much of Basra has remained under the control of a combination of radical Islamic militias and criminal gangs, which has made it virtually impossible for the Iraqi government in Baghdad to exercise its authority over the city.

I attended the Basra hand-over, and after the formalities the local Iraqi military commander, General Mohan al-Furayji, invited me to celebrations in the city centre. When I asked my British military escort whether this was feasible, he replied, "It depends whether you fancy making a one-way trip."

The activities of the Iraqi kidnap gangs in Basra, which almost daily abduct victims at will for either financial gain or political advantage, was one of the many issues General Mohan told me he was keen to confront as soon as he had the manpower available to deal with the militias.

"The lawlessness in Basra is an insult to the Iraqi people and an insult to the Iraqi government. It simply cannot be tolerated," he said.

General Mohan, who is now overseeing the Iraqi government's attempts to disarm the militias in Basra, personifies the folly of the American deBaathification programme.

Formerly a senior officer in Saddam's Republican Guard, he was briefly jailed in the 1990s after falling out with the Iraqi dictator. An Iraqi patriot, rather than a Saddam loyalist, he was nevertheless barred from active participation in the initial post-Saddam Iraqi administrations because of his links with the former Baathist regime.

He was brought back into the security apparatus only when Iraq's first democratically elected government took office under Prime Minister Nouri al-Maliki.

Just how much of the bloodshed of the past five years might have been avoided had highly professional and experienced military officers of General Mohan's calibre been allowed to participate from the start of Iraq's reconstruction is an issue historians will debate for generations to come.

But the fact that he and other members of the Iraqi government believe they now have both the confidence and resources to assert their authority represents a critical moment in the country's development, one which could ultimately decide the country's destiny.

The coalition may have succeeded in its goal of establishing a democratic, pro-Western government in Baghdad, but not everyone in Iraq is happy with this arrangement, particularly radical Shia leaders such as Muqtada al-Sadr, whose Mehdi Army is in the vanguard of the resistance to the Iraqi government's forces in Basra.

Al-Sadr and his supporters, who receive military and financial support from Iran, are fiercely opposed to the current political status quo, and want to see the creation of an Iranian-style Shia state in Iraq, which would not at all be in the West's interests.

The big difference between the Iraqi government and the Mehdi Army is that the former has been elected, while the other seeks to impose its hardline anti-Western ideology on the Iraqi people who, in Basra at least, have no say in the matter.

Most of the Iraqi forces now attempting to ensure that the rule of law, rather that the law of the gun, prevails in Basra have been trained by the British military, which is providing air and artillery support for the Iraqi government cause.

For the battle for Basra is a test of both the Iraqi government's legitimacy and virility. If General Mohan and his colleagues can prevail over the militias who pose the greatest threat to Iraq's survival as a democratic entity, the Iraqi people can look forward to taking charge of their own destiny - and the coalition's troops can start planning their withdrawal in the knowledge that their mission has been successfully accomplished.



93 comments:

  1. Did I here someone say "change the mission"?

    ReplyDelete
  2. I REALLY needed that Picture!
    Thanks so much!

    ReplyDelete
  3. Walgreens' Manager Held Hostage, Local 10 Cameras Roll

    "The driver fled to 82nd Street and North Miami Court, where he crashed the car and then ran. A few hours later, Miami-Dade police held a press conference, and told Local 10 that the man had been captured after being found with gunshot wounds in the area of 82nd Street and North Miami Avenue. He was transported to Jackson Memorial Hospital."
    ---
    I once got shot right near Hollywood and Vine, just below my left nipple.

    ReplyDelete
  4. I hope you didn't kiss the cop at 34th and Vine.

    You really got shot?

    ReplyDelete
  5. Naw, I just thot it was funny sounding like the location of his wounds could be located on a city map.
    Maybe it's just me?
    again

    ReplyDelete
  6. I'm reading a book about John Adams, called, "John Adams" by McCullough.

    About a third were Tories, about a third were fence sitters, and about a third were true blue. The colonists around Boston and the New England coast called the British 'crabbacks' among other things, in addition to redcoats. King George III didn't handle things well. There was a large group that wanted to finesse the situation with peace feelers and such, but he rebuked them every time. Adams came from a long line of farmers. One of his early cases as a lawyer was defending some British troops who had shot some rioters. He got them off, most of them, and in such a manner that he didn't much damage his reputation, in fact enhanced it, as being a fair minded man. This doesn't have much to do with Iraq, except it occurs to me we've been better than we were treated by George III. Though the situations aren't even similar.

    ReplyDelete
  7. Ny Times has video on the frontpage of Sadr City and Basra.

    ReplyDelete
  8. ah, I'm kind of half asleep as usual. Stupid question. Being as Hollywood and Vine is right about where your heart's at, according to your description, you couldn't be making such claims:)

    ReplyDelete
  9. Basra is a test of America's exit strategy

    President Bush has called the current battle between Iraqi security forces and Sadr militiamen in Basra “a defining moment.” In his mind, President Bush probably likens the Basra battle to America’s Whiskey Rebellion, when President Washington had to defend the new constitution against a militia uprising. Of course, many other observers interpret the violence in Basra as Shi’ite factions, some in government uniforms, battling for economic spoils in Basra and the surrounding oil patch.

    ReplyDelete
  10. Yeah, that's a vital intersection!

    ReplyDelete
  11. While some officials interpreted the offensive as Maliki’s “first salvo in upcoming elections”, others saw a simple power grab for oil. The intricate differences between rival Shi’ite groups in Basra and their presumed links to Iran were all minutely examined by intelligence officers. Yet on Friday one administration official admitted: “We can’t quite decipher what’s going on.”

    ReplyDelete
  12. Bush probly gets flashbacks when he thinks of the Whiskey Rebellion.

    ReplyDelete
  13. Shot at the intersection of Cardiovascular Avenue and Aorta Street.


    Maliki risks All

    ReplyDelete
  14. Well, he's on a Tea Party now, he claims.

    I think it was you who said recently, we'd all be better of if he'd kept on the bottle.:)

    ReplyDelete
  15. The Wars of Iraq


    Iraq, as we know it today, did not exist prior to World War One. For several hundred years prior to the First World War, the mostly Arab region known as Mesopotamia lay within the Turkish Ottoman Empire. During that war, the British invaded Ottoman Mesopotamia, finally conquering the area. The peace treaty that ended Turkey's part in World War One, caused the Turks to give up control of Mesopotamia, which became known by the older name, Iraq. The new Iraq was under British control at first, a fact which caused a great deal of unrest. The current borders of Iraq and most Middle Eastern nations, such as Syria and Palestine/Israel, were drawn by the conquering Europeans, often with little regard to the preferences of the people who were to live in these newly created nations.

    Thus, Iraq became a nation with three large demographic groups; the Sunni Kurds in the north, the Sunni (Sunna) Arabs in the middle of the country, and the Shiite (Shia) Arabs in the south. The Kurds wanted a nation of their own, as did the Kurds living in neighboring Turkey and Iran. Though the British eventually granted full independence to Iraq, it was not without much bloodshed and hard feelings in Iraq about the long occupation.

    Below is a list, with some details, on the wars and conflicts of Iraq.

    World War One—1914-1918 -Also known as the Great War, this conflict brought about the end of the Turkish Ottoman Empire, which aligned itself with the German-led Central Powers. The Turks fought largely against the British Empire forces mostly in Ottoman Palestine, and Ottoman Mesopotamia, and the Russian Empire in the Caucasus region and neighboring Iran. In November, 1914, British forces landed at Basra, in what is now southern Iraq. Despite a serious British defeat at al-Kut in 1916, Baghdad fell to the British army in March, 1917. By November, 1918, the British had gained control over most of the Ottoman vilayets (provinces) that formed Iraq.
    The Great Iraqi Revolution (known in Iraq as Ath Thawra al Iraqiyya al Kubra and by the British as the Arab Revolt of 1920)—May 1920-Feb. 1921-Rebellion by Iraqi Arabs against the rule of the British Mandate. The rebellion was suppressed by the British military. This can be considered the First Anglo-Iraqi War.

    The immediate causes of this conflict arose out of the results of the British conquest of the Mesopotamian region from the Ottoman Turks during World War I. Following that war, the British established, with League of Nations approval, a colonial-style Mandate over the region now named “Iraq.” Many Iraqi nationalists, who believed independence would result from the ejection of the Turks, were severely disappointed with the establishment of the British Mandate. Other, related events and issues also inflamed Iraqi Arab opinion against the British. The Mandate government almost completely excluded Iraqis, as the British imported experienced civil servants from India (also ruled by Britain) to help administer the country. In northern Iraq, the British allowed thousands of Christian refugees escaping persecution in Turkey, to settle in mostly Muslim Iraq.

    Kurdish Revolt—1922-1924 -Rebellion by Iraqi Kurds against the British Mandate. Kurdish tribesmen, led by Sheik Mahmud, a powerful Kurdish leader, attempted to establish an independent Kurdish nation. British forces, primarily using airpower, suppressed the rebellion. This turned out to be the first of many Kurdish rebellions against the British Mandate and later, against the Iraqi government. As with many of the later Kurdish uprisings, the rebels were put down with some aid from rival Kurds.

    It should be noted that many similar and often related Kurdish uprisings took place in neighboring Turkey and Iran. Government forces always succeeded in defeating the rebels in Iraq, Turkey and Iran. Though Kurds in Iraq and Iran did enjoy some successes, they almost always came with the aid of foreign nations. When the foreign aid eventually is withdrawn, the Kurds’ success, historically, also fades away.

    Assyrian “Revolt” and Massacre-- August, 1933-- The Iraqi military, using a supposed revolt as an excuse, massacre at least 600 Iraqi Assyrian Christians.

    Shia Tribal Revolt-1935-Shiite uprising against the Iraqi government.

    Anglo-Iraqi War of 1941 (Rashid Ali Coup)--During World War Two, Iraqi politician Rashid Ali seized power in Iraq and aligned himself with the German-led Axis Powers. British forces invaded Iraq and quickly defeated the Iraqi military.

    Kurdish Revolt—1943 (July to October)-Rebellion suppressed by the Iraqi Army and the British RAF. Led by Mullah Mustafa Barzani.

    Kurdish Revolt--1945 (August 10 to October)-Rebellion suppressed by the Iraqi Army and the British RAF. Led by Mullah Mustafa Barzani, who escaped into Iran after breaking through an Iraqi Army force. Once in Iran, Mustafa Barzani and his forces joined the army of the new “Mahabad Republic,” the first independent, though in this case, (short-lived) Kurdish state. After Mahabad’s crushing by the Iranian Army, Barzani led his forces back into Iraq on April 28, 1947.

    Kurdish Campaign —1947 (May 27 to June 15)- After returning to Iraq from the failed Mahabad Republic, Iraqi government actions (arrests, executions, etc.) caused Mustafa Barzani and 496 followers to begin a fighting retreat from the Barzan region in northern Iraq through Turkey and into Iran in an attempt to reach the Soviet Union. They reached the U.S.S.R. on June 15, 1947, followed by the Iranian Army. (O’Ballance, 1973).
    al-Wathbah Uprising- (Jan. to May, 1948) -- Anti government uprising led by Iraqi leftists. This revolt was sparked by the Treaty of Portsmouth, in which Iraq agreed to let Britain keep military bases in Iraq and maintain continued influence in Iraqi foreign affairs. The imposition of martial law in May, 1948 allowed the government to crush the rebellion, just in time for the Iraqi army to travel to Palestine for the First Arab-Israeli War.

    First Arab-Israeli War -1948-1949-Israel declared independence from the British Mandate Authority on May 1, 1948, and is subsequently invaded by the armies of Egypt, Syria, Lebanon, Transjordan, Iraq, and Saudi Arabia. This is actually a continuation of the violence between Jewish (Israeli) militias and Palestinian Arab militias in the leadup to the British withdrawal. The war concludes on July 20, 1949 with the last Israeli armistice with the Arab nations. A legal state of war continued to exist, despite the temporary end of conventional combat. A legal state of war between Iraq and Israel continues to this day.

    Army Revolt/Coup- July 14, 1958--Brigadier General Abdul Karim el Qassim overthrows the royal government of King Faisal II. Both the king and Prime Minister Nouri al Said are killed. Qassim soon withdrew Iraq from the pro-Western Baghdad Pact and established friendly relations with the Soviet Union.

    Mosul Revolt--March, 1959--Pro-Qassim communist militia , called the People's Resistance Force, violently suppressed an anti-Qassim Sunni Army faction made up mostly of junior officers.

    Kirkuk Violence-1959--Pro-Qassim(pro-Communist) Kurds and People's Resistance Force killed ethnic Turkomen in Kirkuk .

    Kurdish Revolt—1961-1970 –After a period of relative calm, Iraqi government promises of Kurdish autonomy, or self-rule, went unfulfilled, sparking discontent and eventual rebellion among the Kurds in 1961. Mullah Mustafa Barzani is again a leader of the Kurdish forces. Beginning in 1963, Syrian Army and Air Force units aid the Iraqi military in fighting against the Kurds. A cease-fire in 1964, lasting until April of 1965, can be seen as a dividing point between two separate conflicts, though this web site interprets this rebellion as one continuous conflict. This prolonged period of Kurdish-Iraqi fighting ends in 1970 with a cease-fire and a government guarantee of Kurdish autonomy.

    Six-Day War (3rd Arab-Israeli War) 1967--Israel launched a pre-emptive attack on Egypt, Jordan, and Syria, fearing they were preparing to launch their own attack. The Israeli air force also attacked Iraqi airfields. Iraq sent ground forces to support the Jordanians and the Syrians.

    Ramadan (Yom Kipper) War -1973-1974 -Egypt and Syria launched a surprise attack on Israel during the Jewish Yom Kippur holiday. The attack also fell on the Muslim holiday of Ramadan. Iraq sent army and air forces to support Syria.

    Kurdish Revolt -March, 1974 -–In March, 1974, Kurdish rebels led by Mullah Mustafa Barzani (having survived an assassination attempt) rebelled against the government. The Kurds felt that the government was not living up to the agreement which ended the previous revolt. The Iraqi Kurds were supported by the Shah (King) of neighboring Iran, who sought to put pressure on the Iraqi government over a border dispute. The Kurds were also assisted by the American Central Intelligence Agency (CIA), who opposed the Iraqi government due to its friendly relations with the Soviet Union. After an agreement between the Shah of Iran and Iraqi leader Saddam Hussein in 1975, (which temporarily settled the border dispute until the Iran-Iraq War began in 1980), the Kurds collapsed under intense Iraqi military pressure. The CIA, allied to the Shah, also suspended aid. Kurds cite this betrayal by two key allies as evidence supporting their future distrust of American attempts to incite them to fight Saddam Hussein’s forces in the 1990s and in the early years of the 21st Century.
    Intra-Kurdish warfare 1978-1979 --In 1975, Jalal Talabani formed the Patriotic Union of Kurdistan (PUK)-urban-based and leftist) in opposition the Barzani-led Kurdish Democratic Party (KDP).

    Shia unrest in Karbala -February, 1979--Suppressed by the Saddam regime. Under Saddam Hussein, the Shiites (Shia) were a persecuted religious group, both despite the fact, and because of, their numerical majority in the country.

    The First Persian Gulf War (also known as the Iran-Iraq War)—1980-1988 - In 1975, Iraq and Iran came to an agreement on the disputed Shatt al-Arab waterway which provides Iraq’s only outlet to the sea. In exchange for Iran stopping support for Kurdish rebels, Iraq agreed to share the Shatt al-Arab with Iran. This and other disputes over their common border, plus the belief that the 1979 revolution had weakened Iran, led Iraqi leader Saddam Hussein to launch an invasion of Iran on September 22, 1980. After initial successes, the Iraqi army ground to a halt and soon retreated under repeated assaults by the numerically larger Iranian Army and Revolutionary Guards. After the Iranians pushed the war into Iraq, Saddam’s forces began using chemical weapons. By 1988, both nations faced exhaustion and, after nearly a million casualties between them, agreed to end the conflict.

    Osiraq Reactor Raid—June 7, 1981 –Fearing the consequences of a successful Iraqi nuclear weapons program, Israel launched a pre-emptive air strike on the Osiraq nuclear reactor (under construction) in June, 1981. One of the pilots (the youngest) in that raid was Ilan Ramon, who later became Israel’s first astronaut, and who died in the Space Shuttle Columbia tragedy on February 1, 2003.
    Kurdish Revolt—1983-1988 –During the Iran-Iraq War (1980-1988), Iraqi Kurds, aided by Iran, fought against Iraqi government forces. In 1987 and 1988, the Iraqi military used chemical weapons to kill thousands of Kurds (including many civilians) in a successful effort to break the back of the resistance.

    Iraq-Kuwait Relations

    1961- Iraq threatens Kuwait, claiming that it belonged to Iraq because of old Ottoman territorial claims. The British supported Kuwait by sending military forces to Kuwait. Saddam Hussein used similar excuses for his 1991 invasion of Kuwait.

    1973 (March)- Iraq occupies as Samitah, a border post on Kuwait-Iraq border. Dispute began when Iraq demanded the right to occupy the Kuwaiti islands of Bubiyan and Warbah. Saudi and the Arab League convinced Iraq to withdraw.

    The Second Persian Gulf War (known in the U.S. as “Operation Desert Storm”—Aug. 2, 1990-Feb. 1991 – On August 2, 1990, Iraqi forces invaded and quickly conquered the small, oil-rich emirate of Kuwait. Almost immediately, an international coalition of nations gathered a powerful military force under the authority of the United Nations and the leadership of the United States, first to defend the United States, first to defend the oil-rich kingdom of Saudi Arabia, and secondly, to force Iraq to withdraw from occupied Kuwait. From the beginning of the crisis, the United Kingdom, led by Prime Minister Margaret Thatcher, worked very closely with the U.S. in assuming a determined posture against Saddam Hussein's territorial ambition.

    Kurdish Revolt—1991 –Encouraged by the stunning defeat of Saddam’s forces in Kuwait and spurred by appeals by President George H. W. Bush of the U.S., Kurds rose up against the Iraqi government With the bulk of his elite forces having escaped from the fighting in Kuwait and southern Iraq, Saddam was able to quell the revolt, causing hundreds of thousands of Kurdish refugees to flee into neighboring Turkey and Iran to escape.

    Shiite Revolt—1991 – Encouraged by the stunning defeat of Saddam’s forces in Kuwait and spurred by appeals by President George H. W. Bush of the U.S., the Shiites of southern Iraq rose up against the Iraqi government, only to be crushed by Saddam’s forces. Sporadic guerrilla resistance continued, with the bulk of the Shiite fighting forces seeking refuge in neighboring Shiite Iran.

    The "No-Fly Zone War" --1991-2003--Following the cease-fire ending the Gulf War, the Allies, (U.S., U.K., and France) had the right to conduct air patrols over parts of Iraq to ensure Iraqi compliance with the cease-fire terms. France soon left the Coalition, but U.S. and British planes continued to patrol Iraqi skies, often drawing anti-aircraft fire from the ground. Several major bombing campaigns were launched to punish the Baghdad regime. This conflict officially ended when the Third Gulf War began in March, 2003.

    Intra-Kurdish warfare --1996 – Combat between various Kurdish militias.

    The Third Persian Gulf War (known in the U.S. as “Operation Iraqi Freedom”)—March 19, 2003- Present– The current war can be seen in at least two distinct phases: The Invasion and the Occupation. Though Saddam's regime fell fairly quickly, the insurgency was able to gain strength in large part because the U.S. and Coalition leadership was slow to recognize that they had a nascent guerrilla movement underfoot. Though the Iraqi people have voted, and now have an elected government (featuring a Kurdish president!), the situation is now changing from a war against the occupier, to becoming more of a civil war among Iraqis.

    _ History Guy

    ReplyDelete

  16. Global warming: Just deal with it, some scientists say


    The 'non-skeptic heretic club' says it would be easier and cheaper to adapt than fight climate change.
    ---
    Downplaying the importance of emissions reductions has raised hackles among scientists around the world, who say that the planet-wide effects of global warming will eventually go beyond humans' ability to deal with it.

    "You can't adapt to melting the Greenland ice sheet," said Stephen H. Schneider, a climatologist at Stanford University. "You can't adapt to species that have gone extinct."
    ---
    STANFORD says blah blah blah,
    AS IF mankind has not dealt with a melted Greenland before, very effectively.

    ReplyDelete
  17. Though the Iraqi people have voted, and now have an elected government (featuring a Kurdish president!), the situation is now changing from a war against the occupier, to becoming more of a civil war among Iraqis.

    And now that the Shi'ite areas and Sunni areas are no longer mixed (due to ethnic cleansing) it is changing from sectarian violence into a civil war between factions within the sects...Kurdish realpolitik vs. separatists for a Greater Kurdistan, al-Qaeda in Iraq vs. Sunni tribal leaders who have been paid off, Shi'ite government vs. Sadrists. There is an ancient American dictum that goes "Divide and rule, subdivide and rule absolutely."

    ReplyDelete
  18. An lraqi documentary on Sadr City without the special effects from the movie Constantine:

    http://www.liveleak.com/view?i=8b0_1206842356

    ReplyDelete
  19. Who put that fear and hatred into the hearts of those orphans? The a holes kill each other, blame the US and and lie to the children about it.

    It's time to leave Iraq.

    ReplyDelete
  20. To be fair, though, I hear many reports that life in Iraq is so much better and more normal than is presented in the viewpoint of this video.

    ReplyDelete
  21. Past time Whit. Look at the list of wars of Iraq in my 7:43.

    How could anyone have looked at that short history and come up with a conclusion that the US needs to get involved in that and we would be able to make a difference.

    You would have had to have had a normal curiosity and asked the question:

    "Gentleman, while on my treadmill this morning, I have decided to Attack Iraq. Anyone know anything about the place? Nothing? All right then let's geter done."

    ReplyDelete
  22. Iraq is not our place to make better or worse.

    ReplyDelete
  23. The horns of a dilemma alright. How do you respond to McCain when he says things get mega-worse if we leave? They probably will, if we leave.

    Looked at from that perspective, they're fortunate now, all living in gated communities, so to ironically speak. We leave, the gates come down, the real killing begins. And the Kurds draw the short stick again.

    This fighting in Basra seems to be between rival shia factions, isn't it. And the government. Sadr, Hakim, the government. Stir in the Iranians. None of that's going away if we leave.

    Back to arguing the best thing might be to divide the place into thirds, draw the map right for once.

    Barack, he's our man, he can finesse the situation, if anybody can.

    ReplyDelete
  24. Yeah, it's hard to get much from one video. You could make a video about parts of L.A., and make it look nearly as bad.

    ReplyDelete
  25. And the Kurds are viewing the whole thing as a respite from the past.

    ReplyDelete
  26. Divide and rule, subdivide and rule absolutely, condo and don't have to rule at all. The association rules.

    We have some enterprising folk here in Opportunity, that made condos out of a mini-storage facility. Selling too. Since few orginal ideas originate here, it must be copied from other places.

    ReplyDelete
  27. Bob, There is hardly a thread where you dont get a smile or two out of me and most of the others I am sure.

    ReplyDelete
  28. Iraqi Shia cleric calls off militia
    By Jack Fairweather

    Published: March 30 2008 16:41 FT

    Moqtada al-Sadr called on his followers on Sunday to stop fighting Iraqi government forces in Basra as he attempted to avert a widening of internal Shia conflict.

    “Because of religious responsibility, and to stop Iraqi blood being shed...we call for an end to armed appearances in Basra and all other provinces,” the Shia cleric said.

    “Anyone carrying a weapon and targeting government institutions will not be one of us.”

    If Mr Sadr’s call is heeded by his followers it would be a significant victory for the strategy of Nouri al-Maliki, prime minister, of confronting the militias.

    - Financial Times

    ReplyDelete
  29. hmm, mookie backs down.

    I'd think the call would be heeded, as he controls a lot of their purse strings, provides weapons, etc.

    ReplyDelete
  30. After we leave we'll have to close our eyes to the internecine barbarism and shut our hears to the criticism from the left.

    ReplyDelete
  31. Bobal: This fighting in Basra seems to be between rival shia factions, isn't it. And the government. Sadr, Hakim, the government. Stir in the Iranians. None of that's going away if we leave.

    True, but our imports of flag-draped coffins will slow to a trickle. We didn't need to send our boys to die for the South Vietnamese, or the Somalians, or the Lebanese, and we didn't need to send our boys to die for the Iraqis.

    ReplyDelete
  32. ""Gentleman, while on my treadmill this morning, I have decided to Attack Iraq. Anyone know anything about the place? Nothing? All right then let's geter done.""
    ---
    The sad thing was, lots of folks DID know a lot about Iraq.

    Early on Gen Garner learned of a guy in State that had spent years coming up with a plan for postwar Iraq.
    He asked someone if he could use his expertise, and was given yes for an answer.
    Two weeks later he was jerked away, leaving Jay Garner to his own devices.
    ...then Jay was unceremoniously jerked away before he got started, and the rest is history:
    See Picture at Top of Thread!

    ReplyDelete
  33. BTW,
    Tell your Kike Lawyer my letter is in the mail:
    Suing you for Peace and Reparations for that Subdivision of my ancestor's tribal lands.

    ReplyDelete
  34. Doesn't come near raw nookie.

    ReplyDelete
  35. You never told me you were Nez Perce!

    Really though, where I'm at, around Moscow, they weren't. No one has found an arrowhead. The most they can claim is they passed through. They lived along the rivers most of the time, like any sensible people would, fishing. Fisher'gatherers, most all the time. Didn't like to work then, and don't now. Like any sensible people.

    ReplyDelete
  36. The ethics of much of ancient Greece, work is below us.

    ReplyDelete
  37. Tony said...
    The Rev. Jeremiah Wright grew up in the Germantown section of Philly, in what used to be one of the nicest neighborhoods in the city when he was living there. His father was a pastor for 62 years at Grace Lutheran Church there

    O Lord, let me live this down!

    ReplyDelete
  38. Yeah, the stupid Chumash could do no better than dine on Abalone, Salmon, Oysters, Venison, Acorns, and the like.
    REALLY stoopid.

    ReplyDelete
  39. Plus, they were "organic" freaks:
    No additives, preservatives, or secret Chi-com ingredients.
    Truly backward and superstitious.

    ReplyDelete
  40. Plus, the women did what little work was to do done! Only a moron would trade that for a forty week.

    There are hundreds, thousands, of rock drawings up the Snake and Salmon River, if you know where to look.

    ReplyDelete
  41. This is a stage show, for US benefit.

    al-Sadr and Mr Maliki are on the same ship. Have the same Goals and are in it, together.

    There may be internal strife, but this is part of the "end game".
    To allow the US military combat capacity to leave, but have Iraq stay on the teat.

    The Iraqi Army "defeats" the Mahdi Army, after three days of fighting and a few hundred dead. That's a laugh.
    They were losing that many, daily, just a year ago.
    Remember the objective of the Shia is for the US to lose it's offensive ability with in Iraq. But to remain, long term, as a financial benefactor.

    This gives Mr Bush, Maliki and the Joint Chiefs all they need to declare the Mission a success. It's part of the program, not part of the deviation.

    The Iraqi military defeats the militias, without US graound troops required.

    So, so sweeeet ...
    And right on time.

    The more interesting an important news is that Mr Bush proposes turning more control and regulatory authority to te Federal Reserve.
    Further privatizing the US economy and monetary policies. Transferring a hugh amount of responsibility and authority from the Government to private bankers to regulate.

    The "Federal" Reserve.
    Like "America", a stroke of marketing genius.

    ReplyDelete
  42. Back to Rev. Wright ...
    After the Roman Catholic priest praised him and allowed him to preach at the Catholic Church?

    Please!

    That is a dead horse, we'll be demanding Catholics renounce THEIR Church. Since, as duece said, the Catholics Churches are as one, a unified group, not like the Protostents. Where each Church ran it's own course.

    Give it a break.

    ReplyDelete
  43. This comment has been removed by the author.

    ReplyDelete
  44. Gets McCain out of his 95 years and a wake up position.

    It's 30MAR08, the "Deal" will be annonnunced in conjunction with the local Iraqi elections, scheduled for October. General P will make a September report.

    Good news building to a crescendo of Peace in Our Time, in Iraq.

    All to impact the November '08 US election.

    ReplyDelete
  45. Look, all three factions now have money. The Kurds and the Shiia have their oil income and the Sunni Arabs have the Saudis. If they want to fight, sell them the weapons and let them at each other. Bleeding $100 billion a year for better oil contracts that are not coming is getting rather silly at this point. There are better uses for this money.

    ReplyDelete
  46. Remember that Mr Cheney and Ms Rice declare the Mission in Basra a success, over a year ago.
    A political success.
    As the Brits pulledout, it became impossible for the Iraqi Federal Police to control the militias operating in the city. The Iraqi Army is called, there are a few skirmishes, for both real turf and News @ 11:00.

    After three or four days, the Iraqi Army is successful. As successful as the US has been in Anbar.
    Concerned Local Citizens in control.

    The Iraqi Government has proven capable of engaging the Insurgents, both Sunni and Shia, with tactical success.

    ReplyDelete
  47. DR: That is a dead horse, we'll be demanding Catholics renounce THEIR Church. Since, as duece said, the Catholics Churches are as one, a unified group, not like the Protostents. Where each Church ran it's own course.


    VATICAN CITY (Reuters) - Islam has overtaken Roman Catholicism as the biggest single religious denomination in the world, the Vatican said on Sunday.

    ReplyDelete
  48. As I recall, al-Sadr's political faction is the largest component of the Shite bloc.

    This has not changed, in fact I've seen reports of polls that show al-Sadr's political strength rising.

    If accurate then the local elections will be good for al-Sadr and bad for Maliki. If al-Sadr does not engage, militarily, his political strength will continue to mount.

    He'll sit tight through the elections, playing the Peacemaker, a pious man of moderation.

    He'll win at the ballot box, same as his faction was due to, in JUN03.

    The spinmiesters in Baghdad and DC not playing the same tune, different storylines pitched to their targeted audience.

    These attacks will play poorly for Maliki, at the polls in October.

    ReplyDelete
  49. This is a stage show, for US benefit.

    al-Sadr and Mr Maliki are on the same ship. Have the same Goals and are in it, together.

    There may be internal strife, but this is part of the "end game".
    To allow the US military combat capacity to leave, but have Iraq stay on the teat.


    If that is the case, it seems they are taking a long involved detour around to get to the same goal. Why not just play nice, not burn up the ammo, and give the Americans no reason or excuse to stay in numbers, let the Americans build a nice embassy, build the oil infrastructure, defend the country from outside attack, and suck on the teat?

    I don't think they are people that can agree on much of anything.

    ReplyDelete
  50. Because none of the players really want US to leave, bob.
    Not totally.
    But to stay on for 95 years, hostaged to the Shite Government.
    Paying the fees of dhimmitude.

    Just as Mr McCain said.
    There has to be "some" level of turmoil, to exemplify the Iraqi Army's capacity. They WERE capable when we left, there is evidence in Basra and Anbar, Kirkurk as well.

    It is an honor society with lots of guns, it's part of the culture, to fight, as I read their history.
    Knives, guns or power drills.

    But also chess players

    ReplyDelete
  51. When Maliki loses in the next Prime Minster selection election it'll be al-Sadr's faction with the votes.
    Organized not to fight, but to get out the vote.

    ReplyDelete
  52. Adams "Thoughts On Government", as it would be known, was first set forth in a letter to a fellow congressman....

    For Adams the structure of government was a subject of passionate interest that raised fundamental questions about the realities of human nature, political power, and the good society. It was a concern that for years had propelled much of his reading and the exchange of ideas with those whose judgment he most respected, including his wife Abigail--

    "The great fish swallow up the small(she continued) and he who is most strenuous for the rights of the people, when vested with power, is as eager after the prerogatives of government. You tell me of degrees of perfection to which human nature is capable of arriving, and I believe it, but at the same time lament that our admiration should arise from the scarcity of the instances." Abigail Adams

    Abigail longed to hear word of independence declared. Her spirit took flight at the thought--

    "and by the way in the new code of laws which I suppose it will be necessary for you to make, I desire you would remember the ladies, and be more favorable to them than your ancestors. Do not put such unlimited power into the hands of husbands."

    Borrowing a line from a poem by De
    Foe, she wrote, "Remember all men would be tyrants if they could."

    "If particular care and attention is not paid to the ladies we are determined to foment a rebellion, and will not hold ourselves bound by any laws in which we have no voice or representation."

    John Adams responded in a light spirit--

    "I cannot but laugh. We have been told that our struggle has loosened the bands of government everywhere; that children and apprentices were disobedient; that schools and colleges were grown turbulent. But your letter was the first intimation that another tribe more numerous and powerful than all the rest were grown discontented.

    Depend on it, we know better than to repeal our masculine systems. Although they are in full force, you know they are little more than theory. We dare not exert our power in its full latitude. We are obliged to go fair and softly, and in practice you know we are the subjects. We have only the name of masters, and rather give up this, which would completely subject us to the despotism of the petticoat, I hope General Washington and all our brave heoes would fight" John Adams :0 from 'John Adams'

    John and Abigail were best of friends, always.

    ReplyDelete
  53. In the end, who will be commanding the "stood up" Iraqi Army, come 2010.

    Trained and equipped, ready to rumble. Iraq's new Prime Minister Mookie al-Sadr and Defense Minister
    al-Hakim or their surrogates.

    ReplyDelete
  54. Well, then just ask us to stay, beg us to stay, to defend them from Iran, Syria, Russia, whoever, fix the oil system, and pay big bucks for the right of having first dibs on buying and shipping the oil to America. Sane solution all around.

    I read somewhere the Hakims and the Sadrs are like the Hatfields and the McCoys, and have been for 'a long time'.

    ReplyDelete
  55. That's is true, but ...
    We are the mark, they are both
    Operators of what, in the US, would be criminal enterprises.

    We have sanctified one and demonized the other, but that does not change that the Hatfields and McCoys still were selling lumber, despite the feud over the forestry rights of a pig range.

    The majority of both the Hatfields and the McCoys fought for the Confederacy in the Civil War, however, the first real violence in the feud was the murder of returning Union soldier, Harmon McCoy. Harmon was killed by a group of ex-Confederates called the 'Logan Wildcats,' among whom was reputed trigger man, Devil Anse Hatfield[1].

    The Hatfields were more affluent than the McCoys and were well-connected politically. "Devil Anse" Hatfield's timbering operation was a source of wealth for his family, but he employed many non-Hatfields, and even hired Albert McCoy, Lorenzo Dow McCoy, and Selkirk McCoy.

    ReplyDelete
  56. Well, my half life in Iraq would be about two days.

    ReplyDelete
  57. and even hired Albert McCoy, Lorenzo Dow McCoy, and Selkirk McCoy.

    Coulda hired Harmon, too, if they hadn't put him in a pine box, made from good Hatfield timber.

    ReplyDelete
  58. Just like al-Hakim and al-Sadr.

    Sometimes they fight
    Sometimes they work together

    Ebb and flow.

    Like the Hatfields and the McCoys

    ReplyDelete
  59. farmers and ranchers, cowboys and indians, swedes and norwegians, men and women, husbands and wives...

    ReplyDelete
  60. I was struck at how poorly managed the US propaganda war is, as shown in that Iraqi documentary. But Israel has the same problem with its Arabs. I think that really the problem is that too much is done for these people by people that don't understand human nature. Bob has it right. Make them understand their precarious position. Make them beg for scraps. And even then, never relent.

    ReplyDelete
  61. Civilized and not.

    There you have it.

    The "White Man's Burden"

    as described by Rudyard Kipling
    expanded, now to be the
    "Anglosphere's Burden"
    White, Brown and Black being equal
    English being the ties that binds

    ReplyDelete
  62. That is so far from the course, mat ...

    Who controls Pakistan, in 120 days, that's a real question of merit.
    Who commands the Army's loyalty?
    Who commands him?

    ReplyDelete
  63. "Who controls Pakistan, in 120 days, that's a real question of merit."

    No, it's not!

    The Pakis, like the Turks, like the Iraqi Shiia, have nowhere to turn. Why is it that the US strategists can't see that?

    ReplyDelete
  64. The FACT that Barry's self created public persona is false in almost every detail, no biggee.

    Getting repeatedly thrown into the Muck in Thailand for looking different, choosing not to return, and then painting not just a false, but an UPSIDE DOWN picture of racial relations and his place in them in Hawaii, and specifically at Punahoe and Grandma and Grandpas, no big deal:

    Feel guilty for my LIES, white man, for I was conceived on the backs of the Selma Marchers who crossed that bridge THREE YEARS AFTER I was Born!
    Don't tell ME I'm not comin back home to Alabamie!

    ...and let me tell you about that race-obsessed black guy from LA that was my friend and confidant:
    That Boy, Ray Arakawa, all he saw was race, what with that slave name and all.

    And that white man in the big House, Governor Arioshi, that guy hated Japs! Likewise Sen In No Way and Arakawa, my cousin, bunch of racist white folk!

    Pure white, that's what Punahoe wanted to be, cept for the Flips, Japs, Portagees, "Locals" occasional Tongans, Samoans, Chinese, Okinawans and so forth.

    Damned Whiteys ruled the place!
    How I wished I was back in Thailand, where I was really SPECIAL, and got to live with my weirdo hippy, spacecase mom!

    ReplyDelete
  65. Because of the conspriacy you deny, mat

    About the only one.

    A cabal of Christian Internationalist, looking to bring the "End Time", or just their version of it.

    Riding that wave of heredity and destiny.

    ReplyDelete
  66. Geez, not that again. Does that cabal of internationalists riding the wave of heredity and destiny also sit in Moscow Beijing Delhi, or is that cabal unique to the US?

    ReplyDelete
  67. Hey, guys:
    Bob al-Harb let the truth slip out over at BC:
    ---
    " bobal said...
    I was a poor poppy grower in the Land of the Two Rivers, when the Mukhabarat, noticing my industriousness, recruited me, and sent me to Idaho, a member of a wheat exchange study group being my cover, in hopes of infiltrating me somehow into Hanford, Washington, and obtaining nuclear materials.

    Knowing a good opportunity when presented to me, I jumped ship, had a facial and a name change, and settled in Opportunity, Idaho, now that you ask.
    "

    ReplyDelete
  68. Yeah, Moscow IDAHO, Mat!
    Open your frigging eyes, man!

    ReplyDelete
  69. Yes, or have agent that do.

    Russell Company was the largest importer of opium, to China.

    It has agents there.
    Russia and Israel, too.
    To this day the inheritors of the flame ignite points of light.

    FDR to Bush43, Russell Company factors large in their heredity.

    One of the more public facets of the community.

    ReplyDelete
  70. All I can say is that it's time to cue in the music from the Twilight Zone. :)

    Anyway, I see no reason not to let the internationalist cabal in Moscow Beijing Delhi have their way with their friendly neighborhood Jihadis.

    ReplyDelete
  71. Because there are affiliates in the Kingdom, raising monies for the Temple, by way of an oil tax.

    Keeping oil prices on the Gold Standard, but not ever mentioning it, publicly.

    The conspiracy, well once based on some varient of Christianity, also has theme players across the other mahor religions. But each conspirator playing their own game, almost like a "Hidden Hand"

    ReplyDelete
  72. Doug,

    We're all aware of that magic hat wearing cabal in Moscow IDAHO. That's why I was specific in asking about those branches outside the US. :)

    ReplyDelete
  73. "Keeping oil prices on the Gold Standard.."

    As opposed to which other standard, the US dollar?

    ReplyDelete
  74. Guess Who?
    "Soros was not involved with Obama until recently, same with the Hollywood Jews of the homosexual/Marxist orientation.

    They made the wrong pick early on with Hillary, drifting over to Obama slowly, then their mountains of money flooding in faster when they saw how lame Hillary was and how malleable Obama would be to their purposes.
    "

    ReplyDelete
  75. Uh,
    What's YOUR orientation, Mat?
    ...just curious!

    ReplyDelete
  76. I suppose that makes me a cabalist, eh, Mat? :D

    Idaho State Song

    ReplyDelete
  77. Yup, that's all folks, eight lines and a repeated chorus, that's all she really wrote.

    ReplyDelete
  78. NBPP ReUps For Obama

    "Soros was not involved with Obama until recently, same with the Hollywood Jews of the homosexual/Marxist orientation.



    Black racists, Soros, Holywood Jews of the homosexual/Marxist orientation--what a damned zoo!
    (cobbled together)

    Aliens for Obama, I expect that next.

    ReplyDelete
  79. "What's YOUR orientation, Mat?"

    Due Mars.

    ReplyDelete
  80. Could I just dig for about 30 minutes on one of your mountains of money, Mat?
    ...I promise to cover my enormous divot.

    ReplyDelete
  81. This comment has been removed by the author.

    ReplyDelete
  82. Zenster said...
    Like the First Fallujah, the truce is really a sham.

    When will the Western world finally accept that there is never any such thing as a "truce" with Islam? There is ONLY hudna and nothing else.

    Yet like the First Fallujah the current operations are likely to have been a military disaster for enemy forces.

    The only acceptable definition of a "military disaster" for Madhi forces is Moqtada Sadr attaining room temperature.

    it was also political forces which demanded their cessation for fear of civilian casualties.

    Which is all true so long as your definition of "civilian casualties" is actually "military defeat". Madhi forces and—to an ever so slightly lesser extent—Maliki could give a rip about collateral fatalities so long as their political objectives are being met.

    Any notion of humanitarian concerns by Islam should have been put to rest with the farcical appointment of so many Islamic nations to the UN's Human Rights Council. Such an action constitutes a frank admission that all pretense is no longer necessary.

    What is missing in Iraq is the legitimacy of the government of Prime Minister Nuri al-Maliki, which is perceived as highly inept and equally corrupt.

    Glad to see that niggling little issue cleared up. Maliki and Sadr are two peas in a pod. They are both totally amoral power hungry wannabe warlords. One uses his office of state, the other his clerical status. Bush can scrape out more moral authority from beneath his little toenail than either of these thugs on their best day.

    Just in case any of you continue to harbor the seriously mistaken idea that Maliki is even marginally acceptable as an ally in the war on terrorism, I give you some quotes by Sami Moubayed as he recounts discussions with Kahudayr “Deport All Muslims Including Me” Taher about Nour al Maliki:

    Maliki spoke a very different language, saying, "Our Sunni brothers, by their participation in a broad alliance, have begun to carry responsibilities in the political process." These responsibilities, he said, "will dry up" the sources of terrorism. Fighting the insurgency, he added, would be his government's priority, saying that he hoped to do so by creating "a white front" of Sunnis, Shi'ites and Kurds.

    We’ve all gotten a solid demonstration of Maliki’s intentions to build a “white front” against terrorism. Nothing whatsoever has happened because any sort of lasting peace would enable an outraged populace to begin unseating Maliki at the first opportunity.

    The only contradictory statement, which shatters much of the flattering talk revolving around Maliki, was made by Khudayr Taher, a US-based Shi'ite writer who has known Maliki since their days in exile in Syria in the 1980s.

    Taher wrote an editorial in Arabic saying that he used to meet Maliki at the local library in Syria, where he would be doing research for his master's degree in Arabic literature, pointing out: "I do not claim that we were friends." Taher said Maliki had "modest general knowledge ... he will be a puppet in the hands of Jaafari, Hakim, the Kurds and Sunnis". He added that Maliki "does not believe in democracy because of his ideological commitments" in al-Da'wa Party, claiming that political Islam and democracy do not meet for someone like Maliki.

    In a private discussion held when both men were in Syria, Maliki told Taher: "We declare our acceptance of democracy, but in reality, we are tricking them [the Americans] in order to topple Saddam and come to power." Taher writes: "I swear to God that this is exactly what he said!"

    Taher adds that Maliki does not believe in the equality of women and will refuse to give any cabinet posts to Iraqi women, unless those imposed by the Kurds. He wraps up by saying that Maliki is anti-American, and has expressed his anti-American views to friends and in private discourse.
    [Emphasis Added]

    While the foregoing is dated information, I would bet the farm that no significant alteration in Maliki’s game plan has happened. All external evidence points to this. So, don’t get your hopes up that Maliki has somehow slipped Sadr’s leash or vice versa. These two are bound at the wrist and ankle when it comes to raping Iraq for their own personal gain.

    Sadr is furious at the fact that members of the Islamic Supreme Council of Iraq (ISCI), have joined the Iraqi army’s offensive against his forces in important areas such as Baghdad and Basra. ... Al Sadr is not only upset because ISCI has decided to turn its guns against fellow Shiites, but also at the fact that ISCI has been the recipient of a larger amount of aid from Tehran than his organization.

    What! No honor amongst thieves?!? Pauvre petite!

    [Sadr] is worried that Teheran has sold him down the river and given Maliki the green light to wipe him out.

    Please note the far more important subtext: Not that Sadr is on the verge of political collapse but that Maliki is an Iranian puppet of the same ilk as Moqtada.

    At the same time, he will continue to face the uncertainty about how serious Muqtada really is in making peace offerings.

    One Muslim worrying about the sincerity of another Muslim. Effing priceless! Taqiyya comes home to roost. Certitude must be a truly rare commodity in the Islamic world. It definitely explains a lot about why Muslims remain mired in the Iron Age.

    This strategy will "raise the misery index" and inevitably put political pressure on Maliki to stop the fighting.

    Haven’t we all seen this movie before? A lot of this will stop once we halt Sadr’s continued theft of oxygen from more deserving life forms like cockroaches, lice and scorpions.

    Maliki has no choice but to try and defang Sadr by negotiations.

    For anyone who believes the above load of tommyrot, please ask Israel about the efficacy of their “negotiations” with the Palestinians. Those who think that such a thing can produce any useful results need to watch the video, "Relentless".

    the hard reality is that sooner or later there has to be a showdown between the Iraqi government (which although Shi'ite dominated is neverthless partly made up of Kurds and Sunnis) and the militias. And this showdown can never be concluded purely by negotiation, however one may wish them to be.

    So, why all the hand waving and pretense of “negotiations”? This face-off should have happened years ago except that Maliki and Sadr were too busy gorging themselves on aid from their respective backers. The objectives of these two thugs intersect only at one single point and that is power over the Iraqi people. Either Maliki kills his rival or becomes (even better) known for his incompetence and ghastly alliance with these terrorist elements.

    Sadr and other militias probably won't respect any ceasefires

    Look up the word, “hudna”.

    The coming campaign will probably be an all-Iraqi or predominantly Iraqi affair.

    It had damn well better be. I’m sick and tired of Maliki being allowed to throw American soldiers in front of Sadr’s machine guns. It’s time for the Iraqis to begin paying the price for permitting this sort of political malaise to linger.

    the fledgling Iraqi force did not go to pieces; remained under orders (unlike the First Fallujah when whole Iraqi battalions vamoosed); and did not engage in unrestrained attacks on civilian targets. In short, it behaved in an extraordinarily competent way, by regional standards.

    This represents the dimmest glimmer of a hope. If American intervention results in whatever given nation suddenly obtaining a functional military, then all other Muslim countries will begin to rethink their rejection of Western ways. Read through Norvell B. De Atkine’s paper “ Why Arabs Lose Wars” for an idea of just how threatening an American trained military would be to all other Arabic nations.

    The question is whether the switch puller is MNF-I or Iran.

    Crippling Iran would go a long way towards resolving that particular debate.

    I still maintain that much of this insanity might have been averted had America merely set up a harsh military dictatorship with rigidly enforced curfews that allowed for our forces to search out and destroy the various militias. Handing over the reins to a bunch of Muslim thugs like Maliki and his ilk has only prolonged everyone’s misery. Especially our own, both in terms of +4,000 military dead and untold BILLIONS of dollars spent. If Iraq is the model for all further intercessions within the MME (Muslim Middle East), then it is patently obvious that this is not a viable strategy.

    Where will we unearth the TRILLIONS of dollars needed to extend a similar sort of campaign into all of the other MME countries that must be neutralized? Were this strategy more cost-effective, I would continue to back it. Clearly, IT IS NOT. For this reason, much more innovative measures must be adopted. Targeted killings and massively disproportionate retaliation are the two methods that promise more swift results.

    Am I happy at having to propose the need for massively disproportionate retaliations? Absolutely not. Yet, I am far less happy at America losing over FOUR THOUSAND of it finest and incurring debt that our great-grandchildren will be paying off. Islam’s predation upon the West must be resolved and damn quick. The price tag for inaction remains far too high. Furthermore, Islam continues to paint us into a nuclear corner as we continue this “law enforcement” approach to fighting terrorism. Either we begin killing off Islam’s aristocracy and start maiming its various war machines or face the eventuality of a Muslim holocaust. Remember:

    ISLAM WOULDN’T HAVE IT ANY OTHER WAY.

    3/31/2008 11:56:00 AM

    ReplyDelete