Kissinger thinks (or at least he pretends to think) that Iran has dreams of rekindling old Persian dreams of domination. He also says Bush will be looked upon more favorably in less than 50 years. I agree with Kissinger in that a cut and run withdrawal of US forces from Iraq would greatly empower radical Islam, not to mention an official kick-start of the civil war, but I would further elaborate that it would empower both [Sunni] and [Shia] radicalism, two very different components with highly different, and mutually hostile, objectives.
This is going to be huge. For some reason I can't wait for the civil war to really begin, I'm tired of the fruitless Green Zone foreplay.
30 comments:
Kissinger (a virulent Zionist) is the kind of person who lumps together Saddam Hussein, Sunni insurgents, Al-Qaeda, Hizbullah, Hamas and Iran into one group which he calls "Radical Islam." It's hardly a surprise if we remember what he said about the Iraq-Iran war in the 1980s: "the only acceptable outcome is for them both to lose." Typical that he would endorse McCain.
And they both lost! If I will vote for somebody, I will vote for Obama or Clinton, I want the civil war to kick into headgear and to get this hypocrisy over with.
You're very mistaken if you think either Clinton or Obama would start withdrawing the troops or abandon America's global (imperial) interests. They are both part of the system and the establishment. Actually, if you lived here, you would realize what a scam the whole two political party system is, especially when it comes to foreign policy. And we in Iraq know better since we were bombed by two Republican presidents and a Democrat president. Obama sounds like he may be a lesser evil but once he is in office, if ever, his perspectives will change dramatically, as you will see. The only anti-establishment, anti-corporate presidential candidates, such as Ron Paul(R) and Dennis Kucinich(D), were heavily ridiculed by America's media, made to sound like they are nuts, and were denied the chance to join presidential debates on corporate-owned media outlets.
Anon, yes I entertain this thought, but...don't you think they have too much at stake if they don't, I mean, it's basically their selling point, how can they not meet it, unless they make up some really plausible excuse ...
and, do you think that McCain has much competition against a black with a middle name called Hussein and a woman? I somehow doubt Americans are all that open-minded inside.
I must admit I don't really know what will happen.
No, Americans are not that open minded at all. However, a lot of conservatives dislike McCain because they think he is too liberal in some of his positions (absurd, I know), but I kind of doubt Obama has a chance if running against McCain. Clinton would probably have a much better chance, but then again it looks like she is going to lose the nomination.
As for an excuse, they will just say American troops are in Iraq at the request of the democratically elected Iraqi government. They may draw down some troops but America is in Iraq to stay for many years to come (whether it's Bush, McCain, Clinton, or Hussein in the White House), trust me.
i agree w/anon. they may pull some troops out but they won't go very far, plus they both (obama and clinton) say they would leave enough to man their stations, or protect their interests ie, the embassy and the bases. that out to be at least 100,000 troops. plus, nobody s taking the private troops out of there ie blackwater etc.
we aren't leaving.
annie
Abbas,
Haven't you already gotten what you are asking for? Didn't the "civil war" already happen in 2006 to mid 2007? Did Iraqis toy with this idea and the Sunni Arabs decided against it?
Or are you saying that you hope for a genocide of Sunni Arabs in Iraq? Don't take this wrong, but you were singing a different tune when you actually lived IN Baghdad. Now you sound like Khalid --who also cheered for war from outside Iraq.
cmar ii, there is a potential for a bigger civil war than 2006/2007. I'm surprised Abbas would look forward to it. laish ya Abbas?
Personally I think the race in November, if it comes down to Obama and McCain, will be close. McCain is drawing from the more moderate Republicans and Independents who perceive him as being more middle of the road. Which is why the conservatives aren't too pleased with him. Obama has convinced the people who are desperate for change, any change, that he is the best person to achieve that. He reminds me a little of our former governor Jessie Ventura (minus the feather boa). For some people he's a protest candidate.
I don't think that race will be as much of a factor as you think, Abbas. Not this election. However, there will be some people for which it is still an issue.
Dr. Mohammed-Ali Zainy is Mojo's father. (Mojo, btw, is Muhannad Zainy, and he's used that name often in comments on the Angry Arab.) Dr. Zainy is an Iraqi oil expert living in London (but has US citizenship) and is quoted in many news articles. He also seems to be a more moderate, nonsectarian figure because he is adamantly opposed to the proposed Iraqi oil law draft, although at some point he returned to postwar Iraq to join the Green Zone government and was suggested as Iraqi Oil Minister. I even remember an occasion when he posted a comment on his son's blog publicly scolding him or calling him an idiot after he read his silly posts. There are tons of information about this family's history online. Al Zainy is a famous family from Karbala and Baghdad. They claim descent from the prophet's family. Seems Zainy was an Iraqi oil official before he defected to the West at an OPEC meeting in Vienna in the early 1980s. So much for Mojo's claims of his family being persecuted by Saddam's regime. LOL.
One other thing, Abbas, I would normally agree with the crazy anonymous post about whether Obama or Hillary would ever pull American troops from Iraq. I would normally assert that NO American President would all Iraq to "be lost" due to choices he/she inequivocally made under his Presidency.
Actually Hillary has left herself some wiggle room. She can "begin" to withdraw troops but never actually withdraw that much until the security situation warrants it (Bush's policy).
But, Obama has never left himself that kind of wiggle-room and his naivity might well allow him to make a horrible decision. He has actually said that a likely genocide in Iraq would not prevent him from withdrawing US troops.
McCain is really not first (or fifth choice) for president, but if I were Iraqi or had relatives in Iraq, he would have been.
Cuz I'm tired of a deadlocked stalemate. I now believe it's inevitable, so I want to reach the end as quickly as possible.
[Abbas] Cuz I'm tired of a deadlocked stalemate. I now believe it's inevitable, so I want to reach the end as quickly as possible.
Actually, a "deadlocked stalemate" in which the various parties don't risk attempting a final stroke is the nature of a pluralistic, democratic society. As De Toqueville said of America's democracy in 1833 when it was a novelty "Every election is a little crisis" that subsides as soon as it is over. That's life without a "strong man" (a dictator is the perfect leveler of society).
What you are weary of is actually what what you've been hoping for. What is convincing you that the extermination of Sunni Arabs is inevitable is actually the best sign that they have made it through the bottleneck and will reintegrate into Iraq.
The only real question now is whether the Iraqi Arabs (Sunni and Shi'a) will unite against the Kurds. That's Iraq's real next crisis looming in the future, not the war between Sunni and Shi'a Arabs.
But until then, be happy. Iraqis have passed the first great challenge: the redefining of the Sunni Arabs' place in Iraqi society.
From IraqPundit:
A combination of events, emphatically including the surge, has brought stability to much of Baghdad and the country, and has put the most lethal element of the insurgency, AQI, on the ropes.
Obviously, the U.S. did not go to Iraq to fight AQI, but that, in large part, is what the war turned into, and that’s the war the U.S. is now winning. Says who? Says AQI. That’s not a success that any sane American or Iraqi would want to throw away.
Iraqis have clawed their way through too much and paid too much at this point --for now when they are finally showing a return on their efforts-- to say "Let's just have a purge already and get it over with".
An ethnic purge didn't solve the problems of Serbians or Croatians.
Stop listening to people who are ideologically invested in Iraq's failure because they want to stick a thumb in the eye of Bush or America. Most of them have nothing to lose in selling Iraq's inevitable doom to you (and aggressive Doom Merchants is exactly what they are). You and your family definitely have a lot to lose in buying what their selling.
Abbas:
Without the American presence to restrain the neighbors, what makes you think a real Iraqi civil war would remain an "Iraqi only" affair?
It seems to me that the Turks would invade northern Iraq and annex it in a heart beat. As it stands now, they are already periodically invading Iraq to chase the PKK. That invasion would likely be the start of the complete shattering of Iraq. With the Turks in first, the Iranians would have more than enough political cover to send troop into at least Basra, and probably, much of the south to "protect" Shia interests.
Anbar would probably end up a rump Sunni state funded by the gulf Arabs. I doubt that Iranian troops would push as far as Baghdad in an attempt to prevent the Sunni Arab powers from uniting against them. Instead, Iran would likely rely on Shia proxy forces. The battle for Baghdad and the center of Iraq would likely last for many years as occured in Kabul and Beirut where opposing warlords endlessly attacked and counter attacked the city in continual efforts to demonstrate their own faction's relative military strength.
Also, it is not unreasonable to think that after Sunni forces are inevitably forced west into Anbar (although they would likely still be close enough to raid, mortar or rocket Baghdad periodically) by the combined Badr/Mahdi army forces, that the Badr and Mahdi military factions would square off over the spoils of victory. Again, the decades long battle between formerly allied Afghan warlords over Kabul is the relevant historical precedent.
For all these reasons, I vastly prefer hypocrisy to protracted slaughter a true "Iraqi civil war" would likely entail.
Mark-In-Chi-Town
Mark, you're probably right, but I guess I'm tired from seeing them try and try and somehow you know that it's going to be there anyway, and do you think that the positioning of Iraq is the same as Beirut? I don't think either Kabul or Beirut are as important to the region's partners as Baghdad, Shouldn't that speed up things?
Abbas:
I agree that Baghdad is far more important to the region, and probably the world in general, than either Beirut or Kabul. However, this makes it even more likely that the fight for it will be nasty and prolonged. Unfortunatley, it seems that the bigger the prize, the more tenaciously the contestants will fight over it and the less likely to admit defeat.
To avoid these highly unpleasant scenarios, American troops will be stuck in Iraq for the short term no matter who wins the next election. Although my gut feeling is that Obama is more serious about a relatively rapid withdrawl than the others, even he is likely to leave a "trip wire" level force in Iraq for a time. In other words, a big enough force (probably about 30K troops similar to level in S. Korea) that an attack upon them could be repelled long enough to allow over the horizon reinforcements to arrived.
Let's face it, Iraq is now a resource rich country with little means of defending itself from the covetous eyes of its neighbors. Until Iraq is politically stable enough to rearm with a signifcant number of battle tanks and a functional air force, from a regional security perspective, it would be very risky for the US to withdraw completely. With the violent internal conflicts in Iraq sitll unresolved, the US is going to be reluctant to supply those types of weapons since the risk of their being used in a "real Iraqi civil" war is believed to be too great at present. If you thought the last round of internal violence was bad, just picture the Mahdi army swarming into hostile Sunni areas of Baghdad in battle tanks.
Mark-In-Chi-Town
So basically, either way and whatever the outcome, it is convenient for the Americans to remain in Iraq for years to come. When we think of that as the goal, we can understand how much of the present conflict is of America's doing and how it is America's interest to stoke the fires of sectarian distrust in Iraq.
Anonymous 702a.m.:
You don't get it. Being in Iraq at this point is not a goal for any American politician. It is a costly, politically unpopular quagmire. We Americans are now stuck in a trap of our own making.
On a cost benefit analysis, the invasion of Iraq will never even come close to paying for itself, not matter how Pro US Iraq's government turns out to be in the long run. The U.S. burn rate (11 billion per month) in cash (total to date of about $500 billion and counting)and in American lives can never be recouped, but leaving now will only make things worse. To put that amount in perspecive, Iraq's 2007 annual oil revenue (not profit) was a mere $40 billion. Even if the US took all of Iraq's oil revenue for itself (leaving nothing for Iraqis), it would still be running a deficit of roughly $80 billion per year.
On top of all of that, the instability the invasion has caused in world oil markets combined with the resulting escalation of U.S. Iran tensions has added a 20% instabilty premium to world oil prices since 2003. Not a good thing for an oil importing country like the US.
If one of the politicians in this country can figure out a way to get out without sparking a "real Iraqi Civil" war and causing even worse regional instability and chaos in world engery markets, they would be a hero to all Americans.
To summarize, it is not in the American interest to cause sectarian tension or even regional tension in the middle east. We are massive oil importers. Regional stability and lower oil prices are the only thing that is truly in American's short term interests. Of course, if you are of the green persuasion (environmentally concerned), the currently high costs of oil can be viewed as the painful, long term medicine that world economy needs to shed its unhealthy oil addicition. If that happens, it would be very bad thing for the economies of Iraq and the middle east. Some how I doubt that the green angle is what you meant by asserting its is convenient for American's to stay in Iraq but, at this point, that is the only likely benefit.
Mark-In-Chi-Town
To summarize, it is not in the American interest to cause sectarian tension or even regional tension in the middle east.
OK you had a point with everything else you were saying but I think you greatly overestimating the amount of foresight the american admin here.
Also man what the fuck, Hillary Clinton voted for the Iraq war and the Patriot act when she totally knew better, that's just the tip of the iceberg of how much she sucks.
Muhannad Zainy aka Iraqi Mojo is currently working at Wyeth Pharmaceuticals. If you want to pay him a visit, the
address is:
1 Burtt Rd, Andover, MA
If you would like to call his employers at Wyeth and complain about his behavior or the time he wastes at work reading blogs, the number is: (978) 475-9214
You can check As'ad's sitemeter and see the IP address from Andover, MA, there.
Anonymous 621:
You had better be careful what you suggest because attacks on professional reputation consititute per se libel under US law. You could be opening yourself or someone influenced by you to significant personal liability if Iraqi Mojo were to loose his job or get passed over for promotion. Also, once a forensic computer specialist gets on the trail (with the assistance of the court's subponea power to get phone and ISP records) an anonymous poster or tipster is pretty easy to track down. Bottom line is you are playing a dangerous game.
Before you complain to my boss about this posting from my work account, you might want to know that I work for myself, although, for the record, my boss is often sorely tempted to dock my pay for excessive blog commenting.
Mark-In-Chi-Town
Oh dear ignorant Mark, letting his employers know how much time he spends online while pretending to work won't land me in any trouble but nice try. And even if it did, I don't live in the US and I have no plans to visit the US and trust me your SHIT country has no jurisdiction over me and my country.
Mazel Tov!
Anon 2:30:
I am not your "dear," nor am in any way ignorant. I had suspected you lived outside the US by your cavilier attitude about Mojo's legal rights. My last post was, in part, an attempt to draw this out of you. Thanks for confirming my hunch. Another purpose of my post was to serve as a friendly reminder to anyone in this country who might be foolish enough to be infuenced by your post.
Of course, my hunch was based on the knowledge that, in this "SHIT" country, no one with an ounce of self-respect or intelligence would suggest a campaign to destroy another's professional reputation. In this country, before even a half-wit would communicate a complaint about another to their employer, they would make absolutely sure it was factually accurate. Which rasies the question, do you have irrefutable proof that Mojo has been "pretending" to work, while instead blogging? I seriously doubt it.
Your enthusiasm for flouting the laws of another country illustrates your general contempt for the rule of law. Even more telling about your character is that you have choosen to flout a legal rule (protection of professional reputation) that is recognized in nearly every legal jurisidiction. Such disregard for the nearly universally accepted norms of civilized behavior sounds a bit like the "medieval mentality" that Abbas recently decried in one of his posts, although you sound to me like more of a secular, rather than religious medievalist.
By the way, in which country do you reside? Does it permit unproven attacks on other's professional reputations? Somehow, I doubt it.
Furthermore, whether Mojo chooses to blog in his free time should be absolutely irrelevant to his employer and is, in any event, constitutionally protected free speach.
Lastly, is your "Mazel Tov" intended to imply that I am Jewish? I am not, but your suggestion makes me think that perhaps I should consider conversion since I do find my local church to be rather uninspiring. Perhaps instead, I should just adopt your "medieval secularist" idealogy since it would much easier to follow your example and dispense with all laws and social norms I find inconvenient. Please let me know what to call this "medieval secularism" so I can start weighing my religous/philisophical options.
Mark-In-Chi-Town
As the worldwide web grows, so does the competition for websites. Great content does you no good if nobody gets to see it. Here are a few pointers on boosting your website.
literaturesw |
mamaniaca |
marchofdimesillinois |
marketing2011 |
myhousefix |
mypersonalhealthrecord |
nyyyhg |
ononas |
pandoraschmuckshop |
pizzabootcamp |
i love this post.
heroes of the storm hack
I've read this post and if I could I desire to suggest you few interesting things or tips.
Get free itunes codes from http://itunescodesncards.com and forget about jailbreak.
20160309meiqing
louis vuitton outlet
michael kors handbags
ray ban
nike blazers uk
ralph lauren outlet
adidas uk
ralph lauren sale
air jordan 8
cheap oakleys
toms shoes
cheap toms
canada goose outlet online
jordan 3s
canada goose sale
louis vuitton outlet
true religion
ray bans
louis vuitton outlet
coach outlet
kobe shoes
coach factory outlet online
kevin durant shoes
ugg outlet
michael kors outlet
celine handbags
true religion jeans
kate spade handbags
michael kors outlet
uggs boots
toms outlet
nike store uk
canada goose outlet
louis vuitton uk
coach outlet store online
michael kors handbags
ray ban outlet
coach factory outlet online
tory burch outlet online
christian louboutin shoes
cheap uggs
Thank you, the article is very petrifying, hopefully it can be useful for everyone.
Tips Paling Jitu Untuk Mengatasi Penyakit Demam Berdarah Dengue
Post a Comment