Iraq rebels 'intensify violence'

Iraq rebels 'intensify violence'
From correspondents in Amman
22dec05

AN Iraqi Sunni leader said insurgents will intensify attacks to drive out US troops and violence will worsen if a Shiite-led government returns to power, as seems likely.

Sheikh Majeed al-Gaood, head of the Wahaj al-Iraq party with strong ties to both Islamist and secular nationalist insurgents, today said a victory for ruling Shiite Islamists aligned to Iran in last week's parliamentary elections would bring bloodshed.

"The resistance will intensify and there will be a bloodbath and much blood will be spilt if Iran's agents gain power," said Sheikh Gaood whose group has a strong following among ex-army officers, Saddam Hussein loyalists and Arab Sunnis waging the insurgency.

"Not a single honest Iraqi nationalist would accept the Iranians or their agents ruling the country." Provisional results released yesterday indicated the ruling Shiite Alliance will remain dominant and possibly retain an absolute majority in parliament.

<SNIP>

http://www.heraldsun.news.com.au/common/story_page/0,5478,17639536^1702,00.html

it doesn't seem like driving the US out it their only motivation.

The nation of Iraq is a fiction created by the British after WWI as they carved up the former Ottoman empire. It was the Brits who put the minority Sunni's in charge - using their typical colonial trick of annointing a minority tribe as the ruling elite making them dependent on British guns to stay in power. The cold war continued the arrangement, with the Baath party replacing the sunni monarchy and playing off the soviets and the americans for material support. The Iranian revolution tilted our hand in favor of more or less overt support of the Saddam dictatorship as a counter balance to shiite ascendency in the region. But keep in mind that for the last 80 years, stability in Iraq has meant brutal suppression of shiite and kurdish nationalist aspirations.

The final breakdown of Iraq started with Gulf Farce I - that odd war triggered by our apparent green light to Saddam for his Kuwati adventure, followed by our feigned shock and outrage that he did what he said he was going to do and which we indicated was of no interest to us, and the subsequent crushing of his army and destruction of his offensive capabilities. We left Saddam in power at the time as the Bush-I gang recognized that the sunni dictatorship continued to be a useful counter force to Iran.

What changed? Why did the necons become obsessed with toppling Saddam? By 1998, with the infamous PNAC documents, including the letter to Clinton advocating overt regime change, The Cabal had mapped out a global strategy for world domination that had Iraq as its base of operations for control over the middle east oil fields in what they saw as a world resource war between China and the US - the Oil Wars. As we know they needed some excuse for actuating this plan. 9-11 happened - what a coincidence - and the game was on.

Unfortunately the clowns in charge seemed to have missed the fact that Iraq was essentially a shiite region and that the real consequence of their invasion was going to be the creation of Greater Persia, of a shiite dominated mesopotamia, of a complete and total breakdown of the fictional nation of Iraq. Before our stupid invasion the shiite theocracy in Iran was losing control. It was in retreat: people were openly defying the idiotic religious laws and reform candidates were in control of the nominal government. Since the invasion the theocracy is back on top, and is now poised to dominate the region and deliver a crushing humiliating blow to our neocon idiocy.

There is no nation of Iraq. We can recognize that now, or we can recognize it later, at approximately 1,000 soldiers and $250B per year of our refusal to accept reality. At some point we will realize that we cannot stay in Iraq, that there will be no friendly government to yield up the permanent base agreements that were the reason for our invasion, that rather than being the staging grounds for our imperial domination of the region, for the destruction of the Syrian and Iranian regimes, we have destroyed what was left of the post WWI colonial structures and the region is going to realign itself into ethnic sunni, shiite and kurdish nations.

We would be far better off putting that 250B/yr into alternative energy source research and development. That would be a strategy for a future america we could be proud to leave to the next generation.

And well thought out as well. With the destruction of the Baathist regime the unity of Iraq - which was essentially a Sunni Arab dominated Apartheid state with a fascist government - is all but finished. It's obvious (at least to us) the US will have to leave soon.

However the Kurds, I'm told, are about the most pro-American people you will find so any permanent military bases will have to be located there. The Turks may not like it, but they won't defy the US. Besides they have to be on good behaviour to enter into EU accession talks. PNAC might get something out of this afterall........

While Baathist rule was certainly "uniting" Iraq (by mere force or otherwise), this unity was very superficial, as Kurdistan was pretty much autonomous, and even then, Saddam did not fully control the rest of the country.

The Kurds are the most pro-Kurd people you will find (they were pro-Iranian during the Iraq-Iran war). However, one must look at the great amount of diversity in northern cities such as Mosul, where Arabs constitute a big part of the population (Saddam encouraged this population's growth, sometimes through discriminatory policy, and now the Kurds are doing the opposite by use of de facto force). So, actually Kurdistan would not be so nice of a place for US bases after all.

It should be printed, and framed.

I agree with all of it. It sums up what I've read. And the key word here is "clowns in Washington". Stupid fools. They just don't get it, and they will bring the entire region down because of their stupidity.

Except for the first six paragraphs. :D

Fair and square. Nice one.

I don't know if I have ever seen it laid out so cogently.

Your analysis is dead-on.

Major Sunnis, Shiites call Iraq vote 'fraudulent'
Groups threaten to boycott new parliament if complaints are not addresse

Updated: 9:35 a.m. ET Dec. 22, 2005
BAGHDAD, Iraq - Dozens of Sunni Arab and secular Shiite groups threatened Thursday to boycott Iraq’s new legislature if complaints about tainted voting are not reviewed by an international body.

A representative for former Prime Minister Ayad Allawi described the Dec. 15 vote as “fraudulent” and the elected lawmakers “illegitimate.”

A joint statement issued by 35 political groups that competed in last week’s elections said the Independent Electoral Commission of Iraq, which oversaw the ballot, should be disbanded.

http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/10572818 /

:nuke:

Call Guinness.