"How Bush Created a Theocracy in Iraq" By Juan Cole

How Bush Created a Theocracy in Iraq
http://www.truthdig.com/report/item/how_bush_created_a_theocracy_in_iraq
Posted on Dec. 2, 2005

By Juan Cole

The Bush administration naively believed that Iraq was a blank slate on which it could inscribe its vision for a remake of the Arab world. Iraq, however, was a witches’ brew of dynamic social and religious movements, a veritable pressure cooker. When George W. Bush invaded, he blew off the lid.

Shiite religious leaders and parties, in particular, have crucially shaped the new Iraq in each of its three political phases. The first was during the period of direct American rule, largely by Paul Bremer. The second comprised the months of interim government, when Iyad Allawi was prime minister. The third stretches from the formation of an elected government, with Ibrahim Jaafari as prime minister, to today...
http://www.truthdig.com/report/item/how_bush_created_a_theocracy_in_iraq

In the first phase, expatriate Shiite parties returned to the country to emerge as major players, to the consternation of a confused and clueless “Coalition Provisional Authority.”

grasp for religion. Sadaam was secularist and would often hold back some of the Shi'a traditions. It's only human nature for them to now want more control and put religion in the forefront.

Some do. It is a human way to be. To find strength in religion. It is one option. Available to some but not to others. Because our brains are different.

"The Bush administration naively believed that Iraq was a blank slate ..."

What if he and his handlers knew full well what every objective, free-thinking person knew, that the entire place was likely to explode like the proverbial powderkeg? Or, I guess I'm wondering, how could they not know? No group of people experienced with global politics (of course bush was the blank slate in this case) would think for a minute that Iraq was a blank slate.

I firmly believe that bush's handlers knew full well what the worst-case possibilities were, and they didn't give a damn. Hell, these clowns aren't going to live forever; most are in their fifities, sixties, or seventies. I think they did what they did for one or two reasons: money for themselves in the short term and their families in the long term, or global fame/power. They know that they are at very little risk of personal loss - none of bush's family are going to die in Iraq - and the potential payoff was tremendous. These cowards were willing to sell out their country to satisfy personal ambition.

I reject the sentiment that bush's handlers are naive, although I think he is in so far over his head he doen't know what to do without being told. I believe they are evil. I believe the recent push to talk up bush's personal religious convictions related to his rule is bogus. It sounds like an attempt to explain away why he should be competent and accountable for this mess he has created. Almost as if his apologists are already preparing for the end of his presidency and the beginning of his imagined rehabilitation.

This new Iraq that is emerging seems to be rule by religious politicians who are not clerics. A noticeable difference

The Shiites have won the Iraq War, true. Still, they are 60% of the Iraqi population, it must have been foreseen as inevitable that their emancipation would lead to this.