Sunday, September 7, 2008

Iran thanks the brave American soldiers! Part 2

We have won in Iraq.

The media is now focused on the circus of the American political presidential election, and has no time to report any news stories on Iraq. And as for those American (and Canadian, and French, and Poles, and English, and Australian, and many others) troops who are fighting and dying and bleeding in Afghanistan - so sorry, you do not count at all.

Might as well not exist - this whole "war thing" was about Iraq anyway, and its sitting on large oil fields, and its position right next to enemies of Israel, so that our American military could threaten to bomb and kill any Arab nations which got too uppity and if Israeli lobby then ordered us into another war.

Iran comes to mind.

But anyway, there is no point in running any stories about Iraq - you see, we have won. The surge was a great success. There is no violence happening in Iraq. It is all flowers and smiling Iraqis and unicorns, oh my...

After all, it is not just Bush "W" and Cheney and the TV paid propaganda people singing hosannas about the surge being a great success - we have our great "liberal" hero, the annointed one, Obama, saying the same thing:

Bloomberg.com:

Obama Says Iraq Surge Success Beyond `Wildest Dreams'

Barack Obama said the surge of American forces in Iraq has ``succeeded beyond our wildest dreams,'' though Iraqis still haven't done enough to take responsibility for their country.

``The surge has succeeded in ways that nobody anticipated,'' Obama, the Democratic presidential nominee, said in a recorded interview broadcast tonight on Fox News's ``The O'Reilly Factor'' program.


Two things are interesting here.

One, that (surprise?) Obama is effectively supporting American foreign policy, and so you can bet (well, I am doing so) that his foreign policy will NOT be any different than the aggressive imperial foreign policy of Bush "W", Clinton, Bush Senior....

Same shit, but better PR to better fool the world - that's my position on Obama.

And two, the "liberal" champion went on FOX "news", and better yet, on the O'Reilly factor.

Snicker.

Being a cynical bastard, I decided to look into this whole surge is a success and the war is won meme - you see, I start off watching the American TV "news" with the mindset that everything they say is a lie, or at the best a heavy distortion.

So, onto the surge.

If you recall, a few years ago the so called "Sunni Triangle" was in the news because in that area American soldiers had the propensity to drive over dug in containers that went BOOM! in the night.

And die in the process.

Stories like these were common:
CNN, Sunni Triangle dangerous ground for U.S. soldiers, September 19, 2003:
Political observers believe that the local Sunni population is dissatisfied with U.S. reconstruction efforts and is mounting its own hit-and-run attacks against American forces.

These surprise attacks, often booby traps detonated by remote control, have made U.S. soldiers jumpy, suspicious and quick to shoot, resulting in many civilian deaths.

Since August, U.S. soldiers have killed 10 civilians and this past week they shot at Iraqi police, journalists, a wedding party and a top Italian diplomat.

On Wednesday in Fallujah, a city in the Sunni Triangle, a 14-year-old boy was killed and six people were wounded when U.S. soldiers opened fire on a wedding party. The soldiers thought shots fired by wedding guests were directed at them.

Iraq's retaliation for these deaths has been ferocious. On Thursday, three U.S. soldiers died in an ambush near Tikrit and since May 1, when President Bush declared major fighting at an end, 82 U.S. soldiers have died in combat.


Fox News from 2004; Multiple Attacks in Sunni Triangle:

Bomb attacks in central Iraqi towns killed five American soldiers and four Iraqis on Saturday, a day after two U.N. security experts arrived in the capital to study the possible return of the world body's international staff.

The deadliest attack took place in Khaldiyah (search), west of the capital, where a four-wheel-drive vehicle rigged with explosives drove up to a U.S. checkpoint at a bridge and detonated, a witness said.

The U.S. military said three American soldiers were killed in the attack. Six soldiers and several Iraqi civilians were wounded, the military said.

About 20 miles away, near the town of Fallujah (search), a roadside bomb went off as a U.S. convoy passed, killing two soldiers.


Those were typical news stories in 2003 and 2004 and beyond.

Bombs going off, clueless American soldiers being blown to bits alongside many innocent Iraqi civilians.

But now - those stories have disappeared.

The Sunnis are no longer shooting at and blowing up American troops in the Sunni triangle.

We won, right?

Well... yeah!

Here's how we won: we paid them not to shoot us.

WashingtonPost; U.S. Unsure About the Future of Iraq's 'Sons'l from March 31, 2008:

While public attention has been focused on Shiite-vs.-Shiite fighting in Basra and Baghdad, U.S. military leaders are taking a cold second look at the future intentions of the roughly 90,000 "Sons of Iraq" -- the locally recruited and primarily Sunni security forces that are armed and supported by the United States at $300 per person each month.


Got that?

There are over 90,000 militia - Sunni militia - in Iraq whom Americans pay $300 per person so they will not kill us.

Victory!

Obama Sez Iraq Surge Success Beyond `Wildest Dreams'!

The TV propaganda pundits orgasm live on the air and jizz the cameras!

Now, lets do this example: if you had a private business, say, in New York, and every few days your windshield would be shattered with a rock, and your customers blown up or shot, and you received a visit from a guy named Guido Mafiosi, who told you that all you had to do to stop these outrages would be to pay him and his associates...

And you decided, that all in all, it is worth it to pay Mr. Mafiosi to let your restaurant business run in peace...

Would you call that a victory?

At a Pentagon briefing last Wednesday, the commander of the 4th Stryker Brigade Combat Team in Diyala province, Col. Jon Lehr, told reporters via videoconference that the Sons of Iraq "are not a permanent security solution," although, he added, "they have been an integral part of our strategy."

That strategy, Lehr said, was "getting people to stand up and assume security of their own given area." Starting in Anbar province, and with U.S. money and American-supplied arms, they were happy to turn on their former allies and fight alongside U.S. Marines, their former enemies. Together they chased al-Qaeda elements out of Anbar. That same idea -- buying off the Sunnis and renegade Shiites with money and arms, and empowering them to provide security in their tribal areas -- began to be applied in other parts of Iraq, including Baghdad.


The 'Sons of Iraq', the Sunni militia whom we now pay, are an integral part of USA's strategy in Iraq.

It's been such a successful strategy that it was replicated all over Iraq - American soldiers and CIA guys and politicians went to meet with tribal leaders and mullahs, with suitcases full of our tax money, and asked them would they be so nice as to take these millions of $$$ and please not shoot us anymore?

So who are these 'Sons of Iraq'?

Baqubah's Sons of Iraq came from the 1920s Revolutionary Brigade, which earlier had been responsible not only for killing American soldiers but also for kidnapping a U.S. Marine. Others are from Hamas in Iraq, a Sunni insurgent faction that had broken away from the 1920s Brigade. And there are also some from mujaheddin made up of former Saddam Hussein loyalists.


They are Sunnis who just a short while ago were shooting, blowing up and kidnapping American soldiers.

Some are even former Saddam Hussein loyalists.

And some are Sunni who are from Hamas - you know, Israel's greatest enemy.

Hamas and Saddam Hussein's people and Sunni mujahedin - they are our friends now.

On our payroll.

But, there is something deeper going on here.

Why would all these people - Hamas (which has no love for USA due to America being under the heavy influence of the pro Israel Lobby), Saddam loyalists and crazy religious fundamentalist ex al Kaida people accept money from Americans and start shooting people on behalf of the occupier, the "great satan", USofA?

They were killing Americans a few months ago!

And now they are our "allies"?

LA Times, Baghdad's misguided crackdown on the Sons of Iraq, dateline August 26, 2008, written by Shawn Brimley and Colin Kahl:

Much of Iraq's dramatic security progress can be traced to a series of decisions made by Sunni tribal leaders in late 2006 to turn against Al Qaeda in Iraq and cooperate with American forces in Anbar province. These leaders, outraged by Al Qaeda's brutality against their people, approached the U.S. military with an offer it couldn't refuse: Enter into an alliance with the tribes, and they would turn their weapons against Al Qaeda rather than American troops.


Got that?

The Iraqi Sunni guerrillas came to Americans themselves and said "Gee, we don't want to kill you anymore, just pay us and we will fight with you".

What gives?

Throughout 2007, U.S. commanders capitalized on this Sunni movement, the so-called Awakening, to create an expanding network of alliances with Sunni tribes and former insurgents that helped turn the tide and drive Al Qaeda in Iraq to near extinction. There are now about 100,000 armed Sons of Iraq, each paid $300 a month by U.S. forces to provide security in local neighborhoods throughout the country. In recognition of the key role the Awakening played in security improvements, President Bush met with several Sunni tribal leaders during his trip to Anbar last September(...)


Again, what gives?

These guys were enthusiastically kidnapping American soldiers and civilians and using power tools and saws to dismember them, while shouting "Allahu Akbar!".

Maliki and his advisors never really accepted the Sunni Awakening, and they remain convinced that the movement is simply a way for Sunni insurgents to buy time to restart a campaign of violence or to infiltrate the state's security apparatus. In 2007, with Iraq's government weak and its military not yet ready to take the lead in operations, the Maliki government acquiesced to the U.S.-led initiative and grudgingly agreed to integrate 20% of the Sons of Iraq into the Iraqi security forces. Now, a newly confident Maliki government is edging away from this commitment.


Interesting.

The Iraqi government, led by Mr. Maliki, does not like the 'Sons of Iraq'.

Plans to integrate these Sunni fighters into Iraq's security forces or provide them with civilian employment have been consistently "slow rolled." While Maliki has committed to incorporate 20% of the 100,000 Sons of Iraq members under U.S. contract into Iraq's army or police forces by the end of this year, only a small fraction have actually been hired. When asked if the Iraqi government had created stumbling blocks to integrating the Sons of Iraq, Petraeus said in a recent interview, "That certainly has been the case."


Interesting.

Maliki does not want those 'Sons of Iraq' people in his government.

I know I have intelligent readers, and right now a lighbulb has probably gone off in your heads, accompanied by a "ding! ding! ding!" sound.

Let me explain anyway.

Remember, the USA has had problems with Sunni guerrillas - after all, the 'Sunni Triangle' was all over the news in 2003 and 2004 and 2005.

Maliki, on the other hand is Shia - just like Iran's citizens... and Iranian mullahs.

The Shia and the Sunni do not like each other - much. Think of Catholics and Protestants - but not in modernity, but during the 17th Century, the Thirty Years War, when Protestants and Catholics slaughtered, murdered and used (non power in 17th Century) tools to enthusiastically dismember each other while shouting "God is great!".

And if you recall about why Saddam was such a bad guy, it was mostly because he, as a Sunni, was putting all Sunnis in his government and treating the majority of Iraqi population - the Shia - as second hand citizens.

In that part of the world, that meant using power tools on their hands, arms, legs, toes....

So now the Shia are getting revenge on the Sunnis, and now they are taking over the country from the Sunnis.

Heck, what do I mean taking over - they DID take over the country - Maliki and all his goons in the government ARE Shia - no Sunni in sight.

That is why they do not want to have any 'Sons of Iraq' incorporated into the Iraqi (read - Shia, both Iraqi and agents of influence from Iran) government.

And that is why the Sunnis, who used to blow up American soldiers with glee, suddenly realized what has happened ("We lost the country, by Allah's beard!") and started to work with Americans, who gave them cover as they proceeded to purge Shia influence from their territories.

And by purge I mean kill off the Shia.

If you have been paying attention to the news, you would have realized that the reality of the situation is that there is a civil war going on in Iraq now.

The Sunni, the weaker minority, supplied by Saudi Arabia and other Sunni Arab states, are in mortal combat with the Shia, supported by Iran and stiffened by the Iranian 'Badr Corps' (more on the Badrists later in the article).

Lets continue with the article.

It gets worse. Over the last several weeks, Iraqi army units and special operations forces (which report directly to Maliki) have arrested Sons of Iraq leaders, dismantled checkpoints and otherwise harassed local security volunteers in Diyala province and greater Baghdad. There are reportedly plans to detain hundreds of Sons of Iraq members in the coming weeks. "These people are like cancer, and we must remove them," an Iraqi army general in Abu Ghraib, a Baghdad suburb, told a reporter last week. Another Iraqi commander in Baghdad confided, "We cannot stand them, and we detained many of them recently," before telling that reporter of plans to instigate a major crackdown as early as November.


Proves my point, yah think?

Iraqi army units and special forces which report directly to Maliki (read - Shia thugs, aka the government of free and sovereign Iraq) started to arrest/kill off the 'Sons of Iraq', the Sunni militia.

So whose side is Maliki, the Shia, the "leader" of Iraq, on?

Whose side are the Iraqi Army generals (read - Shia thugs) on?

The Iraqi army general openly admit that "We cannot stand them" (them as in 'Sons of Iraq', them as in Sunnis), and that "These people are like cancer, and we must remove them".

He is talking ethnic cleansing.

He is talking civil war.

So right now America and, more unfortunately, our soldiers are in a strange, paradoxical situation.

On the one hand, they are there to support the "legitimate", "democratic" government of Maliki and his merry band of Shia thugs and bandits, to fight the Sunni al Kaida.

On the other hand, the reality is that there IS NO and NEVER WAS Iraqi al Kaida, as the 'Sons of Iraq' have shown - it was the local Sunnis killing off Americans after all, perhaps with a VERY small number of foreign jihadists.

Let me repeat - there never was an al Kaida in Iraq. It was a figment of American propaganda. It was the local Iraqi Sunnis killing our troops (can you blame them?).

And now they noticed that they were outmaneuvered by the Iranian agents of influence, that Maliki and other Shia have taken over the country and its government in a "democratic" election (which the Sunni boycotted, because they realized that their smaller numbers would make no dent in electing a new government and also that all the Shia would vote for Shia politicians and their, Sunni participation, would only legitimize the farce of "democracy").

Now, the Sunnis realize that they are fucked.

The "Iraqi" Army is really a bunch of Shia thugs, many of them trained in Iran (more on that in a moment). There are also Kurds in the "Iraqi" army, but they try to just protect their autonomous region of Kurdistan (really an independent country at this moment, a de facto state) and try to stay the fuck away from the Shia Sunni civil war - so we can discount the Kurds in all this.

So the Sunnis noticed that ONLY THEY are FIGHTING the Americans, meanwhile the Iranian agents of influence are openly cooperating with the occupying Americans.

The Shia Iraqi translator, attached to an American unit, unnerringly guided the American patrols and Special Forces to the homes of prominent, important Sunni leaders, who were then (alongside their wives and children) arrested and brought to the Abu Ghraib holiday resort.

So the Sunnis said fuck it, we will do the same thing the Iranians and the Iraqi Shia are doing - using the dumbass Americans to arm ourselves and prepare for the next phase of the civil war in Iraq.

It is insane that this simple analysis is not shouted from the American TV "news" and written about in alarm in American newspapers.

American soldiers are stuck between two mortal enemies, who both "work" with them meanwhile doing everything to erase other's influence from the government, the "Iraqi" army, the country - by arrests, by murder, by ethnic cleansing, by telling American soldiers' patrol/arrest/murder squads to "go to that house, the terrorists lives there!" and the dumbass Americans obligingly going in and killing the "terrorists".

So what can we do?

Nothing.

The Shia WILL win, and by proxy, Iran will win.

The Shia CONTROL the "Iraqi" government, while the Sunnis who just recently were fighting the Americans are late to the party.

Maliki and his Shia generals openly talk about "removing them like cancer" - they openly talk about ethnic cleansing.

And what about the surge being such success, proclaimed by Bush "W", by the TV propaganda people on the cable "news" shows, even by Obama himself?

The authors of this LA Times article are spot on:

The "surge" strategy in Iraq, as described by President Bush in January 2007, rested on the belief that tamping down violence would provide a window of opportunity that Iraq's leaders would use to pursue political reconciliation. But this has not occurred, despite the dramatic security improvements. Indeed, if the problem in 2006 and 2007 was Maliki's weakness and inability to pursue reconciliation in the midst of a civil war, the issue in 2008 is his overconfidence and unwillingness to entertain any real accommodation with his political adversaries. America's blank check to the Iraqi government feeds this hubris.


The US surge was designed to bring all the Iraqis together in a reconciliation the Sunnis and the Shia (the Kurds will stay happy as long as they have their nation within a nation, Kurdistan autonomous region - they don't matter in this political equation at all).

It didn't work - the Shia in the "Iraqi" government do not gel much with the Sunni ex (anti American, now "pro" American) guerrillas.

The success of the surge?

Simply put, the Iranians and their Shia allies in the government control the government and they control the country, while the Sunnis stopped shooting Americans because they realized that Iran and their Iraqi Shia allies were using the dumbass Americans to thin their ranks before the civil war hits the next phase - and that by opposing the Americans actively and being the insurgents they have lost Iraq to Iranian influence.

So they stopped the insurgency - what's the point, it was benefitting Iran and their Iraqi Shia allies by weakening the Sunni military forces and making Americans more wary of the war, which would result in Americans leaving sooner.

So now America - we are on the side of ex-Saddam Hussein thugs - and Hamas.

Because they are the only force - once we leave, and we WILL leave Iraq, in a few months, years, whatever - that stands between Iranian mullahs take over of Iraq.

Once we leave, the majority Arab countries which are Sunni, will give support, money, weapons and al Kaida volunteers (al Kaida is VERY Sunni, and hates Shias with a passion) to Iraqi Sunnis, while Iran will put its volunteers, money and weapons to its Shia allies.

Bloodbath will result.

The Shia WILL win, because there are many more of them than the Sunnis.

Congratulations, America - you just allowed Iran to expand its influence and made a secular, modern country like Iraq into a copy version of Iran, complete with women wearing burkas and other aspects of religious fanaticism.

And what about Israel and its lobby in the USA, which pushed America into this Iraq fiasco?

They are losers too.

Yes, Saddam's conventional military capabilities were dismantled. Yes, he will no longer give money to Palestinian families of suicide bombers.

But in Saddam's place, who was sane (politically speaking) and had sane political ambitions (get rich and kill off personal enemies) will be put an Iranian agent network, called the Iraqi government, which either will ethnically cleanse the Sunnis or let them in peace if they promise not to interfere (look for a BIG Sunni exodus from Iraq into Saudi Arabia and other places when Americans leave).

Instead of Saddam, you will have a real, for real real, terrorist state.

I hope you are proud of yourselves, AIPAC and Israeli agents of influence who have worked so hard to get America to do this clusterfuck.

And America?

We are the patsy of a patsy.

Some superpower we are.

Bonus Material: "Iraqi" Army
Hey, lets use Wikipedia - it is many times a surprisingly good resource to start off the research.

So, about the so called "Iraqi" army.

Wikipedia; Badr Organization:

Badr Organization (Arabic: منظمة بدر ) (previously known as Badr Brigade or Bader Corps -- not to be confused with the Badr Brigade in the Jordanian Army) is the armed wing of the Supreme Islamic Iraqi Council (SIIC). Headed by Hadi Al-Amiri it participated in the 2005 Iraqi election as part of the United Iraqi Alliance coalition. Its members have entered the new Iraqi army and police force.


There you have it.

The Badr Corps - Iraqi Shia exiles who fled to Iran and were then trained as terrorists to fight against Saddam's forces and Sunnis - made a triumphant return to Iraq during the American "liberation" (and were quite open about it - they came in from Iran, crossed the border and said "Hi! We are Iranian agents!" to which the incompetent Americans replied "Cool! We are having elections, so welcome to the democratic Iraqi government and its army and police force!", to which the Badr people replied "Cool! Thanks for giving Iraq to Iran, America!").

So in the final analysis, despite the Israel Lobby involvement in pushing America into this war, the final winner is not America (it was a patsy for Israeli interests), it is not even Israel.

The winner is Iran.

Bonus Material 2:Iran thanks the brave American soldiers! Part 1

I wrote about the fact that Iran is the ultimate winner in all this, that the "Iraqi" army is in reality an Iranian trained Badr terrorist force all the way back in March 28, 2008 in this article:

Iran thanks the brave American soldiers!

I wonder when the idiotic American mass media, when the impressive propaganda machine called FOXNEWS, CNN, ABC, CBS, NBC will realize this fact.

Not soon, looks like.

After all, even Obama is saying that the surge is a success.

Somebody should ask him if he knows the difference between the Shia and Sunnis - after all, chance are he doesn't, just like many other American politicians and government officials who lead this country.

Which leads to...

Bonus Material 3: We are led by idiots.

Pensito Review:

Take Representative Terry Everett, a seven-term Alabama Republican who is vice chairman of the House intelligence subcommittee on technical and tactical intelligence.

"Do you know the difference between a Sunni and a Shiite?" I asked him a few weeks ago.

Mr. Everett responded with a low chuckle. He thought for a moment: "One's in one location, another's in another location. No, to be honest with you, I don't know. I thought it was differences in their religion, different families or something."


Aggressive ignorance and being proud of his stupidity - the hallmark of an successful American politician.

How about the senile McCain?

NYTimes blog:

Mr. McCain said several times during his visit to Jordan – during a news conference and a radio interview — that he was concerned that Iran was training members of Al Qaeda in Iraq. The United States believes that Iran, a Shiite country, has been training and financing Shiite extremists in Iraq, but not Al Qaeda, which is a Sunni insurgent group.

“We continue to be concerned about Iranian taking Al Qaeda into Iran, training them and sending them back,’’ Mr. McCain said at the news conference. Asked about that statement, Mr. McCain said: “Well, it’s common knowledge and has been reported in the media that Al Qaeda is going back into Iran and receiving training and are coming back into Iraq from Iran. That’s well known. And it’s unfortunate.”

It was not until he got a whispered correction from Senator Joseph I. Lieberman of Connecticut, who was traveling with Mr. McCain on the trip, which is a Congressional delegation, that Mr. McCain corrected himself.

“I’m sorry, the Iranians are training extremists, not Al Qaeda,” he said.


Get your story straight, you senile old moron.

Thank goodness the Israeli agent of influence, Lieberman (Israel, Connecticut) is there to help out the idiot.

FOX "news":

New House Intelligence Committee Chair Short on Intelligence

He is expected to have an acute understanding of terrorist groups and their threats to American interests. But the incoming chairman of a congressional intelligence committee was yesterday struggling to explain his ignorance of Al Qaeda and Hezbollah.

Silvestre Reyes, the Democrat chosen to head the House of Representatives committee, was asked whether members of Al Qaeda came from the Sunni or the Shia branch of Islam.

"Al Qaeda, they have both,” he answered, adding: “Predominantly probably Shi’ite.”

In fact, Al Qaeda was founded by Usama bin Laden as a Sunni organisation and views Shia Muslims as heretics.


Stein has also caught out Willie Hulon, chief of the FBI’s new national security branch when he was asked to which branch of Islam were Iran and Hezbollah belonged. “Sunni” he replied. “Wrong,” said Stein.


I am so happy that we are in the "war on terror" when we don't even know who the fuck we are fighting!

Wow, America - we are led by idiots!

 Del.icio.us Add to my Technorati Favorites! StumbleUpon

3 comments:

Brave American said...

Politics at its best (and dirtiest, I may add). The spotlight will fall on the middle East after the election hype has died away, but this time, the focus may be Iran, or Syria, or God knows who!!!

Yes, American has won alright, not the war but another chance to guide the world forward under a new leadership. May God bless America and Long Live the "Stars and Stripes"...

ThePoliticalCat said...

Hey, there, AmericanGoy,

Thanks for your understanding. I wish Cynthia McKinney had a better chance, because I believe she's a true progressive. I wish Dennis Kucinich had won the primaries.

Like you said, it's a choice now between someone whose foreign policy statements sound like the same old, and a senile old fool who will take us into 100 years of war on three or more fronts with his Rapture-loving Dominionist fundie buddy and right-hand woman.

Again, thanks for your understanding. We have so much to do to pull the country back from the brink of this Bush-induced disaster.

Anonymous said...

http://www.cnn.com/2008/WORLD/meast/09/09/iraq.secret/index.html

Woodward, associate editor of the Washington Post, wrote that along with the surge and the new covert tactics, two other factors helped reduce the violence.

One was the decision of militant cleric Muqtada al-Sadr to order a cease-fire by his Mehdi Army. The other was the "Anbar Awakening" movement that saw Sunni tribes aligning with U.S. troops to battle al Qaeda in Iraq.