Capitol Hill Blue Forums Political Issues Foreign Policy & News Bomb Iran

RS, I don't think very many Iraqis ever had the impression that the US-led Occupation forces were there to "liberate" their country from Saddam. Many Shiites were, initially, glad that we had. But as the Occupation wore on, living conditions deteriorated, and it became more apparent that "Mission Accomplished" meant "We Own It Now", the gladness soured.

Looking at the survey you mentioned, we can see quite plainly how seriously detrimental the "surge" has been on every level of Iraqi life.

I speculate that he lost favor in 1988 because he failed to achieve the US goal of regime change in Iran during the Iraq-Iranian War. The move to demonize him continued for the next few years when he was conveniently suckered into invading Kuwait.


If militia size is directly proportional to support then the Sadrists will overcome the Iranian influence. al-Sadr is apparently working hard to form a broader coalition spanning Shia and Sunni groups. This in and of itself could be progress in view of Sunni criticism of al-Maliki government.

The problem with al-Sadr from an administration perspective is he is anti-occupation which the administration interprets as anti-American. Thus he won't get US support as the US supports some other loser.

al-Maliki has already stated he will not tolerate Iraq being used as base to attack Iran. If the US does attack Iran, I believe al-Maliki will have no choice but to request immediate American withdrawal. How ironical that would be to achieve Israeli goals (knocking out Iran the Israeli perceived threat) and completely failing to achieve American goals (build a stable pro-American democracy in the ME (the string of adjectives is actually really long and has been shortened)).

He may have little to say or do about it. In fact, I wonder if he has any say at all over the matter?

8 U.S. Soldiers in Iraq Die in Vehicle Wrecks; Another Killed in North
Is it possible that this base would not send out teams to enter Iran? Border enforcement? Sounds legit to me!

I have wondered the same, however, an appeal to the global community should do the trick. Failure to leave would visibly expose the administration intentions and reality for what many already believe is true. I don't believe even the spin doctors at Weekly Standard would be able to salvage a reasonable story, or they may not even try and just wrap themselves in an American flag and thumb their noses at anyone who objects or questions their intentions.


I doubt it.

There are enough reports to suspect the US is already sending black ops teams into Iran as well as they have probably already hired (without too much inducement) anti-Iranian groups as MEK and PDK. Sending regulars into Iran would be counter-productive from a propaganda viewpoint especially if they were caught i.e. remember the British sailors Iran detained.

I favor this explanation:

• The background: Mr. Bush was advised upon entering office that Iraq was the "perfect" country to attack: perceived as being strong enough to be a worthy adversary, yet in reality weak enough to knock over with ease; a very low-risk, high-reward military venture. Who were the main advisors, you may ask? Why, Rumsfeld, Feith, Rove, and Wolfowitz of course. And the Vice-Dick President, Cheney.
• The catalyst: Saddam announced his intentions to begin trading petro in Euros.

The lesson ought not to be lost in the current situation. There is too much in common, and too much at stake.

I think you have described the immediate reasons. Neocons had a long term dislike of Saddam, dating back to at least 1988 and certainly by 1991 when Wolfowitz (may have been Feith) began calling for Saddam's head. Thus when 911 offered a serious geo-eco-political discussion of the ME, it wasn't too hard to find Iraq on the map as it fit so many criteria which you described for successful US intervention.

The change to euros certainly was not welcome and we can only now surmise what the effect will be if the Iranians successfully build a bourse based on euros.

There were a lot of people who did not like Saddam for a lot of reasons but one of my favorites is speculative, they did not like his mustache.

The drumbeats for the forthcoming Iran attack continue. The Administration's propaganda machine must be putting in long hours coming up with these stories and their dubious conclusions:
MSNBC Article

Bergner is, of course, full of potatoes.

This is the same rocket known as the Katyusha, that was widely fired by Hezbollah in Lebanon during the summer 2006 conflict against the Israelis. It's the same rocket that has been fired at British troops in Basra for the past year or more, largely by the Badr Corps, which actually does have strong connections to the Iranian Revolutionary Guard, which the Mahdi Army does not.

And lest we forget, Mahdi leader Muqtada al Sadr recently declared a cease-fire. Has it been effective? The LA Times reports

Of course the article is a complete muddle, as is often the case when the Librul Press tries to explain away the Mahdi Army as something other than Freedom Fighters.

Bottom line: there are lots of Katyushas in Iraq. "Groups" that fire them in Baghdad are probably neighborhood gangs of a dozen or less persons, who may or may not have affiliation with one or more of the Shiite factions. Chances are very good that they are Shiites and that their rockets came from Iran. Chances are very slim that anyone can prove that this particular rocket just arrived in Iraq.

Unfortunately, it doesn't matter in the least! The propaganda machine has grabbed hold of it and spit it out to the American public. Most of the American public now unquestionably knows that Iran is attacking our troops in Iraq and now we need to attack Iran to stop that. They know this because their government told them so. Their government would never, ever lie to them!

And after Mr. President Bush's speech tonight, there will no longer be any doubt at all that Iran is attacking out troops in Iraq and we will have to deal with them(Iran)!

From Hizbollah's Iranian Rocket Force we have

So are we to conclude there is a 15 ton truck moving around Baghdad with rocket launchers mounted on the back and no one sees it? or someone is packing a 1/2 ton rocket in their backpack with a fold-up launcher?