Texas Gentleman Posted October 27, 2006 Report Share Posted October 27, 2006 EXCLUSIVE-Iraqi PM sees peace in 6 months - if US cooperates Salim, I appreciate your enthusiasm in the reuters report ---- peace in 6mos ? I would like to point out to you news from rueters is unreliable at best. Their reporting is always inconsistant and as unreliable as Al Jezzera and as famous for thier ANTI-AMERICAN propaganda. ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~ The primary target of the joint Iraqi and U.S. raid inside Sadr city on October 25 was directed as Mahdi Army commander Abu Dura (or Abu Deraa), a death squad leader believed to be responsible for some of the worst sectarian killing in and around Baghdad. The initial raid led to a follow on operation in Sadr City, after "credible intelligence indicating that criminals involved in the kidnapping of a US Soldier were located in a Sadr City mosque" was although it is unclear if this intelligence was obtained during the initial raid. Note the Coalition now believes the Mahdi Army may be complicit in the kidnapping of an American soldier - an incident that will only increase the pressure on Sadr. At the initial target - a Sadr City residence believed to be hiding Abu Dura - 10 Mahdi Army fighters were killed, 2 were wounded and 10 captured, In the follow on raid at the mosque, three Mahdi Army fighters were killed. No Iraqi troops or Coalition forces casualties were taken during the fights. The raid was lead by the 1st Iraqi Special Operations Forces, and supported by U.S. embedded trainers and air assets. http://www.mnf-iraq.com/index.php?option=c...=6801&Itemid=21 The 1st Iraqi SOF reports directly to Prime Minister Nouri al-Maliki, who initially protested the raid and claimed he wasn't aware of it. Maliki has since backtracked from this statement, and now claims "the raid had his backing but argued that it was conducted in a heavy handed way that could wreck a political deal he had worked on with Muqtada al-Sadr," according to Reuters. Maliki has to walk the line as a politician, and as an Iraqi politician has his Iraqi constituents to consider at times. He must not always be seen as being in lockstep with the Americans/Coalition, particularly when Iraqis are killed. Richard Fernandez sums up Maliki's dilemma nicely: Legally Iraq is a sovereign country, which the US must treat it as any other country from the perspective of US national interest. Theoretically Maliki is under no obligation to obey Washington, which is correspondingly under no compulsion to support Maliki. While America would prefer to see a stable government in Iraq that is ultimately a task that cannot be delegated to Americans indefinitely. So expect some hardball to be played as this is the way of relations between nations. That said, Maliki's statements imply he values American support less necessary than the goodwill of his Shi'ite base. Or that he perceives Shi'ite support as so important that he's willing to risk American goodwill. How solid that Shi'ite base will prove, is open to question. He also must be concerned with the very real threat that Sadr's Mahdi Army possesses to his and his family's safety. Sadr is not above the art of assassination. An Iraqi judge issued an arrest warrant for Sadr for his role in the murder of Abdul Majid al-Khoei, the influential, pro-American Shiite Cleric, at the steps of the Imam Ali mosque in Najaf. This warrant is still outstanding. Sadr has evaded this charge, as well as responsibility for the uprising in Najaf and southern Iraq and Baghdad during the spring and summer of 2004. ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~ In other Mahdi Army news .......................................... — A fierce battle between police and militia gunmen northeast of Baghdad Thursday left 30 people dead and 42 wounded, a police official said. The new violence came as the U.S. military announced the deaths of five servicemen killed in action in Anbar province on Wednesday. The gunmen fighting police in the city of Baqouba, 35 miles northeast of the capital, were believed to be members of the Mahdi Army militia, loyal to hard-line anti-American cleric Muqtada al-Sadr, said Ghassan al-Bawi, police chief of surrounding Diyala province. The dead included 12 police officers and 18 militants, he said........................................ U.S. intelligence reports describe Anbar as virtually lawless, with well-armed Al Qaeda-backed insurgents filling the political vacuum. President Bush cited Anbar province in a press conference on Wednesday, calling it one of the biggest challenges to U.S. and Iraqi military forces, and a key battleground in the fight against terrorism. ............................ Mahdi militiamen have recently flooded into the area 35 miles northeast of Baghdad, forcing large numbers of residents belonging to Iraq's Sunni Arab minority to flee their homes. Mahdi fighters killed scores of Sunnis in massacres last week in the nearby city of Balad, forcing U.S. troops to return to the area after Iraqi security forces were unable to stem the bloodshed. Iraqi Prime Minister Nouri al-Maliki has come under criticism in the U.S. for failing to take decisive action to end the carnage, leading to signs of strain in his relationship with Washington. Earlier this week fighting broke out between the Mahdi Army and Badr Brigade-aligned police in the southern city Amarah in which 31 people were killed, including six police officers murdered by gunmen who stormed their homes. In other violence Thursday, Iraqi police reported killing a suicide car bomber as he attempted to drive an explosives-packed car into a check point north of Baqouba. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
salim Posted October 28, 2006 Report Share Posted October 28, 2006 What had happened over the last two day proves to me that there is real concern by every body to make Iraq a success. Today's meeting between president Bush and Almaliki is more than needed. There is a growing concern by many iraqis that the current american policy in iraq is working. Iraqis pacience ran so thin practising every day violance and killing under the UN mandate of the coalition forces to role the security file in Iraq. It is simply not working mechanism. What maliki is saying in his Reuters interview is just to reflect that concern. I can assure every one that it is the feelings of most iraqis. We get fed up with the current try and error. Let us try it our self on our way. Six months might be too optimistic , might be not bu let us try it. The country is going no where with the copen hand policy to those who are killing Iraqis, we need to try another way. Time is running fast and iraq is moving so fast toward the civil war. The key is to have a strong governemnt, a governemnt that has the tools and will , not a governemnt that is created to please others. Almliki is not Arafat, Iraq is not the west bank. I hope I made my self clear.. It is appropriat to talk about time table, predifined agendas and pointing to others for what is supposed to be your responsibilities as per the agreements.. It is good for both sides to work together but as parteners.. Almaliki was appointed by the will of free Iraqis and every one who works for Iraq , should respect that will .. I am sure that with such spirit that President Bush is showing in supporting Maliki , we can defeat our enemy.. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
salim Posted October 29, 2006 Report Share Posted October 29, 2006 Al-Maliki's anger grew through the week until on Friday, al-Suneid said, the prime minister told Khalilzad: "I am a friend of the United States, but I am not America's man in Iraq." After Saturday's talks, White House spokesman Tony Snow said of al-Maliki: "He's not America's man in Iraq. The United States is there in a role to assist him. He's the prime minister — he's the leader of the Iraqi people." Snow said that reports of a rift between the United States and Iraq were wrong and that Bush had full confidence in al-Maliki. "What you've got in Maliki is a guy who is making decisions. He's making tough decisions, and he's showing toughness and he's also showing political skill in dealing with varying factions within his own country. And both leaders understand the political pressures going on." Snow said Bush told al-Maliki not to worry about U.S. politics "because we are with you and we are going to be with you." http://news.yahoo.com/s/ap/20061028/ap_on_re_mi_ea/iraq Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
salim Posted October 29, 2006 Report Share Posted October 29, 2006 The announcement on the agreement of the two governments of hanling the security file to be run by the iraqi government came to the full shock of sadamists and their propaganda machine. Over the last two months, this propaganda was preaching for a new American policy that is being "intimidated" by their barbaric killing to Iraqis , is disbanding it's support to democracy path on cost of security.. It came while some at the US side is helping by trying to put blames on Maliki governement which has just five months in office and had no say on running the security file. Such stands by the US officials were fueled by the current ellection race in USA. All this made Iraqis so nurvis and sensative. Not because they are affriad of success of such change but becuase of clear disastrouse impact of such claimed plans.. Iraqis know that any such change in policy would not bring security but pushing Iraq into God knows where it migh ends to. Scanning through terrorists supporting media , I can easily trace the signs of shock .. Some Arab radicle who calls for fighting American occupation went to denounce such plans fastening hand over , calling it unrealistic! so what is realistic, keep killing Iraqis and Americans? We need to keep the momentum by having a real meaning and send a strong message to all factionist parties in Iraq "Shia , Sunni arab or Sunni kurds" that this is a real move and there will be no room for playing internal US politics .. These Sadamists and their Qaeda affiliats are under estimating the wil of president Bush and strenght of the ellected Iraqi governement Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
salim Posted October 29, 2006 Report Share Posted October 29, 2006 Iraq war 'fuelling UK terrorism' An article on BBC web site that brought to my mind an interesting argument.. Who is fueling who? The UK and westren qaeda terror cells is fueling Iraqi violance, or as the article went ? It is very clear that most , may be all , suiciders are comming from outside Iraq . Many were announced to be from UK. These terrorist had flowen to Iraq to be killed and to ignite a civil war that they think the only way to turn the Iraqi dream of democratic prosperous into a complete disastor. To my knowledge , non of those insurgents Iraqis had ever went the other direction. So who is fueling who? One might argue that the London's last terror acts were because of Iraq war. did 9/11 happen after Iraq war.? If these London terror had happened becuase of Iraq war, then shouldn't these terrorist go after Bin Ladin and his thugs who are proud to admitt killing hundereds of thousands of Moslims Iraqis "as per thelast unrealistic American/baathi study". Why not hese were acting because of Afghan war against the terror head quarters? why not because of Palestinian conflict? Why only because of Iraq war on Saddam. Is it because Saddam is the undercover leader of these terror networks? !!!! Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Texas Gentleman Posted October 29, 2006 Report Share Posted October 29, 2006 The announcement on the agreement of the two governments of hanling the security file to be run by the iraqi government came to the full shock of sadamists and their propaganda machine. ......................................................................... These Sadamists and their Qaeda affiliats are under estimating the wil of president Bush and strenght of the ellected Iraqi governement Salim, This announcement was good also because the US election hope from the majority of the Democratic anti-Iraq War party supported with mostly anti-Iraq War US media, terrorist enemy propaganda and atrocious Arabic press can no longer distort this. It’s out there for ALL to hear coming out from the IRAQI Government (with Bush and Maliki together). The only thing really new here though, is in announcing agreement on the benchmark timelines as goals to pursue. At first that was even denied by Maliki when our Ambassador to Iraq Zalmay Khalilzad announced it thoughtlessly earlier, instead of allowing Maliki to do so or before Maliki was ready. This regrettably spurred speculation and rumor amongst normal Iraqi conversation in the casba. However it changed no facts. Bush, the US Military, the U.S. Ambassador to Iraq Zalmay Khalilzad (since coming to Iraq) and General Casey have fully supported Maliki since he took office following Iraq’s elections. Anything you may believe differently is pure MEDIA distortion, ENEMY propaganda or idle speculation and rumor. For you to say, that NOW, finnaly with Iraq in control of security, you will do better than the MFN coalition does is more hope than fact. The Iraqi Government ( Maliki) has been in control of MFN Security operations almost since he formed a Government. And ever since then, the anti-Iraq Government insurgency and most terrorist began primarily attacking the Iraqi Army, Iraqi Police and Iraqi civilians more than the American led MFN coalition until lately. The enemy will always attack the weakest link. THe recent stepped up attacks on US Soldiers is desparate hope in influencing the US Elections pure and simple. It has also been very costly to the enemy. The announcement now also does another thing…… it puts Maliki front, forward, and square in the spotlight having to take responsibility (which he has always had) without any deniable plausibility (when things don’t go how he thought they would)… For example:, first he said he had no knowledge of some operations, then backtracks saying he had approved them, but didn’t think they would be carried out so heavy handed (more force than necessary??). He was wrong then and that is a valid criticism. When he has earlier released some Sadr militia leaders captured fighting Iraqi and MFN troops previously he was wrong and that is a valid criticism. He has said he would disarm the Shai Militia's and has not even started. That is a valid critcism. Iraqi’s don’t hesitate to criticize the USA, but you as Iraqi’s hardly have the ability to match your pride. I don’t mean that in mean spirited way, except to point out that your Government forces are not yet strong enough to do the job alone fighting terrorist, insurgent Saddamist or the uncontrolled Iraqi militias. We’ re there to help you have a decent life and not because we like living and dieing in Iraq. America AND Iraqi forces will make regrettable mistakes as will our leaders. War is by nature is chaotic mass confusionwhen the bullets are flying and your people are dieing. We have to remember who our allies are. The MFN coalition is doing the best to train and equip the IA and IP (to take the lead) but many recruits turn out more loyal to Iraq Militias in a fight and infiltrated the IA, IP to start with. Still many others are the best Iraq could wish for, being very brave and increasing in numbers. There or other IA brigades who can operate almost unassisted from the MFN . If you live in Iraq then you be the judge first hand if these links below are propaganda. It is so easy to go and see for yourselfs. Coalition aids Iraqi Forces during Ramadan Sunday, 22 October 2006 Limits of power: keeping the lights on in Iraq Monday, 23 October 2006 Iraqis keep eye in sky during Ramadan Tuesday, 24 October 2006 Coalition, Iraqis developing goals Tuesday, 24 October 2006 Iraqi Soldiers, Police score multiple victories against terrorists and insurgent forces Tuesday, 24 October 2006 Training centers prepare for influx Wednesday, 25 October 2006 Iraqi NCOs graduate in Mahmudiyah Thursday, 26 October 2006 Iraqis, Coalition unite in poverty fight Friday, 26 October 2006 Operation Helping Hands success Friday, 27 October 2006 Troops extend helping hand to town Friday, 27 October 2006 Engineers ensure freedom of movement Friday, 27 October 2006 Coalition helps save crops Saturday, 28 October 2006 Iraqi Army making waves on Euphrates Saturday, 28 October 2006 Marines working to build effective force Sunday, 29 October 2006 Iraqi Army dents IED production Sunday, 29 October 2006 U.S. contractors improve Police facilities Sunday, 29 October 2006 Salim, you will not find a person that supports the US led Coalition and Iraqi Government goals for Iraq more than I do. What I do not accept and will not support is leaving Iraqi militias running amuck with death squads killing innocent Iraqis and MY blood…. US & Coalition soldiers. The Sadr Militia and Badr Brigade rank right up there with the Saddamist and al Queda in Iraq. They are murderous thugs and that is not propaganda. I WILL NOT ACCEPT THEM being important to Iraqi politics as you have said. This has gone on TO LONG A PERIOD. Maliki had better take, or allow to be taken, much stronger actions in disarming these militias and soon or I will join the chorus to bring my kids out of Iraq. Iraq will no longer be worth their sacrifice to me. This is were you and I disagree. Maliki has NOT handled the Militias politically so far. That game is badly broken and Malikis handling of it has cost to many lives already. Maliki has been given all the latitude with al Sadr’s militia any American support left will tolerate. Believe me we will handle Sadr and pacify Sadr City, given the green light to do and it wont be pretty but it will be over. If the Other Shi’it’s in Iraq can not stand for that, then its time the US left Iraq. Should the US leave and Iraq then becomes a threat to my country, we will not be back to help you, but to destroy you as a threat Something none of us want to happen who cares for Iraq’s future. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
salim Posted October 30, 2006 Report Share Posted October 30, 2006 This is were you and I disagree. Maliki has NOT handled the Militias politically so far. That game is badly broken and Malikis handling of it has cost to many lives already. Maliki has been given all the latitude with al Sadr’s militia any American support left will tolerate. Believe me we will handle Sadr and pacify Sadr City, given the green light to do and it wont be pretty but it will be over. If the Other Shi’it’s in Iraq can not stand for that, then its time the US left Iraq. Should the US leave and Iraq then becomes a threat to my country, we will not be back to help you, but to destroy you as a threat My friend, I don't think we disagree on this point. We disagree on the tactics.. I never met or knew Maliki before. Indeed I rarely heard about his stands before being brought under exposure six months ago. But I think that his walking steps through the mine field of Iraqi deadly politics today, is the most practicall and reasonable one.. Almaliki is simply saying that the best way to fight radicalism and Extreemism at same time, is by keeping the pressure on the extreemism through isolating it from it's nursaring environment while encouraging more people to join the political process and to aviod, to the up most level, any move that would help push more radilce into the wellcoming hands of extreemism Embassidor Khalil Zadeh had done a historical great job in helping that policy through his open hands to radicle Sunni Arab, tuning them on the faction background that he shares.Indeed with curent cultural shock, Sunni Arabs in Iraq need such type of factioanl based advice and help. However, there was a similar pattron that was expected on the other front of radicle Shia who already joined the process and heathly contributed to it. May be Alsadrees had done this for their political goals, but who cares if this ends up to strenghtening of the governement and narrowing the front of fighting terror in Iraq. I think the more support for Maliki is the key to stabalize Iraq. President Bush had just jump in time in one of the most shrud moves that proved his strong leadership.. Maliki is simply saying :Don't put what you would affriad of to-happen-tomorrow, as higher priority of what you are suffering from today.. You might end up suffering from both! Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Mutergem Posted October 30, 2006 Report Share Posted October 30, 2006 U.S. Is Said to Fail in Tracking Arms for Iraqis By JAMES GLANZ Published: October 30, 2006 The American military has not properly tracked hundreds of thousands of weapons intended for Iraqi security forces and has failed to provide spare parts, maintenance personnel or even repair manuals for most of the weapons given to the Iraqis, a federal report released Sunday has concluded. Go to Complete Coverage » The report was undertaken at the request of Senator John W. Warner, the Virginia Republican who is the chairman of the Senate Armed Services Committee and who recently expressed an assessment far darker than the Bush administration’s on the situation in Iraq. http://www.nytimes.com/2006/10/30/world/mi...econstruct.html The question is where these aminitions ended with.. Iraqis kept claiming that Sadamist and Qaeda terrorists are much better equiped than Iraqi police and Army.. are we talking here about a hidden agenda by some one inside the US Army in Iraq? Very serious querstion that need to be answered .. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
salim Posted November 1, 2006 Report Share Posted November 1, 2006 The order by Maliki to end the unrealistic siege on more than half of Baghdad is received with huge boost by Iraqis feeling for first time in three years as a sign of recovery by the government sovereignty and strong stands.. What is important is that the agreement on such end was orchestrated to look in favour of Maliki to show him as a strong man. Such move by the US administration is ringing a bell of a great change in the way the Americans are handling the Iraqi affairs. It came just days after the close circuit conference between Bush and Maliki and the visit of national security advisor to Iraq.. As I wrote before, we need to give Maliki a boost of support and should only be possible in sending strong message to all Iraqi parties that an ellected PM is the only to support. Not to my surprise, some politicians showed their suspicion of ability of Maliki government to be able to stand to the challenges. I think they are expressing their fears of having a strong government in place. They want the current un clear view to remain. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
salim Posted November 1, 2006 Report Share Posted November 1, 2006 Interesting article in NY today.. Just to emphasis my point that a stronger Maliki should be looked at as complying with American interest in stabelizing Iraq.. If the declaration was intended to show Mr. Maliki as a forceful and decisive leader, as far Mr. Sined was concerned, it had that effect. The order demonstrated that Mr. Maliki was “a strong and brave prime minister,” he said. “He behaved like a successful prime minister.” The senior American Embassy official said that the embassy applauded the boldness of Mr. Maliki’s declaration. “We’re actually encouraging the prime minister to take responsibility,” he said. “So trying to sound like he’s a leader here in Iraq is a good thing.” Also to emphazise my other point, A sunni Arab Islamic party " brotherhood" leader and vice president Hashimi is denouncing Maliki move.. While such denouncing is fully understood by a politician who is looking for a conflict between Americans and Sader party, I don't understand Hashimi point of corelating the siege of more than 4 millions people as a realistic measure to stop violance.. If this is the right way , we might need to call of siege of most violant discret of Baghdad that is accused of harboring Qaeda and sadamist whose actions are blamed for all car and suiciding bombings against residentents. In those discret there are just less than half a million Iraqis! Very unpleasent talking by some leader who is supposed to protect Iraqis rather than jail them for eight days. The country’s Sunni leadership condemned Mr. Maliki’s decision, saying it would upend the Baghdad security plan and expose the population to greater violence. General Casey said last week that Iraqi security forces still needed at least a year before they would be ready to take over full control of the country’s security. Tariq al-Hashemi, one of Iraq’s two vice-presidents and the leader of the largest Sunni Arab bloc, said the prime minister’s decision “will allow the terrorists and the insurgents to move freely.” He said that civilians’ lives should be more important than saving a few hours during a commute. One point that I noticed is that most Sadamist suporting media, including Aljezera, was rarely highlighting the siege of more than half of baghdad " not Alsader city only" .. It was their way to encourage Americans to go further .. The question that had came to my mind is if this is because they hate Alsadrees or Americans more.. For sure they hate the new democratic Iraq much more! Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
salim Posted November 2, 2006 Report Share Posted November 2, 2006 To Understand the level that Sadamist miltia had pentrated the American Army and governemnt police. I would like readers to have a look to the WP interesting article .. While reading this article, one needs to keep in mind that Shula discrete sits in the hart of the northwest baghdad, at the most critical gate to the hotest Alqaeda play ground in Anbar and Saladin provinces. Just between Tarmia and AboGriab .. Alghazalia that the article also referred to , used to be known as the hidden place for the terrorists. In that discrete , Sadam used to grant his Intelligence and republican Militia the land to build houses by thousands..Residents of Alshula and Ghazalia were the victims of the most barbaric attacks by Qaeda and Sadamist thugs. Going back to the article. I don't know who is Brig. Gen. Salah al-Ani, chief of police for the western half of Baghdad, but from the name looks he is from the city of Ana in Anbar terrorist sympathy province. It was not surprising at all reading through his estimation. Having in mind that west Baghdad is today a play ground for his fellow Sadamists. From his rank it is very clear that he is a former Sadam officer. As for those quoted American soldiers, it is really annoying seeing these brave women and men get into such level of micro judgment . How did they know for sure that the personals at Sholeh police had the killed the American soldiers. The writer went through this as a fact without telling us what had happened after that. If the the brave Iraqi police officers of Shula are to be blamed, why there was no court follow up if there are enough evidences. If not, how come an American officer comes into such prejudgment? This is not to say these police officers at Shula are clean and do best job, but raising photos of Muqtada to terrorize Alqaeda is for me way much better than raising Sadam photos to please them.. Ask The great head of the west Baghdad police about the later.. He knew them for sure, they are his relatives!! Among the worst of the suspected Mahdi Army members is Lt. Col. Musa Khadim Lazim Asadi, station commander of the Ghazaliyah patrol police. "He has stated to us that he does not believe the Mahdi Militia is a bad organization," a military report said. "He had a picture of Sadr in his vehicle until we said something about it." Finally it might be good to have a look to this news at yahoo.com Interior Ministry: 119 Iraqi police killed in Oct. Updated: 4:50 a.m. PT Nov 2, 2006 BAGHDAD, Iraq - At least 119 Iraqi policemen were killed in shootings, abductions and bomb attacks last month, the Interior Ministry said Thursday, underscoring the toll Iraq’s relentless violence is inflicting on the poorly trained and underequipped force. How many of these killed are those miltia Mehdi inflated personals? Who had killed them? Why? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
hogan Posted November 2, 2006 Report Share Posted November 2, 2006 Salim, What bother me is whenever we in America hear about the attrocities commited in Iraq we rarely get any indication whether the victims are Sunni or Shia. I don't have any idea about the dynamics. Does the US Military understand who is commiting each of these attrocities? What the American press seems to say is that since the bombing of the Sumarra mosque, both sides are involved in a tit for tat feud and the US is trying to play the honest broker and punish both sides when they commit violence. If this is different from your view of the dynamics please help me to understand what you believe is going on. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
salim Posted November 3, 2006 Report Share Posted November 3, 2006 hogan, Today there are three types of violence in Iraq. First those toward Americanand Iraqi forces. Second is the random killings of Iraqi civilians by Sadamists and Alqaeda, then there is the sectarian based Shia retaliation attacks. Not including the actions by ordinary criminals. The one related to your question is the third one. the second is what was the case over the last three years and is related to the first.. By any measure this third type is not to exceed 10% , as far as number of casualties and level.. I think why such notion of making it as the main is due to many reasons. First by those who are giving excuses to why the US role of UN mandation is not working to secure the country. Another is by those who are trying to say that the whole Iraq exercise was a fail, as it creates much more problems than what it probably solved.. Both groups are looking for short term political goals. It is unfortunate that both of them agree on same mechanism to achieve two completely opposite goals but at the expense of more American and Iraqi blood.. With such propaganda, the question by most Americans today is , if there is an exit possibility to a successful Iraq mission. Indeed there are so many but with the current hesitation by US administration on deciding which way to go, I think this might take a longer time.. Indeed, such hesitation might explain some of US analysists putting Alsadrees on higher priority than Sadamist/Qaeda coalition.. I fully understand their concerns, but what I don't agree with is the way they think right to deal with.. It might be a sadamist friends idea to use force against Alsadrees, however it simply boosts them. The best way that I think of, is to deal with the routs .. I mean terrorist thugs threats and economical reforms.. Over the last three years there were enough evidences that both of theses routs can't be accomplished without having sovereign strong Iraqi government. The last week major development is a sign that American administration is moving in that right direction. Anti democracy US allies work so hard to push away such tactic from happening trying to reach the American administration with whole a bunch of concerns such as the Shia crescent myth to the Iranian influence on a Shia dominating government.. Are they realistic in their concerns? may be! but keeping the current situation is benefiting Iranians much more . Bleeding the US resources and weakening the Iraqi government is a recipe of whole chaotic Iraq, some thing both US Allies and Iranian would prefer to see over a democratic AND strong free Iraq. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
salim Posted November 6, 2006 Report Share Posted November 6, 2006 In his speech to the nation on sadam verdict , Al maliki went much far than his call for unity. He emphasised the responsibility of the Baath party of all Sadam's crimes. I don't know if this was just an opinion or a new stand by the firm prime minister but according to what Maliki has shown over the last months, I don't think such statement is without meaning.. Baathists are claiming to be envolved in a secret negotiations with Americans and keep refusing to join the political process.They keep send messages to their base that they are just about to strike a deal ! Some thing that help lifting their spirits after the deadly successes in isolating the base from most of the Iraqi political body. After getting the green light from President Bush ,Almaliki seems more confident to step forward to put the Baathists in the corner. He used this moment of Sadam being senteced to death to send strong message to them for re considering their stand or facing realities. Maliki was clear in send the other wellcoming message to them too. I think a strong clear messages of supporting his call through stopping any private negtiation, if any, with those who use it for their propaganda , is necessary. They are in a bad shape and such move would help them consider the realistic options of disbanding their stands against the building of new Iraq. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Texas Gentleman Posted November 6, 2006 Report Share Posted November 6, 2006 .. Baathists are claiming to be envolved in a secret negotiations with Americans and keep refusing to join the political process.They keep send messages to their base that they are just about to strike a deal ! Some thing that help lifting their spirits after the deadly successes in isolating the base from most of the Iraqi political body. that is completely absurd and a disgusting IRAQI rumor from the ARABIC PROPAGANDA PRESS !!! Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Join the conversation
You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.