I'm not cherry picking the intelligence (or lack), this was in the Baker City Herald Ed Page. "The Way Forward In Iraq" by James Phillips of The Heritage Foundation. I won't even screw with the quotes to make it seem dumb, I (compared to some important Deciders) will play it straight. He opens thus:
"Critics of the war in Iraq call it a diversion from the broader war against terrorism. But as President Bush emphasized in his 'SOTU' address, this view is 180 degrees off. *** A defeat there would allow al-Queda and other hostile forces to establish a dangerous base in the heart of the Arab world." There are a whole bunch of other words re-stating this premise.
There are essentially 2 forces of nasties in Iraq, al-Queda and assorted Sunni murderers and Shiite militia murderers, the Kurds just want to get on with life and business. Let's deal with nasty Shiites, they want to kill Sunnis and for Americans to get out, otherwise they don't much care about America. The Shiites are the majority ethnic group. The Sunnis used to be the big dogs, now they're not, so they don't like Americans. Then there is al-Queda and its associates, they are Sunni, they hate America and want to hurt us, they are some Iraqis and a lot of foreigners.
Now, do some simple math, the Kurds want to get on with life, they don't want to play the terrorist game and pretty much like America. The Shiites don't like Sunnis who are the minority and especially don't like al-Queda - et al who are a minority of Sunnis. So guess what? al-Queda is not going to win in Iraq no matter what. The Shiites are going to kill them, the Kurds might help with that, depending on how much they screw with their agenda. Iranian Hammas only gains in oppressed Shia communities, that is not going to be Iraq. Iran may be theologically Shia, but Iran is also Persian and you have to be as stupid as BushCo to confuse Persians and Arabs, Iraq is Arab.
BushCo just cannot seem to get the idea that Arabs have long memories. They're still hot about the Crusades, well now since GeorgeII doesn't like to read maybe he's never heard that Persia has been an Empire more than once and was rude to Arabs every time. Last time around was the Ottoman Empire, the Arabs didn't much like that, either. Religion doesn't trump everything with that bunch, Jews should be evidence enough that they're racist bastards to the core, Persians ain't Arabs, Jews are closer to being Arabs.
So if you managed to get out of 4th grade (public school) you can add and subtract and you get - no al-Queda in Iraq if it's left to its own devices. You also don't get Hammas (who have never threatened the US).. You also don't get to own the oil. Neat, ain't it.
This guy Phillips has a bunch of titles and probably gets paid pretty well to write stuff this easy to debunk. But it's not about reaching those who think, it's about repeating the BushCo dogma for the true-believers.
Just so it's clear, the Herald is pretty darn balanced on its Op Ed page.
2 comments:
As I recall, for the first 3 years of this conflict, the world stood by dumbfounded as Sunni/Baathists kept killing Shiites who...did nothing. There was a lot of talk about how 3 decades under Saddam had crushed their will to resist. Personally, I took it as them believing the our promises that we'd take care of it.
After last year's bombing in Samarra the Shittes started hitting back, and the world condemned them for forming militias to protect themselves after 3 years of their government and ours failing to crush the mad bombers fighting to sustain the Sunni's former position as the "master race" of Iraq.
Damned if you do, damned if you don't. Our government's attitude toward the Shiites is exemplary of this whole blunder: we went out on our hunting trip without knowing what it was we wanted to shoot.
Falling around in the dark...
Post a Comment