Iraq, Land of the Eternal Civil War
Well, the slant on this story is a new one on me. Apparently, Iraq is about to slide into a new civil war because the Iraqi government is taking out after the Madhi Army.
So, it’s civil war when Sunni and Shia fight. Now, it’s also civil war when Shia and Shia fight.
And next year, it’ll be civil war when Kurdistan Kickers and the Shiite Suleimen battle for the Championship of the All-Sectarian Footy Cup. Then after that, they’ll be on the verge of civil war as the country falls into the grip of an East Coast/West Coast rapper battle. God alone knows the civil war that could result from a Coke/Pepsi confrontation. The potential for disaster never ends, does it?
Because the MSM has a narrative and darned if the real world is going to get in the way of that.
UPDATE: Via Major John, who is in a position to know exactly what he’s talking about.
Without going into too much detail – I am close to some of the ops ongoing… This is not a sleazy political move, this was brought on, in part, by the fed up residents of Basrah who want an end to the militia crap – kidnappings, violence, etc. Since the IA and the Coalition are pushing AQI further up North and out, the Iraqis figure it is better to confront the problem now, rather than wait for it to get worse.
The fight up North is the fight to run AQI out of Iraq. The fight down South is the fight to see which way Iraq will go once AQI is beaten. I rather like a direction where the elected government of the people is the one with the guns, and the police are on the street – not the Jaish al Mahdi goons.
Civil War? Hardly.
What is not often reported is that the Madhi Army operates thanks to the funding and support of Iran. The Iraqi Army isn’t fighting some ragtag ethnic militia. It’s fighting a proxy of the Mullahs. Back in the day when words mattered to both sides of the political spectrum, we called that a coup attempt.
Folks on the left might find some help in imagining that the Mahdi Army was paid and equipped by the CIA and was operating, say, in Central America. Same thing’s at work here. It was wrong to do it then and it’s wrong of Iran to do it now.
No related posts.
Category: Alliances and Allies, Fighting the Islamists
YOU FORGOT THE JEWS!
i thought we were fighting al queda…might as well come home.
You do know what the definition of civil war is…two or more armed factions fighting for their political and religious beliefs thru armed conflict within a country. Thus it is a civil war doesn't matter who is fighting it is a civil war! Learn to accept facts you ignoramus.
That is your definition of civil war, Madmatt and I refuse it.
Might as well, norm, bcause goodness knows there aren't any other Islamists in the world fighting for domination, right?
So I take it the American Civil War *wasn't* one, merely because both sides shared religious beliefs? That's an interesting definition…
"God alone knows the civil war that could result from a Coke/Pepsi confrontation."
Ha, ha. You are soooo funny. Did you laugh when Baghdad Bush looked under the furniture for the WMD? I bet you did, you and he are such cute little scamps.
So GOP Surrealists are imagining that there’s good news from Iraq concerning Cheney’s intestinal problems, er, the surge, and that they’ve undoubtedly hatched a scheme whereby they can free themselves from the evils of the Constitution, escaping so they can all sit back on their laurels and make slop buckets full of cash whilst falling into a heap of their own drool on some “coffeehouse” counter in Amsterdam before their pointy-pointy heads are whistled for a double dribble penalty as they hit the ground, or from their pseudo-religious objective point of view, as the ground rises to greet them. Copious amounts? Wee dram after wee gram? Dancing potatoes everywhere? And don’t forget: They put chemicals on the “stuff” there, too!
But it’s all hope and projection, based on a history of bad upbringing, ulterior motives of fellow siblings, poor stimulus retention due to gazing at penguin attired “lay” persons for eight of the most important formative years, abandonment in a town named after the Mexican word for a pass in the hills, and several ill-advised experiments with herbal extracts and tinctures of pineal glands obtained through illegitimate means trampling beyond the bounds of good taste and legality.
Hey! Don’t stop me, I’m rolling with this! Wherever known reality stops for conservatives, where they touch the unknown (in the biblical sense), there they project an archetypal image, simultaneously puzzling over why their hands smell like rubber. Wait a second, how about Animus, considered to be that natural and primitive part of the mind's activity and processes remaining after dispensing with a "second self" created by Republican candidate or devil and through whom the narrative is related, which is the mask displayed in interactions with others and which has been shaped by socialization and indifferent promiscuity in local airport restrooms. Freud often described the functioning of psychosexual energies in mechanical terms, influenced perhaps by the dominance of the steam engine at the end of the 19th century, entering a tunnel of course. In this manner, he also tended to think of the libido as a producer of energies, and a main cause of future troubles for persons falling out of favor with “lay” “members” of the clergy or nuns. Hell, maybe I’m just blowing smoke up my frame of reference, or as Joey Rico used to say, a tendency of an organism to revert to instinctive behaviors that can interfere with the conditioned response.
When is a civil war not a civil war – when you're a republican unable to admit you're wrong. Please tell the class how well the Surge worked – I love a good fairy tale!
Jimmie:
What definition of civil war are you using? Do the opposing armies have to be of different religious sects? I guess in that case, the US civil war was mislabeled since the opposing armies were both predominantly white christians.
This argument is one of the most absurd things I've read in a while. What purpose does it really serve to pretend that a horrible situation that is on the verge of spiraling further down into chaos is analogous to the "coke/pepsi confrontation". I bet all those people, Iraqi and American, that are being maimed, killed, and displaced by this latest turn of events would really get a chuckle out of this post. You should send it to the USO so they can use it in their next show. All those troops you support should love it!
No matter what you call it, is this something that American soldiers should be dying and disabled for? What are we trying to achieve with 4,000 lost lives and $2 trillion. Would yow want your son/daughter/wife/husband to die for this?
c'mon jeff…it's george bush who shoulders the biggest burden in this occupation and troop escalation. those killed and maimed all volunteered. well, except for the 100,000 or so innocent iraqis.
Well, it looks like the liberal tyrant-lovers have arrived. Have fun in my little sandbox here, guys.
jimmie,
Keep guessing. You're bound to correct about something sooner or later. (or maybe not).
in all seriousness…the events of the past few days illustrates what a f'ed position bush has gotten us into. clearly the tiny security gains achieved by our 20% troop escalation has not helped political reconciliation one little bit…despite all the cheerleading by the extreme right. and since the british have been pulling out of the south and not escalating by 20%, the danger of pulling out in a haphazard manner is clear. what has always cracked me up is that the very ones who support the policies that got us into this lose lose situation think they are the only ones who know how to handle it. if i f'ed up a project at work this badly i would resign and find another line of work. but not these fools. more of the same…more of the same…it's the only answer.
At least this blog admits implicitly that the situation in Iraq is far more complicated than simply us against "Al Qeda in Iraq." Patreaus himself has noted that there are nearly 30 some odd factions fighting one another and us — 2% of which are calling themselves "Al Queda." The bigger picture is that there is no military solution to this civil war, or "mess," as Patreaus keeps saying. The "surge" was doomed from the start because no one on earth has enough troops to force a reconciliation among the disparate tribes of this makeshift British construction of a country. The only thing the groups seemed to be agreed upon is that America must leave. They don't want us there, we can't help them there, we're dying there, — it's time to fight Osama bin Laden in Pakistan. This battle with terrorism to too important to leave to the oil brokers in the WHite House.
Jimmy, Here's a dollar, go buy yourself a clue (or a used dictionary)!
Civil War: (noun) A war between political factions or regions within the same country.
The latest conflict between the Madhi Army and the Iraqi Forces seems to fit the dictionary's definition. Funny to see you try to make an argument based on nothing more than your own stupidity and ignorance. I guess you can make up your own silly little rules as long as you are in your sandbox. Have fun playing with yourself!
Well, the update has managed to "inform" us of one important thing: the pathetic talking point that the Madhi Army is receiving all this help from Iran. What you fail to mention, either because you are intentionally misleading us or because you are woefully underinformed on the subject, is that the Supreme Council, including Maliki and the Badr Brigade is extensively more tied to Iran than the Madhi Army. Nice try, though. I hope you are proud of yourself for helping out the insane asylum currently running our foreign policy in their attempt to start another illegal war.
"Well, it looks like the liberal tyrant-lovers have arrived. Have fun in my little sandbox here, guys."
Tyrant lovers?
jimmy, don't fret, i agree with you 100%. there is nothing civil about the situation in iraq.
Jimmy: it's also important to learn that Al Sadr not only has support of 65% of the Iraqis (Malaki only 33%), that Malaki is supported by Iran, that the Iraqis want nationalization of the oil as does Sadr, that the vast majority of the country wants America out, a soft partition of the nation, that Sadr has kept the peace through cease-fire that PREDATES the surge as does the resulting downturn in violence from that cease fire, that Sadr has called for CIVIL disobedience because Malaki's police forces have continued to squeeze the Mahdi army — the most popular faction in Iraq, the will of the people there. Your complaints about the term "civil war" are sooooo 2003.
Now as I remember it that Vietnam thing warn't no Civil War neither. Sucked a whole bunch 'tho.
"What is not often reported is that the Madhi Army operates thanks to the funding and support of Iran."
Actually it's reported all the time. What's not reported all the time is that our ISCI allies are also supported by Iran. In fact, it's original incarnation, SCIRI, was established by Iran during the conflict with Iraq. The Mahdi army at least originally existed as in independent operation. SCIRI (now ISCI), has always been Iran's pawn. And now they control the Iraqi army. Now why would Iran back both sides in this conflict? Easy, it guarantees that they will have influence with whoever wins. It's a fairly common strategy. When I was in Vietnam (recently, not during the war), I met several families that had sent one son to fight for the North and one to fight for the South. No matter who won, they'd have a son on the winning side who could help them out when it was all over.
As for your definition of "civil war," the conflict is more a civil war than our own Civil War. Remember, in our Civil War, there were actually two separate countries involved (just like in Vietnam). In Iraq, we have multiple factions trying to control the same country. Obviously, many of these factions receive foreign help, but I can't think of a single civil war where that hasn't been the case.
Actually, it's the liberal tyrant haters who are here.
We're against tyrants like George Bush; we're against tyrants like the rulers of Saudi Arabia, Bush's great friends (perhaps you've forgotten that the 9/11 attacks were funded by and operated by Saudi Arabians).
So which "tyrant" did we support? (Hint: it wasn't Saddam, we hated that Republican-installed, Republican-supported tyrant as much as any of them.)
IRAQ just five years old and OUR BEST WAR EVER !!!
Good article for those who actually care.
http://astuteblogger.blogspot.com/2008/03/iraqi-t…
Wow, I link from Salon to read the latest right wing talking points on the uncivil war in Iraq and I find the author being slapped around by a gang of dirty hippies. Time to turn in your official Dubya "We're A Surgin'" Franklin Mint plate.
StaggerLee – If you consider having the comment field pretty much to yourself because I don't feel like hacking my way through the tired talking points, then sure, you're the champion, bug guy.
Don't bruise your knees or chap your lips congratulating each other, k?