So much for Iraqi freedom and democracy....

[segovius]

now that it looks like Iraqis have exercised their democratic rights and voted in a Shi'i proto-theocratic administration (where are those results btw ?) the US is faced with no option but to fall back on its old tricks - arm militia groups when you don't get your own way through the ballot and fund an insurgency campaign that you can distance yourself from when it blows back - let's call it the 'Taleban syndrome':

To head off this threat of a Shi'ite clergy-driven religious movement, the US has, according to Asia Times Online investigations, resolved to arm small militias backed by US troops and entrenched in the population to "nip the evil in the bud".

Asia Times Online has learned that in a highly clandestine operation, the US has procured Pakistan-manufactured weapons, including rifles, rocket-propelled grenade launchers, ammunition, rockets and other light weaponry. Consignments have been loaded in bulk onto US military cargo aircraft at Chaklala airbase in the past few weeks. The aircraft arrived from and departed for Iraq.

The US-armed and supported militias in the south will comprise former members of the Ba'ath Party, which has already split into three factions, only one of which is pro-Saddam Hussein. They would be expected to receive assistance from pro-US interim Prime Minister Iyad Allawi's Iraqi National Accord.

Way to respect a people's democratic choice.

They never learn do they ? This will go horribly wrong - but then again, maybe that's the plan - chaos, the old divide and rule.

Shouldn't be surprising but let's just not call it freedom if we're going to oppose people's choices by funding guerillas to oppose those choices if we don't like them - maybe there's another F-word we could press into service ?

:no:

Asia Times (http://www.atimes.com/atimes/Middle_East/GB15Ak02.html)

[stupider...likeafox]

This clusterfuck has been going on for so long I'd forgotten to check up on Get Your War On (http://www.mnftiu.cc/mnftiu.cc/war43.html) regularly. Genius!

[e1618978]

I call BS on this article.

1) I don't see how this would serve the US
and 2) "Asia times" - look at the articles, every one bashes the US.

[pfflam]

I must say . . . that is outright absurd . . .. 'Asia Times'?!?! the goldarndest bestest arbiters-O-truth!!

Ifthis is true, which seems incredibly unlickely, then it would mean only one thing: that discord is the goal in orderr to maintain a US presence . . . .
Now I do believe that that is the long term goal of the US in the region, BUT, I think that they will utilize other means . ..

The simple fact that such a form of mediation -using Packistani arms and organizing militia etc- would demand such high visibility that it would reveal itself through more than merely 'Asia Times' is enough for me to call the article absurd anti-Americanism without other, real merit.

[e1618978]

Imagine how hard this would be to keep secret. If you were a US soldier, and you were asked to deliver arms to the sunni insurgents that were killing your buddies every day, don't you think that you would tell a reporter or something?

And if you told a reporter, it wouldn't be somebody from the "Asia times".

[segovius]

Well, there is no doubt the US is holding secret negotiations with ex-Baathists and Sunnis:

The secret meeting is taking place in the bowels of a facility in Baghdad, a cavernous, heavily guarded building in the U.S.-controlled green zone. The Iraqi negotiator, a middle-aged former member of Saddam Hussein's regime and the senior representative of the self-described nationalist insurgency, sits on one side of the table.

That's not Asia Times, it's Time Magazine (http://www.time.com/time/magazine/article/0,9171,1029805,00.html).

Question is - what are they talking about ? And would it have anything to do with a new common enemy - the Shi'i ?

Anyone who thinks it wouldn't come up as an issue in such discussions is being a trifle naive imo.

[Towel]

Originally posted by segovius
(where are those results btw ?)Can anyone answer this? I've seen the parliamentary results widely reported (180-75-40-20, or something like that) but nowhere have I seen official vote totals or turnout %. I'm certain they weren't widely reported (I do pay attention), but were they reported at all? Or even released? Or even known? But they must be known by now, right?

[e1618978]

Originally posted by segovius
Well, there is no doubt the US is holding secret negotiations with ex-Baathists and Sunnis:



That's not Asia Times, it's Time Magazine (http://www.time.com/time/magazine/article/0,9171,1029805,00.html).

Question is - what are they talking about ? And would it have anything to do with a new common enemy - the Shi'i ?

Anyone who thinks it wouldn't come up as an issue in such discussions is being a trifle naive imo.

The "times" and the "asia times" articles are not similar at all. Talking to the insurgents, trying to get them to give up force and work with the government is a lot different than shipping them arms to try and undermine the government.

Did you even read the time article?

[Gene Clean]

Originally posted by e1618978
The "times" and the "asia times" articles are not similar at all. Talking to the insurgents, trying to get them to give up force and work with the government is a lot different than shipping them arms to try and undermine the government.




Or so they say. How do you know what exactly they're doing?

[segovius]

Originally posted by e1618978
Did you even read the time article?

I believe it said that the US were in secret negotiations with Ba'athists.

That would seem to suggest that either I did indeed read it or that I am possessed of some hitherto unsuspected psychic faculty.

I raised the question of what the talks were in reality about rather than suggesting that Time claimed they were about the same thing as the AT article.

Clearly you are the one who is not assimilating information correctly. I know this is a pre-requisite for someone of your political disposition but if I might venture some advice, it would probably be better for all concerned if you were to refrain from judging others by your own, admittedly unique, standards.

[e1618978]

The two articles had entirely different tones. In one, the US was the evil empire trying to give arms to the baathists in order to overthrow the government. In the other, the US was holding secret negotiations in order to better integrate the Sunni's into the new democracy (i.e. exactly what they should be doing).

If they were not holding secret talks, you would be complaining that they were not talking.

[e1618978]

Originally posted by Gene Clean
Or so they say. How do you know what exactly they're doing?

How do you know that they arn't putting LSD into the water, I bet they are! And the moon mission was faked!

[Scott]

Leave it to segovius to fabricate a dark lining into a silver cloud. Maybe you should work for CBS?

[e1618978]

Originally posted by Scott
Leave it to segovius to fabricate a dark lining into a silver cloud. Maybe you should work for CBS?

Bush and company have plenty of flaws, but if you mix in a bunch of unverified conspiricy theories, it just serves to discredit all criticism (valid/invalid alike).

[SDW2001]

Originally posted by segovius
now that it looks like Iraqis have exercised their democratic rights and voted in a Shi'i proto-theocratic administration (where are those results btw ?) the US is faced with no option but to fall back on its old tricks - arm militia groups when you don't get your own way through the ballot and fund an insurgency campaign that you can distance yourself from when it blows back - let's call it the 'Taleban syndrome':



Way to respect a people's democratic choice.

They never learn do they ? This will go horribly wrong - but then again, maybe that's the plan - chaos, the old divide and rule.

Shouldn't be surprising but let's just not call it freedom if we're going to oppose people's choices by funding guerillas to oppose those choices if we don't like them - maybe there's another F-word we could press into service ?

:no:

Asia Times (http://www.atimes.com/atimes/Middle_East/GB15Ak02.html)

I think it's pretty clear by now that you will use anything to portray democracy in Iraq as a failure. This process is going to take a long time and there are going to be many setbacks. That doesn't mean it can't be done or won't happen.

The pessimistic attitude is representative of the majority of Demcocrats. In other words, they practically pray for America to fail in Iraq.

[segovius]

Originally posted by SDW2001
The pessimistic attitude is representative of the majority of Demcocrats. In other words, they practically pray for America to fail in Iraq.

Maybe that's the proof of the existence of God that many on these boards were asking for a while back then ?

[Mac on a Mac]

The Bush administration has entered into secret meetings with the Elbonians to overthrow the forming Iraqi government should that government get out of hand. It has been reported by knowledgeable sources in respected media outlets that this effort is being mediated by three American men referred to only as "Wally, Dilbert and Asok". “Asok” is reported to “look like an Arab”, but may actually be an Indian. These three men apparently have a long history of collaborating with the Elbonians on everything from bottled water ventures to nuclear technology. There has also been significant discussion of "mud", which is believed to be a code word for an abundant commodity in Elbonia. What are these Americans up to now?

http://www.gtwn.net/~matthew/images/dilbert/elbonians.gif

[benzene]

ROTFL!

[Frank777]

If things get out of hand, Canada will invade Elbonia. Our military is up to the task.

[segovius]

Originally posted by Frank777
If things get out of hand, Canada will invade Elbonia. Our military is up to the task.

That seal-clubbing division is an awesome military unit.....

[Scott]

Originally posted by segovius
That seal-clubbing division is an awesome military unit.....

Those were americans clubbing the seals. Canadians are perfect.

[Frank777]

We're not perfect, just extraordinarily good-looking.

[Protostar]

I agree with earlier posts that democracy in Iraq will take a very long time to secure. I dont understand why the Dems would pray for failure in Iraq because then that would mean that the Muslims and the rest of the world would hate us even more. It would also give fuel to the terrorists in their recruitment campaigns.

[Gene Clean]

Protostar, here's a clue: the "muslims" don't really give a crap how Iraq turns out to be. The "muslims" are in a much bigger number than Iraq + Iran, and they do not, in any way, think success/failure in Iraq is important to their lives.

Arabs, as in the entire populations describing themselves as Arab, make up for only about 18-20% of the Worlds muslims, and they are, as you may tell, just a minority. So, if someone in that part of the world does not think failure in Iraq is good, and that someone happens to be a Muslims, it DOES NOT mean that ALL muslims think/feel the same way. That's because, contrary to popular belief [and teachings] in the West, there are more than a billion muslims today in the world, and that is not a number that can be equated with Iraq + Iran and conspiracy theories from Rummie and the likes.