Withdrawing from Iraq: A Disaster Waiting to Happen?

How stupid can one be ?

Explain to me how Zarqawi and his Sunni allies can triumph over Shites and Kurds when USA and Iran decide to back those groups

Mujtaba writes ``Ahmadi Nejad to the Presidency, a leader probably more radical than Khomenei himself. His recent statement calling for Israel to be ``wiped off the map,`` show that he meant what he said in his campaign talk``

Mujtaba, its one thing to say and its another thing to do. Nijad has only talked about wiping out Israel. If your write-up were to hold true, Iraq (as we knew it) is ACTUALLY in the process of being wiped out by the zionist-evangelist axis.

So perhaps instead of lecturing on how a country which destroyed Iraq should stay in Iraq to save it, you should be talking about how it should beat the retreat - for both Iraqi and the american`s mothers` good who are paying the ultimate price for each day of this adventure - rather than `intellectuals` like you!

The U.S. invasion of Iraq was illegal according to the UN Charter and International law. It has killed over 100,000 civilians according to research published in the Lancet and conducted by Johns Hopkins University, Columbia University and the Al-Mustansiriya University in Baghdad (reported by CNN, 10/24/`04). Also the probability that an Iraqi is going to get killed by violence went up 5800% after the U.S. invasion compared to before under Saddam, according to the same research. Note that saving people from being ``mass graved`` is one of the reasons that is still repeated by the Bush Administration to justify the invasion of Iraq, even though the probability that a person will get killed violently in Iraq is actually higher today than it was under Saddam. The Iraq war had nothing to do with 9/11, the cronies that now form part of the Bush top ranks had decided upon invading Iraq in 1998 and were writing Clinton, using the same excuses see their letter on their own website at http://newamericancentury.org/iraqclintonletter.htm

Military conflict as conducted by the U.S. is closely linked to its political and economic institutions, it is justified by them for home consumption using moral slogans like freedom and democracy, see http://war.asadi.org

Apparently my PREVIOUS attempt was not able to stir up much emotion in most chowkies.

Therefore.. here is the appeal again..

I know of this young man Hafeez. He is a bonafide victim whose family is out on the road. Please send him the little you can ...

I have already checked the following (Considering chowkie sensibilities):

1- He has NO political affiliation

2- He has NO Jehadi/Islamist affiliation

3- He is a hardworking law-abiding citizen of the AJK who is working in Lahore as a guard/chowkidar + office boy for lowly pay.

4- He lost some of his family and ALL of his worldly belonging.


PLEASE - please -please help.

You know where to contact me.

Re: # 3
masadi...
You`ve stated the plain truth. And truth is generally simple and easy to understand, just as you`ve presented it.
Yes, chaos almost certainly will follow a U.S. pullout, but what is going on now? There is no evidence that the U.S. presence has reduced the chaos - in fact terrorist activity (unknown before the illegal U.S. invasion) and the likehood of civil war appear to increase with each day that the U.S. remains. Isn`t it abundantly clear that only Iraqis can solve Iraq`s problems? It won`t be pretty, and the result won`t please the U.S., but the sooner the U.S. leaves the sooner the Iraqis can begin the difficult process of recovery.

I think it is time to withdraw from Iraq and go and teach Syrians a lesson now, then make our way to Iran and other morons in the region. Oh I would love to see these Arab scumbags kiss sand.

Re: # 6

Iranians aren`t Arab, stupid.

I completely agree with you, America should not leave Iraq at this time.

It`s a damned if you do, and damned if you don`t situation, for the USA, in Iraq. If they stay, things will remain bad. And if they leave, things could become even worse. Quite a bit like what happened in Afghanistan, when the Soviets invaded..........

From a realpolitik view, if the USA still wants to achieve its original objectives of controlling oil, and establishing a furthur foothold in the area, in my opinion, they only have one option. It will be disastrous for Iraq, but beneficial for the USA:

They need to let the country federate or divide into three parts. The Shia part in the South will be in control of Iran, through Islamic Iraqi party. Sistani, himself, being an Irani Ayatollah. The Sunni part in the middle will remain volatile and filled with violence. Americans will remain hated in both these parts........

However, the northern Kurdish part is where Americans have popularity. Iraqi Kurdistan is basically a semi-country of its own. And is quite peaceful. It has its own flag and its own Peshmarga army. The USA could set base here. Give the Kurds ownership of some of the oil fields on the Sunni border territory. And let the Kurds, unofficially, separate. The USA will, thus, get a foothold in the Middle East, and will get the oil it wanted.........

Turkey has threatened to invade any independent Iraqi Kurdistan. Since Turkey has an independent Kurdish movement in its area, which it has brutally suppressed. It does not want any independent Kurdish country, anywhere. However, the new Turkish govt. has approached its Kurds. And the USA could threaten Turkey with a boycot of its support in EU membership, if Turkey threatened Iraqi Kurdistan..........

My guess this is the strategy the USA will follow now in the area. I read that Israel already has its rep in Iraqi Kurdistan. The USA could eventually vacate Iraq and keep forces only in Kurdistan. And work out a deal for oil with a provincial Kurdish govt, through US and British oil companies, which are still waiting anxiously to sign lucrative oil deals in Iraq............The USA could also get the Kurds to recognize Israel........I think the Kurds maybe the only population in the Middle East, which are relatively pro-USA............

In the process, Iraq will be, for all practical purposes, three countries. With a civil war of sorts going on inside...............The biggest beneficiaries of this whole war will be Kurds and Iranis.............The USA has, basically, lost the Iraq War. Now it is trying to save the Iraqi peace.

My guess is Sunni Iraq will be the next long-term base and recruiting ground for Al-Qaeda, and will like much of Afghanistan remain unstable for the foreseeable future...............And Irani influence in the Middle East will grow significantly...............

Re: # 7


>>Iranians aren`t Arab, stupid.<<<


Burpinder, Same thing.. They are all the same. When George Bush gets into Ahmadinjad’s and Asad’s behinds, he is not going to separate Arabs from Iranians or vice-versa. As far as we Americans are concerned, all enemies of Israel and United States are bloody Arabs. They all have the same Allah and Hazballa. If you have an issue with that, that is your problem. Nothing can be done about that. Some while ago Texans whacked a Sikh mistaking him as an Arab. Good on them.


Re: # 9
........I think the Kurds maybe the only population in the Middle East, which are relatively pro-USA............

Romair Sahib… Israel is not in Europe contrary to popular beliefs. USA didn’t go there to get a foothold for the oil. They now get less than a ¼ of their oil from that region, and it is going to become even less within the next decade. USA went there to help liberate people of that region that have lived under oppression and misery for most of their lives (it also went there becuse some Wahabi mofos didnt know how to fly planes properly and stop on red light). I don’t know if anyone is counting or not, to date, over 200 mass graves have been discovered in Iraq. The Wahabi inspired Sunni mofos are now shytting in their pants but were dead silent when Shais and Kurds were being butchered by their daddy Saddam. The worst mistake that the US did was to go and liberate Kuwait. They should have let these Arbi Sunni Wahabi morons kill one another.

burpinder #7

`` Iranians aren`t Arab, stupid. ``

They do stupid things from time to time

Dear Malik,

You will note that I refrained from any approval of moving into Iraq when the US did. That was, obviously, a mistake made because of being hateful, emotional and un-thorough. However, those are the same emotions that are leading us towards the mistake of moving out now. The biggest price being paid for the occupation is not by the American forces, rather the Iraqi people. A response driven by emotions will only cause further chaos.

Regarding your comment about Nejad stating ``its one thing to say and its another thing to do,`` what do you think his policy would be if he was the sole superpower... just say and not do? I doubt it.

Dear Kulharee,

The magnitude of anger in your postings are scary. Destroying and getting destroyed is a result that is not just a lose-lose for everyone, it also makes our lives while we`re alive that much more miserable and uncertain.

Re: # 12

Dear Muj23, You haven`t seen me get angry yet. This is just a little appetizer. I am only warming up. Give me a little time.

The U.S. went to ``liberate`` the Iraqis they say, ``liberate`` them from the face of the earth, killing over 100,000 and destroying the infrastructure of the entire country- that used to be the most developed out of all Arab countries in the 1970s before Reagan lured his ``man in Baghdad`` to start a bloody war with Iran that killed over a million- Of course, and then the U.S. tried to ``liberate`` both those countries by supplying both with weapons once the dynamic of the war had taken hold.

How about the U.S try to liberate its own oppressed folk, over 36 million in the U.S. suffer from chronic hunger, over 46 million in the U.S. have no health insurance or protection from catastrophic illness- Life expectancy for oppressed minority groups in several localities in the U.S. are worse off than that in Bangladesh, according to the New England Journal of Medicine- How come the U.S. didnt go and ``liberate`` the Tutsi when the Hutu in Rwanda slaughtered over 800,000 of them, or try to liberate the Iraqis when Rumsfeld went to shake Saddam`s hand shortly after he had used chemical weapons? This ``liberation`` business is a big farce. The Iraq adventure has backfired for the Bush administration, they still want a foothold in an oil rich region, and protection of Israel is a major concern for them as well. They don`t even hid these facts, they stated them openly in their letter written to Clinton in 1998- http://newamericancentury.org/iraqclintonletter.htm

For details on the illegality of the U.S. invasion and occupation (not liberation) of Iraq see http://iraq.rationalreality.com

# 14

Ladies and gentlemen, that was OBL reporting live from Rwanda where he is helping the oppressed as he did in Bosnia and Kabool. Last week one of his compatriots blew up a wedding party and sent some 50-60 Jordanians to hell, but the lady bomber is still available for future liberations without lubrication.

This is one funny logic,,, we killed a million people because you supplied us weapons.

No one stopped anyone from going and helping the Tutsi. Did someone stop someone?

I think all the anti-Americans should go and help the Tutsi to make themselves useful.

masadi #14

`` The U.S. went to ``liberate`` the Iraqis they say, ``liberate`` them from the face of the earth, killing over 100,000 and destroying the infrastructure of the entire country- that used to be the most developed out of all Arab countries in the 1970s before Reagan lured his ``man in Baghdad`` to start a bloody war with Iran that killed over a million- Of course, and then the U.S. tried to ``liberate`` both those countries by supplying both with weapons once the dynamic of the war had taken hold. ``

How can Reagan lure Saddam to start the war with Iran ? Even if Reagan could lure Saddam where does Saddam`s brain goes ? He is not dumb. He survived for 25 years before being deposed by US invasion. Iraq was a Soviet client state with Soviet equipped military. How does US have influence in such a country ?

Since the fall of the Shah the only weapons US sold Iran was the $50-100 million in weapons for the Iran-Contra deal.