The mosque attacks in Iraq: I am more convinced than ever are being

[smacky44]

carried out by US/coalition-backed mercernaries just to keep the strife between the sects going so that the Iraqis will not unite against their occupiers. I am convinced because of the attacks on Lebanon by Israel would be a unifying force for the Iraqis but as long as different sect mosques are being blown up and one side believe that the other side is responsible, the people won't take time to unite. It's a classic tactic of the US/UK/Israel to infiltrate groups in foreign countries and carry out false-flag operations to foment destablization and divisions.

[k_jerome]

1. is this being done to prevent the world...

from rising up against Israel?

[smacky44]

6. Well, what do you think?

[LoKnLoD]

2. What attacks in Iraq?

Haven't heard anything about them in two weeks...:sarcasm:

[Maat]

3. Funny you should say this ... Faiza said it in March.

Global Exchange Network brought several Iraqi moms over to the U.S., and I spoke with her at length after she came to speak at a luncheon. Faiza would never tell us whether she was Sunni, Shiite, or whatever. She said Iraqis had always been united as Iraqis, in her experience, until some time after the invasion.

Faiza's blog can be found at afamilyinbaghdad.blogspot.com .

[madrchsod]

10. i`ve read her son`s blog for months

he`s in the usa doing political work around the country...

[Maat]

11. Glad to hear it!

I hope that the whole family stays safe.

[shadowknows69]

4. I am inclined to agree with you

even if it means my head is wrapped in tin foil. It makes perfect sense if you believe in the PNAC agenda.

[smacky44]

5. It puzzles me why the Iraqi leaders don't see this or at least

use this to try to stop the sectarian fighting.

[madeline_con]

8. I doubt the Iraqi puppets discuss every thought that goes

through their head. Most of them are probably just trying to stay alive and keep their paycheck coming, courtesy of the American taxpayer. :puke:

[Octafish]

7. That would explain why the British soldiers killed the Iraqi cop...

...then sped away in a car loaded with high-explosives. Of course, they were dressed as Arab militiamen, er, insurgents.

Basra

I’ve been intensely interested in the recent happenings in Basra. Maybe you heard about it. Two SBS Royal Marines, dressed in civilian clothes, wearing Arab-looking beards, were stopped by an Iraqi policeman, alerted by locals who were alarmed about the suspicious car. No one seems to know much more, because these Marines were well-heeled, and smoked the Iraqi. More police arrived, and some more shots were apparently exchanged, and the Marines were arrested. The Iraqi police state their car was loaded with weapons and explosives. The Brits organized a rescue mission, crashed into the Iraqi jail with a “tank” (probably a Scimitar AFV) and broke them out. Various reports credit the Iraqis, police and civilians, with burning two of these AFVs. There were even photos of one of the vehicles in flames, with a crewman, engulfed in flames, escaping through the turret hatch. That was on Monday the 19th, and it took the Brits until Sunday the 25th to come up with the cover story that these two were part of a covert effort to surveill and intercept illegal arms shipments from Iran.

Uh huh.

That would certainly explain why there was ample reportage of automatic weapons and explosives in their vehicle, but no mention of communication equipment, right?

The story has changed over the days. Now the Brits claim these men were SAS operatives, and some fool mentioned a “classified” successor to “14 Intel” which was originally a SAS program to ambush IRA fighters on both sides of the Irish border. That story has now been “revised”.

SNIP...

So, we’re left with two British soldiers, operating in disguise, in a civilian car, with automatic weapons and explosives, but apparently no radios to report on those alleged weapons supplies coming out of Iran. They’re driving around Basra, making civilians nervous, and gun down an Iraqi policeman who stops them.

CONTINUED...

[Junkdrawer]

9. Phase II

NOTE: The following is just a guess based on many, many events that seem to suggest it as a possible BushCo strategy. It is extremely brutal and I hope I'm wrong.

Pretend that you have absolutely no morals whatsoever and that your goal is to capture and exploit the world’s largest underexploited oil reserves - Iraq. You don’t want to start the pumping while your Saudi business partners still can meet demand, so let’s say your time frame to start pumping is 5 to 10 years out. Your problems are:

1.) The population of the country is 65%+ Shia, many with links to Iran and many more decidedly Anti-American.
2.) Immediate installation of a Pro-American puppet regime would be opposed, not only by Iraqis, but also by most of the world, especially Iran, Russia and China.
3.) Oil fields and pipelines are easy sabotage targets for any well-manned insurgency.

So invading with a sufficient force to bring post-invasion stability brings a Shiite regime with a pro-Iranian tilt. Joy, just what you don’t want. So what do you do? Try this little three phase plan:

Phase I:
Invade with a force sufficient to overcome Saddam’s weakened defenses, but insufficient to create stability. Leave plenty of weapon caches lying about because you want an insurgency. Why? Because an insurgency provides cover for:
1.) The expulsion of the U.N.
2.) The expulsion of unfriendly media
3.) The building of permanent military bases
The insurgency also creates the core of a brutal, professional colonial army – something you’ll need for Phase III.

Phase II:
Instigate a civil war and then retreat to the bases you built in Phase I. You can, at this point, talk about an “orderly withdrawal” because you really just need a small core of provocateurs to keep the civil war raging. This is when the real killings occur – the pacification if you will. The idea is to reduce the population of anyone who will oppose your later occupation. The magnitude of the killings during this phase will be so severe that there will actually be cries for your return, both at home and within the international community. See Bosnia.

Phase III:
Remember those military bases and the brutal, professional colonial army you built during Phase I? Now is when you use them to bring about your actual goal: a puppet government propped up by a brutal military presence. You can refer anyone who complains at this point to the atrocities of Phase II and suggest that your forced stability is the lesser of two evils. Oh, by the way, you can pump the oil now.

Well, there you have it. As I said, I hope I’m wrong.



http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=show_topic&forum=364&topic_id=1503947