Whatever happened to that big civil war in Iraq everyone was talking about?

[NNN0LHI]

Shit if Iraqis started killing Iraqis our military wouldn't stop them. They would encourage them. And call in the news media to videotape it.

Who is kidding who here?

Remember how our news media just about had an orgasm every time some idiot would report some kind of "popular uprising" happening after the initial invasion? Well that was wishful thinking.

Anyone who thinks the Iraqi resistance could operate with the presence of most powerful military in the world on the ground during a civil war is a fool. And I have heard some Democratic presidential candidates repeat this civil war crap. They are fools too.

There is no civil war. You have Iraqis killing other Iraqis who may be collaborating with the occupiers for sure. But that is not a civil war.

Don

[spanone]

1. are we still in Iraq?

:sarcasm:

[TwilightGardener]

2. I'm not getting you--one of the reasons most Dem (and some Repub) officials

are afraid for our military to leave Iraq is because the Iraqi factions are going to try to wipe each other out. There may be genocide, and the Sunnis are especially at risk, because of their minority status and previous power under Saddam. Foreign fighters may come in to help them, and may stoke a wider regional war between Sunnis and Shia. There's battles going on in the North between Turks, Kurds, and Iran. The militias are in control in places where our militiary presence is light or nonexistent--NOT the Iraqi army or police (look at what's happening to the Brits in Basra). And, we've armed some Sunni militias to fight Al Qaeda, but who's to say they're not going to end up fighting the Shia after we leave? Iraqis killing each other, whether for power or for retribution, IS a civil war. It's a very dangerous situation.

[NNN0LHI]

3. I am under no illusions that after we leave peace will immediately break out

There will be a power vacuum that someone will fill. There will be bloodshed unfortunately. And I know it is easy for me to say this from safely behind my keyboard.

But what can we do? I mean really. What can we do?

Stay there for another 4 or 5 years unsuccessfully trying to impose our will on millions of people who have no interest in allowing a foreign army to impose its will on them. And then leave when we realize we cannot complete the mission? Whatever the mission is?

Lets look at this realistically.

We need to pull out the troops and send in the diplomats to try and clean this mess up. Because that is what its going to take when all is said and done.

Don

[benddem]

4. You need to get some education

Sunnis are killing Shiites and vice versa and now there are different sects of Shiites killing each other.
This is a civil war. I don't know what your definition of civil war is but it fits mine.
Al Queda comprises a small amount of the damage being inflicted.
Don't you hear about mosques being blown up, snipers shooting during religious pilgrimages.

[NNN0LHI]

5. Don't make no difference what you and I believe. Its what the Iraqis believe that counts

http://www.informationclearinghouse.info/article18140.htm

The Pentagon’s latest Big Lie

By Mike Whitney

08/08/07 "ICH" -- -- The quality of Pentagon-propaganda is really deteriorating.

The War Dept.’s latest fraud appeared in this week’s newspapers under the ominous-sounding headline:

“US Kills Mastermind of Iraq Shrine”

The article is similar to hundreds of other stories we’ve seen in the passed few years boasting of the murder of an “alleged” terrorist kingpin whose evil deeds have prevented democracy from flourishing in Iraq.

Oh, please.

CNN: “Coalition troops killed the al Qaeda terrorist who masterminded the February 2006 attack on Samarra's al-Askariya mosque and set off continuing violence and reprisal killings between Sunnis and Shiites, the U.S. military said Sunday.” Snip “Haitham Sabah al-Baderi, the al Qaeda emir of greater Samarra, was killed Thursday east of Samarra, said Rear Adm. Mark Fox during a news conference”. snip "Eliminating al-Baderi is another step in breaking the cycle of violence instigated by the attack on the holy shrine in Samarra," Fox said. "We will continue to hunt down the brutal terrorists who are intent on creating a Taliban-like state in Iraq." (CNN)

In truth, CNN has no idea who al-Baderi really was or whether he belonged to Al Qaida or not. They just jot down whatever the Pentagon spokesman tells them and then pass it off later as news. It’s the same with the rest of the media. They don’t care. They build their stories on statements from government officials and don’t bother looking for evidence. All they know is that al-Baderi is another unlucky victim in Bush’s war on terror who has been subsumed into the Pentagon’s propaganda war against the American people. That’s it.

So why bother publishing a crazy story like this? It doesn’t change public opinion on the war or convince people that al Qaida is the main enemy in Iraq. So what good is it? It's just an attempt to show progress in a losing cause by holding up another enemy scalp.

But, that’s not public relations--- it’s barbarism. Don’t the Pentagon big-wigs know that? They think the American people relish the idea of assassinating enemy “suspects” without any proof of wrongdoing or judicial oversight. But they’re wrong. People are sickened by it. Can’t they see that?

What is gained by fabricating another goofy story before the dust has even settled on the Tillman fiasco? Why not let the public fully-digest the last “Big Lie” before moving on to the next one?

Remember Tillman---the outspoken NFL star who figured out the war was a fake and started blasting the Bush administration’s lies?

Well, he took three bullets to the head---“gangland style”---in what the Pentagon dubbed “friendly fire”.

What a joke. Is the Pentagon trying to destroy what little credibility it has left?

Apparently.

THIS WEEK’S BIG LIE

I’ve done a lot of research on both bombings of the Golden Dome Mosque and I can tell you that THE MILITARY HAS NEVER CONDUCTED AN INVESTIGATION OF WHAT REALLY HAPPENED. Never. That means the CNN headline is just more empty blather. The few eyewitness accounts that appeared in Iraqi blogs and web sites strongly suggest that US Intelligence agencies and Iraqi troops from the Interior Ministry may have been involved. The theories connecting Al Qaida to the incident are pure speculation with no factual basis.

And yet, here’s what Bush said in a speech just days after the first bombing:

“Al Qaida terrorists and Sunni insurgents… blew up one of the holiest shrines in Shia Islam—the Golden Mosque of Samarra—in a calculated effort to provoke Iraq’s Shia population to retaliate. Their strategy worked. Radical Shia elements; some supported by Iran, formed death squads. And the result was a vicious cycle of sectarian violence that continues today.”

How does Bush know who it was? He never ordered an investigation and he doesn’t have a crystal ball. If there’s proof---show us! Otherwise we should assume that he is just trying to blame someone else for his part in turning Iraq into a charnel house.

Those aren’t Al Qaida’s B-1 Bombers dropping cluster bombs and Daisy Cutters on Iraqi cities. And, that isn’t al-Baderi kicking down doors and dragging off civilians to be tortured in some god-forsaken hell-hole. Those are Bush’s planes and Bush's troops! He’s the one who’s responsible.

Here’s an excerpt from an article I wrote just a few months ago after the last bombing in Samarra:

“Less than 4 hours after the explosion, the Bush public relations team cobbled together a statement that the bombing was the work of Sunni extremists or al Qaida terrorists. But, they’ve never produced a scintilla of evidence to support their claims. It may be that the administration simply saw the bombing as an opportunity to twist the facts to suit their own purposes.

After all, the incident has been a propaganda-bonanza for the Bush team. They’ve used it to support their theory that Iraq is “the central battle in the war on terror” and that “we must fight them there if we don’t want to fight them over here”. It’s been used as one of the main justifications for the occupation; implying that the US military is needed as a referee to keep the warring factions from killing each other. It’s all just nonsense that’s designed to advance the administration’s political agenda.

If there had been an investigation, it would have shown whether or not the perpetrators were experts by the placement of the explosives. They might have found bomb-residue which could have determined the composition of the material used. Forensics experts could have easily ascertained whether the explosives came from Iraqi munitions-dumps (as suggested) or from outside the country (like the USA, perhaps?)

The incident may well have been a “false flag” operation carried out by US intelligence agencies to provoke sectarian violence and, thus, reduce the number of attacks on American troops. (That is what the vast number of Sunnis and Shiites believe)

In any event, as soon as the mosque was destroyed the media swung into action focusing all of its attention on sectarian violence and the prospect of civil war. The media’s incessant “cheerleading” for civil war was suspicious, to say the least.

In the first 30 hours after the blast, more than 1,500 articles appeared on Google News providing the government version of events without deviation and without any corroborating evidence; just fluff that reiterated the Pentagon’s account verbatim and without challenge.

1500! Now that’s a well-oiled propaganda system!