This week we were treated to the NYT publishing a story indicating we are now 'winning' in Iraq by many many measures.
This week the Iraqi parliament, in which the Sunnis WITHDREW from the executive, went on vacation until September.
Remaining unresolved as these people flew, drove and ran off ... oil revenue sharing in a nation desparing of means to make a living, and blessed with either the 2nd or 3rd most oil in the ground ON THE PLANET.
Remaining unresolved, the desertion of non muslims out of realistic fear.
Remaining unresolved, the penetration of the police by shia death squads, perhaps backed by Maliki et al. and their protection of the murderous nationalized goons of Al Sadr
Being resolved - Mass murderers from outside Iraq being stepped on as a result of American lead efforts to get with Sunnis in Al Anbar.
OUT OF THE NEWS- Kurdistan in northern Iraq, largely quiescent? The south, shia, and not in the 'mix'.
Never the less, 'we' have 'won' there (Kurdistan), find a mostly quiet Shia south, which may or may not align with Iran, and the center remains a morass of violence unless held back by a 'surge' which goes back to American 'victory' being possible only with an Iraq FLAT ON ITS BACK.
It is my judgment that the present govt of Iraq has no interest in settling those issues which would create an Iraqi nation able to function in anything like a democratic sense as we think of it.
Secure lives, pursuit of individual goals with personal rights nearly supreme, and religious freedom, with power changes peacefully occurring at normal intervals, indicated by the changing needs of the Iraqi people as a whole, are most of the things I see as 'democracy'
It is my judgment that the govt of Iraq as presently constituted sees an advantage in maintaining the present chaos..WHY is beyond me since every single one of them has a picture of the spot that their necks join their shoulders on the wall of every salafist freak's home.
It is to the advantage of the people of the USA that Kurdistan, Central and Southern Iraq be three nations, and it is to the great advantage of the welfare of the majority of people of the nation known as Iraq (an invention of the Brits, for the benefit of themselves and the Hashemites)
Continue reading "I still think three Iraq's are the best answer" »
2 comments:
fascinating,you have a very good blog :)Awesome blog !!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!! Love it. Infadels, all over the world should check out your site. People say that Christians are violent because of the crusades, but when Mo founded his religion he invaded Medina, Jesus, Buda, and other religion founders were peaceful for the most part. Love to hear what you think about my strange newz blog if you get a chance. KEEP UP THE GOOD WORK:)
Newt has this to say:
We've been engaged in a phony war," said Gingrich. "The only people who have been taking this seriously are the combat military."
His remarks seemed to reflect, in part, the findings of a National Intelligence Estimate made public last month.
In the estimate, the U.S. intelligence community concluded that six years of U.S. efforts to degrade the al-Qaida terrorist group had left the organization constrained but still potent, having "protected or regenerated" the capability to attack the United States in ways that have left the country "in a heightened threat environment."
"We have to take this seriously," said Gingrich.
"We used to be a serious country. When we got attacked at Pearl Harbor, we took on Imperial Japan, Fascist Italy and Nazi Germany," he said, referring to World War II.
"We beat all three in less than four years. We're about to enter the seventh year of this phony war against ... [terrorist groups], and we're losing."
I believe the answer is "One Iraq", desolate and barely habitable. Give the Muzzies something to think about during the twenty or thirty years it will take to rebuild their despotic, America-hating, Jew-baiting sandbox.
Peace,
Michael
Post a Comment