I have divided the extremist/bad Shiites into a group that supports Iran and wants to kill the Sunnis, and the moderate/good Shiites into a group who are more moderate on these two counts. It appears, like so much of politics, that the reality on the ground in Iraq shows there are two groups of Shiites who are each half good/half bad on both these counts.

We've got the Sadr element which is good because it represents average Iraqis, but is bad because it wants to kill the Sunnis. Then we've got the Maliki government which is good because it doesn't want to kill the Sunnis, but is bad because it’s impotent toward Iran.

This is why I think America needs to incorporate the Mahdi (Sadr) with the Badr (Maliki) in a way that rids those from both who are impotent in the face of Iran and those who want to kill the Sunnis. After that incorporation keeping the peace is just a matter of arresting, or keeping a close eye on, those who want to kill the Sunnis or are complacent with Iran.

Charles Krauthammer, had an article today for National Review that shows how unformed this distinction is when it comes to the Shiites, but is just below the surface of any analysis concerning them.

OTOH it might be good that both the good/bad elements are divided evenly among the two militias, however the leaders of sides need to be likeminded and at least mentally weed out the undesirable elements under their commands.
 

Who are behind the adolescent Muqtada Sadr?


When Khomeini came to power an Air France airplane carried him from Paris to Tehran. In the first few days he tried to extend his authority over Iraq by exporting his ideology there. He then provided money and political support to groups loyal for him and openly called the Iraqi Shiite youths to topple the government there.
Saddam also killed Mohamad Baker Sadr the uncle of MS in 1980. He killed him and his sister by his gun after an open communication between MBS and Khomeini!

http://hammorabi.blogspot.com/2004/08/who-are-behind-adolescent-muqtada-sadr.html

This wrttien by one from Iraq.

Anony 11:02 PM
there are two groups of Shiites who are each half good/half bad on both these counts.

With due respect for your view but you are complity wrong in this, I will come back to tell more about this due to time avaliability.

I wissh if could tells me your source for your thoughts and on what bases you built this thouggts?

Truth
 

American Theory about the Iraqi Resistance

Michael Schwartz, Professor of Sociology at the State University of New York at Stony Brook,

Truth
 

An apology here is the link:
http://www.tomdispatch.com/post/2241/schwartz_on_why_the_military_is_failing_in_iraq
 

Ops again, I do not know why the link post not in full length!!
Any way this the article inTomdispatch.com, March 05, 2005

Schwartz on Why the Military Is Failing in Iraq
http://www.tomdispatch.com/post/2241/schwartz_on_why_the_military_is_failing_in_iraq
 

"With due respect for your view but you are complity wrong in this, I will come back to tell more about this due to time avaliability."

Thanks, can't wait.

I wissh if could tells me your source for your thoughts and on what bases you built this thouggts?"

I'll tell you more after you tell me what you think. I don't care if I'm wrong, since my theory is based upon a few black and white points of interest to me personally.
 

I'm sorry, Truth, but I couldn't disagree more with the scattered categories the rev. professor has used to label the insurgents on the Sunni side of the equation.

We all know there are some Al-Queada people, and some Sunni people from Syria possibly aiding any Sunni insurgency that exists. However, as the professor made clear, the ability for foreign fighters to launch attacks means that the local population must first shelter them. For the local population to shelter them, its goals must be coterminous to theirs. Therefore, if we don't wan t foreign mercenaries fighting on the side of the Sunnis, then we have to allay the cause of Sunni angst/fear. Ergo, why consider all of the disparate elements of the Sunni insurgency as anything but a totality of Sunni political will or ill-will for us? It makes no sense to dwell on those.

Furthermore, I was writing about the political dynamics of the Shiites, a subject not broached at all by the article you cited.

Here is a passage from the article to which you linked:

"The Americans, in fact, have neither of these resources. Anti-guerrilla intelligence, after all, requires the cooperation of the local population, which, at least in the Sunni-dominated areas of Iraq, the U.S. has definitively alienated, largely through its use of blunt-edged conventional army attacks on communities that harbor guerrillas. And it cannot station enough troops in key locations because too small an occupation force is spread far too thinly over contested parts of the country. Estimates for the size of an army needed to pacify Iraq range upward from General Eric Shinseki's prewar call for "several hundred thousand" troops."

This is the same old buzz-saw we-need-more-troops solution to the Iraqi mess, which may be true, or it may not be. But what I wrote about was something about a political solution for the Shiites, not the Sunnis.

As far as the Sunnis go, I think that their insurgency is because they're afraid of Sunni extremists trying to exterminate them. If we can alleviate this particular fear of theirs, and there's no reason why we shouldn't be able to do that, then I think they'll make sure any the rogue elements taking shelter within their cities are arrested and we can provide resources for that.

The reasons I think the things I do is after having looked at all the available information I can find in the public prints. This is an imperfect source of information, but I'm an imperfect sort of person with not much responsibility for what goes on in Iraq over and above being a curious American civilian and voter - who did not vote for this nonsense, by the way.

-wgoconnell
 

لقد برهن العراقيون في مناسبات عديدة انهم غير ميالين الى تعريف انفسهم على اساس الانتماء الطائفي، او في الاقل اعطاء هذا الانتماء اولوية على الوطن، ومثل هذا الموقف يصلح اساسا جيدا للبناء عليه عبر مبادرات سياسية واجتماعية وثقافية لا يحكمها التخندق الحاد والشكوك المتبادلة، وبالطبع عبر رؤية سياسية مختلفة لآليات توزيع السلطة تستند إلى عناصر الكفاءة والوطنية لا على الانتماء المذهبي، وإلا سيكون من المعيب ان يظل الشعب متقدماً على طبقته السياسية في رفضه للاصطراع الطائفي.
http://www.asharqalawsat.com/leader.asp?section=3&article=435204&issue=10505

Truth
 

Well Truth, as that passage suggests, most Iraqis will define themselves by sectarian lines before doing so as nationalist Iraqis and that's a step in the right direction as far as I'm concerned. However, in the end, the only way for Iraq to be an independent country is for it to have nationalist sentiment, and that means that each sect will slowly need to consider the interests of the national government before anything else. This is the only way for true power and stability. Of course, after that the country of Iraq will need to put the interests of the entire world before itself.

This isn't a secret, and it's really the only successful pattern for development that any country ever has. You have local interests that have to be taken care of, then you put the country before local interests and the world before country.

Now there's nothing wrong with good old nationalism, and in Iraq's case it's something to work forward to. But honestly, there's a clear demarcation of evolution for countries and they either follow it or they get swallowed by other countries.

I'm not saying the United States is
very good internationally, but we live in a world where few countries are. However, nationalist sentiment is of the utmost importance for a country, it really is.
 

Here is that simplified and in the best Arabic I can muster.

كما ان مرور توحي معظم العراقيين انفسهم سوف تحدد الخطوط الطاءفيه قبل ان افعل ذلك القوميين ، وهذا يشكل خطوة في الاتجاه الصحيح. ولكن ، في نهاية المطاف ، السبيل الوحيد ليكون العراق بلد مستقل هو أن الشعور الوطني قد طرح قبل الطاءفيه ، وهذا يعني ان كل طائفة ببطء ضرورة النظر للمصالح الوطنية موقف الحكومة اولا. هذا هو الطريق الوحيد الصحيح للقوة والاستقرار لجميع الاطراف المعنية. بعد هذا ، بلد العراق سيحتاج الى وضع مصالح العالم باسره امام نفسه.

فليس سرا ان النمط الوحيد الناجح للتنمية اى بلد في اي وقت مضى هو وضع مصلحة الوطن قبل المصالح المحلية والعالمية قبل البلاد. فهذا هو السبيل الوحيد لكي تصبح قوية.

هناك شيء خطأ العز القوميه ، وفي حالة العراق ، والقوميه امر العمل إلى الأمام. ولكن هناك ترسيم واضح لتطور البلدان واما متابعته او يحصلون على البلع بلدان اخرى.

الا ان الولايات المتحدة
جيد جدا دوليا ، لكننا نعيش في عالم حيث هناك عدد قليل من البلدان. بيد ان الشعور الوطني هو من الاهميه القصوى لاستقرار أي بلد ، وإذا كان هناك الشعور الوطني لا يعني ذلك ان الناس لا يريدون ان يكون البلد مستقرا ، واذا كان الناس لا يريدون ان يكون البلد مستقرا وهذا يعني انهم يعملون لبلد آخر ، وهي سيئة جدا جدا..
 

Anonymous
First you asked about me, I an Iraqi who love his country like any American loving his land, I served in two disastrous wars Iraq/Iran war which I believe and most Iraqi Iran was the cause to last for 8 years starting first days Khomeini set himself as a leader in Iran 1979 asking Iraqi to over through their leader and government which in any International accounts is an act of deliberate and unlawful and aggression in any scale you like.

Then the 2nd war Iraqi invasion of Kuwait.

I lived during inhuman sanction on Iraqis, wittinessed UN Food For Corruptions program.

So I believe this give me the right to correct views that been said about my loving home country and I trust you listening to me to reach to a full truth and all the truth about Iraq and Iraqi who are lost very thing from very basic right as humans and they suffered from 1980 till now for no reasons.

Anon, I come back to you to correct some views that not really on the ground in Iraq for generations but now its been appeared not because this is Iraq but some planting\ creates and fuel them to be appeared with people looks to out side are Iraqi and that what’s happen in Iraq now days.
Back to answer you.

I have divided the extremist/bad Shiites into a group that supports Iran and wants to kill the Sunnis, and the moderate/good Shiites into a group who are more moderate

Iraq society so colorful and mixed as I said in the past its looks like Mosaic, people living together and married together , our friends mixed, our workplace mixed and or classrooms colored all around Iraq.

The main thing you need to know about Iraq there were 38-40 cross marriages between Sunnis and Shiites in Iraq which I doubt to be the case in any other Iraq’s neighboring countries.

Here the point you made about “bad Shiites” and “good Shiites” what we knew in Iraq there is one Shiites but some who call themselves Shiites are some how not in love to the land of Iraq!! They are living between us but their hearts and minds in Iran? they take orders from Iran, So did you call them Iraqis?

I ask you if you get a group of people (who call themselves Christians) but they get orders from a country out of US, is this acceptable practice for them?
Do you or your country laws sympathies with them?
What’s you reactions, or US government if this group working to destabilized you politic system or even doing terrorist acts?

In any country even the developed and democratic ones like US or Australia if you take off the security forces and police what will happen?

Just as example, in recent flooded area in Australia (Victoria province) those people who left their homes due to the security forces not functioning two days later the home owners went back to find their homes/farms looted!!

So the crises in Iraq there is no factional security/military system and it is ineffective the Iraqi borders was opened for four years to all the thefts/ criminals/ killers they were invited to come and do whatever what they want without question for some like mercenaries they protected by Bremer’s law from any prosecutions and any law orders or court orders.


We've got the Sadr element which is good because it represents average Iraqis

This another untruthful statement. As most of Sader followers are from the lowest part of the Iraqi society, this includes very poor/unfaithful guys, let take sader city in Bagdad we can say like some of downtown New York gangs areas!!


but is bad because it wants to kill the Sunnis. Then we've got the Maliki government which is good because it doesn't want to kill the Sunnis, but is bad because it’s impotent toward Iran.

For start ADa’awa party created and financed by Iran for twenty years its midwifed by Iran so what you expected from this party or its members to be for Iraq?


Furthermore, I was writing about the political dynamics of the Shiites,

What’s that means? What the dynamics?

All we know Iran Shiites in Iraq like to create and enforce State in State scenario which is unaccepted by various governments in Iraq and its really critical issue here, these Mullah like Sistani now having as State inside State which in any masseur conflicting with sovereignty of Iraq state?
So do you call this “political dynamics”?


However, in the end, the only way for Iraq to be an independent country is for it to have nationalist sentiment,

Totally agree with this, but what if some sec. has different “local interests”? Now these guys supported and helped by US despite their behaviors telling they have no interests to the local land and citizens?
 

I agree with what you have said, but think you are overlooking a step toward Iraqi nationalization. You say:

"As most of Sadr followers are from the lowest part of the Iraqi society, this includes very poor/unfaithful guys, let take sadder city in Bagdad we can say like some of downtown New York gangs areas!!"

Ah, this is a problem in the United States that is fixable as well, but the problem is, is that we have not enough knowledgeable people about religion and society.

Because the Mahdi are from the lowest part of Iqaqi society the al-Dawa and especially al-Sistani along with al-Sadr must take a census of the population, divide the wheat from the chaff - the best and the brightest fighters - and recruit them for the national interest by some means. I do not think that this has happened because al-Sadr is surely a very potentially high quality person and yet he doesn't seem to see the urgency of Iraqi nationalization. If al-Sadr can be shown that nationalization is the only way to true stability for any person in Iraq, then much of the United States' work will be finished.

Then you say:

"All we know Iran Shiites in Iraq like to create and enforce State in State scenario which is unaccepted by various governments in Iraq and its really critical issue here, these Mullah like Sistani now having as State inside State which in any masseur conflicting with sovereignty of Iraq state?
So do you call this “political dynamics”?"

It is wrong for them to have a state inside the state, however, at this time, the only possible way to unite the greatest number of people at local areas is for the state-in-state because these people have many different interests regarding all the other sects which need to be resolved.

However, over time, it will be unacceptable to have the state within the state because it will leave Iraq too vulnerable to outside interests.

Then you say:

"but what if some sec. has different “local interests”? Now these guys supported and helped by US despite their behaviors telling they have no interests to the local land and citizens?"

The local land and citizens, after securing their own immediate safety, do not have interests above those of the Iraqi nation. It can be no other way. They need to give the first fruits of their labor and their children to the nation of Iraq, because that is what unites the greatest number of people and provides the greatest amount of strength and stability to all the people as a whole.

The united States has not acted perfectly in Iraq, and they need to change too.

Political dynamics menas the way different interests have inertia next to and against each other (onto each other)
 

And then I want to add re: al-Sadr, that even if he's not on board, al-Dawa needs to take a census of the Mahdi and separate the wheat from the chaff - keep the gold in the chest of the national government.

However, it is surprising to me that al-Sadr cannot see that national stability is the only way to keep Iraqi independent of all the other countries of the Mideast.
It makes me think less of his abilities and curious as to why he doesn't like the national government, or won't lead it himself.

There’s a passage of the Bible that reads:

"Sun, stand still over Gibeon,
and, moon, you also, over the vale of Aijalon.'
And the sun stood still, and the moon halted,
till the people had vengeance on their enemies."

Doesn't al-Sadr know, that revenge upon the Sunnis goes against time?
 

Anon,

we have not enough knowledgeable people about religion and society.

Same as we in Iraq or Islamic countries friend, as I said before Islamic rules or attitudes are heavy mixed with local and regional customs and cultures which as we speak or the media in western world reflecting Islam as Burka and all Wahabi behaviors from Saudis or OBL taken as a sample of Islam!! This nothing to do with Islam at all.

Imagine if we living in this world with some sick stupid and not enough knowledgeable people what disaster society we living in I don’t talking about women’s rights here that will be more disastrous and more sick nothing to do with real values of Islam and very open and clear massages of society which men and women should by respect as humans and the respect of others who ever their believes.

In regards to Sadar or other religious mullah it’s a step of politicize the religion “Islam” and use that for their befits.

As Vali Nasr, Professor of Political Science, University of San Diego (http://wacsf.vportal.net/) listing to his event specking about ” The Shia Revival: How Conflicts within Islam will Shape the Future he said Asistani made in 2005 or 2006 $3billions from these religious event in Iraqi Holy cites where many times Iraqi innocent killed and bombed for no reasons just because these stupid sick religious figures think how much their packet will get full of US$.

It is wrong for them to have a state inside the state,

That the straggle in Iraq between Iraq central governments and those few Mullah who linked to Iran, I quite opposing this as the example clear and still there in Lebanon we saw Hezbollah doing it for years till all political system in Lebanon which was regarded the more open and transparence in ME brought to chaos by this Iranian’s created party by his Iranians godfather Hussein Fadalallah then handed to Nassrallah.

So there is no hope dealing with these doggy mullah the only way thy should be out their in their Madrasa if they like, not interfering in the political system as we see in Iraqi they missing up all things comparing Iraq society before 2003 and after, what these mullah done to the Iraqi society there with their sick stupid agenda

Truth
 

Given that this war was started on the basis of lies (WMD, AQ connections) and the wingnuts have been yelling -- Iraq is a paradise for 4 year snow and have touted everything (election, Jafari's becoming PM, Jafari's leaving PM post, Al zarqawi's death etc.) as the TURNING POINT THAT WILL FIX anything .

can you blame some of us for being skeptical ..
 

this war was started on the basis of lies

Also add:

Fake Photos Helped Lead US to War in Iraq
By WALTER BRASCH
http://www.counterpunch.org/brasch09032007.html
 

Tuesday 18th September 2007
11.40.p.m.
Hello and Good evening,
Can you please talk in King's ENGLISH and stop-showing-off-your frightful YANKESE!?
Thanks awfully,
Marianna Jane Close (UK)
 

Great info, really helpful for those starting to build a link profile. Highly appreciate your efforts in sharing this article.
IT Services In Ahmedabad