tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-8356601405469434111.post7810725081633082374..comments2024-01-01T19:49:13.788-08:00Comments on The Vigil: The Chatham Report is a Sadrist ScreedVigilantehttp://www.blogger.com/profile/07640246609540057997noreply@blogger.comBlogger12125tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-8356601405469434111.post-51168718407885900702007-06-02T14:44:00.000-07:002007-06-02T14:44:00.000-07:00McClatchy Newspapers is reporting that Lt. Gen. R...<a href="http://www.realcities.com/mld/krwashington/news/special_packages/iraq/17306275.htm" rel="nofollow" rel="nofollow">McClatchy Newspapers</a> is reporting that Lt. Gen. Raymond Odierno is seeing potential in U.S. military seeking direct talks with Shiite Muslim cleric Muqtada al-Sadr. <br><br>However, Salah al-Obaidi, a senior Sadr aide, acknowledged that the U.S. has approached the cleric's supporters multiple times about talks with Sadr. He said the requests had been rebuffed as they should be:<br><br>"This will be a betrayal for the country. Any cooperation with the occupier is forbidden." <br><br>Sadr's supporters have "no problem" if members of the U.S. Congress were to meet with Sadrists in parliament, Obaidi said. <br><br>"<i>We respect the American people. We have no problem with them. We know not all of them accept the occupation.</i><br><br>McClatchy says if Sadr, who's cast himself as a national resistance figure, began talking with the U.S., he'd risk losing support in the Iraqi streetVigilantehttp://www.blogger.com/profile/07640246609540057997noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-8356601405469434111.post-86880838774706267952007-05-29T08:35:00.000-07:002007-05-29T08:35:00.000-07:00The clash between Middle Eastern and Western thin...The clash between Middle Eastern and Western thinking?<br><br>The Middle East: <i>The enemy (Iran) of your enemy (Al Qaeda) can be your friend.</i><br><br>The West: <i>The enemy (Iran) of your friend (Israel) has to be your enemy. </i>DB Cooperhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/10912311299981395050noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-8356601405469434111.post-25941934168675847772007-05-29T06:11:00.000-07:002007-05-29T06:11:00.000-07:00To pile on my earlier points, I'll cite Juan C...To pile on my earlier points, I'll cite Juan Cole's remarks in the wake of the <a href="http://www.juancole.com/2007/05/first-formal-us-iran-talks-since-1980_29.html#comments" rel="nofollow" rel="nofollow">First Formal US-Iran Talks since 1980</a><br><br>Cole is listing common American and Iranian interests<br><br><i>1. Shiite Iran is a deadly enemy of al-Qaeda and the Taliban, which the US is also fighting. Instead of making up silly charges against Iran, the US could explore avenues of cooperation against these enemies.<br><br>2. Shiite Iran is a deadly enemy of the Iraqi Baath Party and of the radical Salafi Jihadis who are responsible for most of the violence in Iraq and for most of the killings of US troops. There are ways in which the US and Iran could cooperate in defeating these forces, which are inimical to both Washington and Tehran.<br><br>3. Shiite Iran is happy with the Shiite led government of Iraq and wants to see Iraq's territorial integrity maintained. Supporting the al-Maliki government and keeping Iraq together are also goals of the United States.<br><br>. . . . Iran is not foredoomed to be a rejectionist state.</i> <br><br>Cole makes two additional points: (1)Mahmoud Ahmadinejad doesn't automatically continue as president after 2009 and (2) fighting the Salafi Jihadis and al-Qaeda can unite the otherwise contentious forces such as the West and Shia. This happened this past week in Lebanon, where Shiite Nasrallah's Hizbullah supported the Seniora government's fight against Sunni Fatah al-Islam.Vigilantehttp://www.blogger.com/profile/07640246609540057997noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-8356601405469434111.post-60570788750708429702007-05-29T05:51:00.000-07:002007-05-29T05:51:00.000-07:00As a retro Marxist-Leninist, I say,ALL POWER TO TH...As a retro Marxist-Leninist, I say,<br><br>ALL POWER TO THE SHI'IA MILITIA!Borishttp://www.blogger.com/profile/13887019984342458931noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-8356601405469434111.post-58075874647366960942007-05-28T09:47:00.000-07:002007-05-28T09:47:00.000-07:00Continuing or reinforcing my comment above, Paul K...Continuing or reinforcing my comment above, Paul Krugman in the NYT documents how Bush's systematic confusing, conflating, and obfuscation began with his first post-9/11 SOTU address in which he <br><br>"<i>...denounced an “axis of evil” consisting of three countries that had nothing to do either with 9/11 or with each other..."</i><br><br>In the current bundling of enemies, all of the Shia and Sunni and Hezbollah and Hamas and the Muslim Brotherhood are stuffed into the same bag as Al Qaeda.<br><br>Read the rest of the Krugster's <a href="http://select.nytimes.com/2007/05/28/opinion/28krugman.html" rel="nofollow" rel="nofollow">Trust and Betrayal</a>.Vigilantehttp://www.blogger.com/profile/07640246609540057997noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-8356601405469434111.post-16274522493928795412007-05-28T06:52:00.000-07:002007-05-28T06:52:00.000-07:00Ritter also makes the point that Cheney and Bush a...Ritter also makes the point that Cheney and Bush are substituting the national interests of Israel for the national interests of the United States as the goals of American foreign policy.<br><br>And the bullshit about waiting until September and we can iron out all these wrinkles? That's giving Bush and Cheney a timeline/deadline by which they have to initiate or provoke open hostilities with Iran.Borishttp://www.blogger.com/profile/13887019984342458931noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-8356601405469434111.post-25270519967513773112007-05-28T06:37:00.000-07:002007-05-28T06:37:00.000-07:00Yes, Colleen. In your segment, Prez. Bush says if ...Yes, Colleen. In your segment, Prez. Bush says if they would tell us to leave, we would leave. Well, Sadr has definitely <b>been</b> asking us to leave. Prez and his gang are listening with tin ear as always. They have their own agenda, as always, which they never share with the public. In this case they are using and <i>perpetuating</i> the occupation of Iraq to destabilizing Iran. Talk about cross purposes. The deceit and duplicity and treason which lead us into unnecessary invasion of Iraq continues unabated. As Ritter says, "WAKE UP, AMERICA!"Messengerhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/12703434191163556292noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-8356601405469434111.post-48348524649463186692007-05-27T07:48:00.000-07:002007-05-27T07:48:00.000-07:00I couldn't have said it any better, but I'...I couldn't have said it any better, but I'll try: <br><br>What I am saying is that this sorry excuse for a government which lied us into invasion, torture, and occupation is still lying. (Why should congenital liars surprise us otherwise?) Initially they serially conflated massive retaliation against al Qaeda into a war against all terrorists, and then into regime change in Mesopotamia. Now, even as we are overwhelmed by multiple insurgencies against our illegitimate and ineffectual occupation in Iraq, Cheney and Bush have chosen to lie yet again: they are now conflating the continuing fight against al Qaeda into all "insurgents", "extremists", and "Iranian agents". Instead of an 'enemy', we now hear more about our "enemies". <br><br>I want to remind anyone who is generous enough to spend moments his Sunday morning with a glimpse in these pages, that this should be the mother of all <b>deja vu</b>. Remember back in 2002 when Bush, Cheney, Powell, Rice & Rumsfeld were marketing their case for regime change? How often was the expression <b>weapons of mass destruction</b> used? Well, I don't know, but it was ubiquitous enough that it became necessary to condense and compress into a new word, <b>WMD</b>. So that every time 'WMD' was used, it became even easier to omit specifying which actual weapon systems were being discussed. (In a letter to the editor about that time, I referred to them as 'hook, line, and sinker'.)<br><br>Well, that's what's happening now folks. Every time you hear our misgovernment referring to the abstract <b>'our enemies'</b>, know that 95% of them would not be intent on 'hurting us', once we end the occupation. And that the remnant 5% would certainly be eradicated from Iraq by the 95-ers once we remove their raison d'etre.Vigilantehttp://www.blogger.com/profile/07640246609540057997noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-8356601405469434111.post-63800286691285684842007-05-27T01:22:00.000-07:002007-05-27T01:22:00.000-07:00Wizard, it looks to me that according to this Chat...Wizard, it looks to me that according to this Chatham white paper, Killing off the Mehdi Army will cement us deeper into the Iraqi desert more permanently and expensively than Americans think the oil to be grabbed would be worth. This is because Cheney wants to take on the responsibility protecting Israel from Iran. This will change the present occupation into a future war. Seymour Hersh is correct. Bush and Cheney want to lock future presidents into endless war in the Middle East. What, other than impeachment, can stop this madness?Messengerhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/12703434191163556292noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-8356601405469434111.post-48290719508376416752007-05-26T17:44:00.000-07:002007-05-26T17:44:00.000-07:00My guess is Bush failed to read the Chatham Report...My guess is Bush failed to read the Chatham Report or either of your last two very insightful blog entries.<br><br><a href="http://news.yahoo.com/s/nm/20070526/wl_nm/iraq_dc;_ylt=AklYfpC9ibeHoMEkBrKitoJm.3QA" rel="nofollow" rel="nofollow">Reuters</a> is reporting this evening:<br><br><b><i>BAGHDAD (Reuters) - American and British forces battled Mehdi Army fighters in Baghdad and Basra on Saturday as the monthly U.S. casualty toll headed towards a record high for the year. <br><br>The renewed fighting came after the Mehdi Army leader, Shi'ite cleric Moqtada al-Sadr, used a rare public appearance to call on U.S. troops to get out of Iraq.</i></b>the WIZARD, fkaphttp://www.blogger.com/profile/18171655256407149176noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-8356601405469434111.post-83459788116185658542007-05-26T15:38:00.000-07:002007-05-26T15:38:00.000-07:00It makes pretty good sense to me, based on a brief...It makes pretty good sense to me, based on a brief skim. If Israel, AIPAC, and the Saudis cannot accept the need for a diplomatic solution, let them put their own youth into that meat grinder. Bush will oppose this as he still wants control of the oil.TomCathttp://www.blogger.com/profile/11397335545286040472noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-8356601405469434111.post-89167023715181336712007-05-26T08:16:00.000-07:002007-05-26T08:16:00.000-07:00Won't this require a 180° change in direction ...Won't this require a 180° change in direction for the USA? Isn't this asking for a few hand-shakes from the Iranians? Will Israel allow this to happen? What will AIPAC say? What will the Saudis say?DB Cooperhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/10912311299981395050noreply@blogger.com