More problems in Iraq

[wiseones2cents]

http://news.yahoo.com/s/ap/20100424/ap_on_re_mi_ea/ml_iraq

Looks like Democracy once again is a failure in the Arab world.

It seems that Al-Qaeda is attacking innocent Shiites. Why? I have no clue.

It makes absolutely no sense to attack the only Shiites in the country that are anti-American. Not to mention the poorest. It's not like they are attacking government infastructure, which would do more damage than killing innocent people, and worst of all? They target people praying.....

If this truly is Al-Qaeda and not Western operatives? Al-Qaeda in Iraq has to be the stupid group around, and are shooting themselves in the foot. Al-Qaeda in Iraq will continue to lose support. At this rate, the Americans and or/Iran are going to comer out on top.

These people targetting innocent Shiites are nothing but butchers. One more attack on innocent Shiites and Al-Qaeda Iraq will alienate itself and lose all support.

It is clear that American cannot protect the Iraqis. The only thing that can guarantee peace in the middle east is if America withdraws from the entire middle east. They will just have to stick with the tactic of bribing politiicans.

There may be some minor fighting but it will be straightened out, since most of the foreign fighters will leave Iraq.

 

[evince]

we told Bush not to swing his baseball bat at the hornets nest

 

[DamnYankee]

This will result in freedom for the entire middle east.

 

[wiseones2cents]

This will result in freedom for the entire middle east.

Result in freedom for the entire middle east? Who do you think has the middle east enslaved? The west. Who do you think put those puppet middle east leaders in power? The west.

This is not about freedom like you were FOOLED to believe? This is a resource war. In which one of the American puppets, Saddam, turned on America. And they had to regain control of their resources.

People talk about foreign oil dependency, when the true fact is that the western Elites OWN most of the oil in the world. Including Saudi Arabia.

The Saudi Kings are thrown crumbs. Not vice versa.

 

[charver]

Result in freedom for the entire middle east? Who do you think has the middle east enslaved? The west. Who do you think put those puppet middle east leaders in power? The west.

This is not about freedom like you were FOOLED to believe? This is a resource war. In which one of the American puppets, Saddam, turned on America. And they had to regain control of their resources.

People talk about foreign oil dependency, when the true fact is that the western Elites OWN most of the oil in the world. Including Saudi Arabia.

The Saudi Kings are thrown crumbs. Not vice versa.

In time you will come to appreciate that SM's seemingly one-dimensional postings, which some posters may be quick to write off as the ravings of an ill-educated American halfwit, are in fact laced with a latent truth and striking nuance that only the more intellectual posters can truly fathom.

 

[Canceled.LTroll.27]

In time you will come to appreciate that SM's seemingly one-dimensional postings, which some posters may be quick to write off as the ravings of an ill-educated American halfwit, are in fact laced with a latent truth and striking nuance that only the more intellectual posters can truly fathom.

Our English friend has a delicious gift of irony.

When will the Americans understand that other cultures do not wish to be "helped" by their invading armies?

 

[DamnYankee]

Result in freedom for the entire middle east? Who do you think has the middle east enslaved? The west. Who do you think put those puppet middle east leaders in power? The west.

This is not about freedom like you were FOOLED to believe? This is a resource war. In which one of the American puppets, Saddam, turned on America. And they had to regain control of their resources.

People talk about foreign oil dependency, when the true fact is that the western Elites OWN most of the oil in the world. Including Saudi Arabia.

The Saudi Kings are thrown crumbs. Not vice versa.

LOL They've never had a democracy due to a religion that keeps them in the 13th century and you think that we're the cause of their lack of democracy.

 

[wiseones2cents]

LOL They've never had a democracy due to a religion that keeps them in the 13th century and you think that we're the cause of their lack of democracy.

WRONG. Every time they tried democracy? And someone that was anti-western won? The west would finance a coup to over throw it. Remember the Shah?

We have witnessed America's failure in Palestine with Hamas winning most of the voted and then denied by America as legitimatye because their favorite didn't win. So spare me the b.s.

Afghanistan? We seen more so called fruits of nDemocracy with the corrupt of the corrupt buying their way into power.But you wont hear a peep from America because corruption and the heroin trade run Afganistan and they need opium for their prozac nation.

Now in Iraq democracy has again proven to be a failure.

Though at least now the armed militias have been making the transition from violence to politics and diplomacy.(Hamas tried that but was denied by the international community(Which is a shame).

Expect Sadr's influence in government to rise. As was the plan all along. That should ruffle America's feathers but at this point there is nothing they can do.

America's plan to put puppet Allawi in power failed miserably.

Al-Sadr will work on freeing its political prisoners that are in Iraqi jails.

Al-Sadr's militia is getting ready to prepare to force the Americans to withdraw by force if they stay beyond their withdrawl date. Dec 2011.

 

[DamnYankee]

The west would finance a coup to over throw it.

Now in Iraq democracy has again proven to be a failure.

Decide which lie to tell first, because you've contradicted yourself here.

 

[Sammy Jankis]

They perceive themselves as tribes first. nations are a western idea. Hussein was a western puppet.

 

[Sammy Jankis]

forcing people together to make imperial managment easier is a crime.

 

[Cancel 2016.2]

http://news.yahoo.com/s/ap/20100424/ap_on_re_mi_ea/ml_iraq

Looks like Democracy once again is a failure in the Arab world.

It seems that Al-Qaeda is attacking innocent Shiites. Why? I have no clue.

It makes absolutely no sense to attack the only Shiites in the country that are anti-American. Not to mention the poorest. It's not like they are attacking government infastructure, which would do more damage than killing innocent people, and worst of all? They target people praying.....

If this truly is Al-Qaeda and not Western operatives? Al-Qaeda in Iraq has to be the stupid group around, and are shooting themselves in the foot. Al-Qaeda in Iraq will continue to lose support. At this rate, the Americans and or/Iran are going to comer out on top.

These people targetting innocent Shiites are nothing but butchers. One more attack on innocent Shiites and Al-Qaeda Iraq will alienate itself and lose all support.

It is clear that American cannot protect the Iraqis. The only thing that can guarantee peace in the middle east is if America withdraws from the entire middle east. They will just have to stick with the tactic of bribing politiicans.

There may be some minor fighting but it will be straightened out, since most of the foreign fighters will leave Iraq.

Ok... I will be the one to ask...

HOW is this the end of democracy in Iraq?

This is also not a sign that Americans cannot protect Iraqis you dolt. Americans are and have been withdrawing from major cities and turning over control to the Iraqi army/police.

The article then goes on to tell of the POLITICAL wrangling going on for power and control in Iraq. Much like what we see here in the US, only the Iraqis have MORE options than we do. Unlike the US, where TWO parties dominate and set the rules to squeeze out other potential parties, the Iraqis have a multi party system, much like the UK and others.

 

[Cancel 2016.2]

we told Bush not to swing his baseball bat at the hornets nest

LMAO.... let me guess... you are going to start the chant of 'Iraq is going to descend into a massive civil war' again???

 

[wiseones2cents]

Decide which lie to tell first, because you've contradicted yourself here.

Spare me. No contradiction here. Which lie did I tell?

How do you think Saddam came to power in the first place? In a coup backed by the USA and CIA.

And when Saddam turned on them? They went to war with Iraq.

Then they put puppet Chalabi in power. that didn't work out. Because they found out he lied(for the Americans) to make a case for war that later proved to be false. Then they put Chalabi's cousin in power. Allawi and that didn't work out. Now the Amerians are trying to put him back in power, using American dollars to buy the Sunnis and keep Iranian influence out of Iraq.

 

[wiseones2cents]

Ok... I will be the one to ask...

HOW is this the end of democracy in Iraq?

This is also not a sign that Americans cannot protect Iraqis you dolt. Americans are and have been withdrawing from major cities and turning over control to the Iraqi army/police.

The article then goes on to tell of the POLITICAL wrangling going on for power and control in Iraq. Much like what we see here in the US, only the Iraqis have MORE options than we do. Unlike the US, where TWO parties dominate and set the rules to squeeze out other potential parties, the Iraqis have a multi party system, much like the UK and others.

Oh oh. King Idiot has spoken.

There can be no Democracy in Iraq unless ALL parties are represented. This current government leaves out the Sunnis and the Kurds, which is a recipe for sectarian violence.

We have sectarian violence in North America? The majority of Americans are armed with AK-47s? Militias that are seperate from the government, running the streets?

What? Americans are killing more civilians in the middle east then Al-Qaeda.

 

[DamnYankee]

Spare me. No contradiction here. Which lie did I tell?

How do you think Saddam came to power in the first place? In a coup backed by the USA and CIA.

And when Saddam turned on them? They went to war with Iraq.

Then they put puppet Chalabi in power. that didn't work out. Because they found out he lied(for the Americans) to make a case for war that later proved to be false. Then they put Chalabi's cousin in power. Allawi and that didn't work out. Now the Amerians are trying to put him back in power, using American dollars to buy the Sunnis and keep Iranian influence out of Iraq.

What's your point?

 

[wiseones2cents]

LMAO.... let me guess... you are going to start the chant of 'Iraq is going to descend into a massive civil war' again???

It is still very possible. Massive civil war was diverted when many groups decided to join the political process, though if they lose faith in the political process, there will be violence.

America is lucky that Sadr's militia stood down when it did. It would have been a blood bath on both sides. Sadr chose that diplomatic/political route and as a result maintained(and kept alive) his power base.

Though if the Americans dont withdraw Dec 2011? They will come out swinging and they will be much more prepared and armed.

I have stated from day one, that ALL Iraqis(Shiite, Sunni, Kurds, ect..) should have strong representation in government. More of a council than a presidency. Only then will there be equality and peace in Iraq.

 

[wiseones2cents]

What's your point?

My point is I do not lie and make no contradictions.

 

[Cancel 2016.2]

Oh oh. King Idiot has spoken.

There can be no Democracy in Iraq unless ALL parties are represented. This current government leaves out the Sunnis and the Kurds, which is a recipe for sectarian violence.

We have sectarian violence in North America? The majority of Americans are armed with AK-47s? Militias that are seperate from the government, running the streets?

What? Americans are killing more civilians in the middle east then Al-Qaeda.

1) The Kurds and Sunnis ARE represented and have been for the last couple of years you dolt.

2) I did not state that the US had sectarian violence you dolt. I stated that political wrangling goes on in the US just as it currently is in Iraq. Pretending that there is widespread sectarian violence in Iraq is absurd. It is Al Queda in Iraq against Iraqis.... and like 2006, the Iraqi people are not going to tolerate attacks against civilians.

3) What are you rambling about? Militias running the streets? Americans with AK47's??? I did not mention either, because NEITHER are occurring. Militia's are NOT running the streets in Iraq you moron. It is like you are taking 2006 talking points and pretending they are still occurring in Iraq today.

 

[wiseones2cents]

1) The Kurds and Sunnis ARE represented and have been for the last couple of years you dolt.

Really? I guess you dont read the news about the Kurds complaining and the fact that Maliki has been going after Sunni politicians that were elected.

2) I did not state that the US had sectarian violence you dolt. I stated that political wrangling goes on in the US just as it currently is in Iraq. Pretending that there is widespread sectarian violence in Iraq is absurd. It is Al Queda in Iraq against Iraqis.... and like 2006, the Iraqi people are not going to tolerate attacks against civilians.

Comparing Iraqi society to American is ridiculous you moron.

You deny that there was sectarian violence in Iraq for years? It has calmed down other than a few isolated incidents in the last few weeks attacking Shiites, since most have chosen the political path. Though tensions are still high and if the political process fails, you will see sectarian violence re-emerge. SOunds to me like you have been living in a cave and have no clue of what has been going on in Iraq since the invasion.

3) What are you rambling about? Militias running the streets? Americans with AK47's??? I did not mention either, because NEITHER are occurring. Militia's are NOT running the streets in Iraq you moron. It is like you are taking 2006 talking points and pretending they are still occurring in Iraq today.

Sure they were and still hold some degree of weight. Why do you think the Americans/Iraqis had to crack down on the Mehdi Army? They disbanded in 2008 but are now regrouping. So they are relavant today.