dagblog - Comments for "Iraq's Sunnis Form Tribal Army, As Sectarian Violence Builds"

25 dead, dozens wounded in

artappraiser — Tue, 30 Apr 2013 04:20:58 +0000

In reply to Iraq's Sunnis Form Tribal Army, As Sectarian Violence Builds

25 dead, dozens wounded in Iraq car bombings
By Mohammed Tawfeeq and Joe Sterling, CNN
April 29, 2013 -- Updated 2255 GMT (0655 HKT)

Baghdad (CNN) -- The longstanding bad blood between Sunnis and Shiites in Iraq boiled Monday amid another round of attacks: the killing of 25 people and wounding of dozens more in five car bombings.

Four of the blasts occurred in the Shiite heartland in the southern region of Iraq.

Two car bombs exploded near a busy outdoor market in Amara, killing 13 people and wounding 24 others. A bomb went off near an outdoor market in Diwaniya, killing six people and wounding 20 others. And two people died and 11 others were wounded in a bombing at a commercial area in Karbala.

Another blast occurred in Mahmoudiya, a predominantly Sunni area just south of Baghdad. Four people were killed and 14 others were wounded in that attack [....]

Amen to this Bruce: States

artappraiser — Tue, 30 Apr 2013 03:15:25 +0000

In reply to The decision to go to war

Amen to this Bruce:

States like Jordan, Syria, and Iraq were cobbled together by the "victors" in WWI, including us, with no regard for 1500 years of history. Such national boundaries, which of course focused more on what was best for Britain and France in the Great Game, failed to account for the folks who lived there, and the simmering historical conflicts that continues to endure.

It's kind of incredible to realize that neo-conservative foreign policy could exceed the stupidity of these ancestor Great Gamesmen, but every day further it seems like they come closer to that goal. Hubris and naivete in a warped togetherness. Sometimes it seems someone like Paul Wolfowitz or Dick Cheney are really the human characters in the ancient Grecian myths of the gods.

Well, like I said, they

Aaron Carine — Tue, 30 Apr 2013 01:42:59 +0000

In reply to The point is that "principled

Well, like I said, they probably should have realized that Bush would go to war even if the inspectors were let in. Under those circumstances, living with the unknown was better than giving him authorization to go to war.

The point is that "principled

PeraclesPlease — Tue, 30 Apr 2013 00:26:45 +0000

In reply to If the war would have come

The point is that "principled opposition" can't ignore real danger and unknowns- there are principles of protection and self-preservation too. The Administration & CIA were outright lying to Democrats & the American public - at that point, impeachment and reorganization should be justified, but instead Bush got his highest ratings ever. Media certainly didn't help. Should be lessons to learn in all this, but they still keep escaping us even 10 years later.

If the war would have come

Aaron Carine — Mon, 29 Apr 2013 22:22:56 +0000

In reply to I thought Bush wanted war

If the war would have come even without Democrats voting for it, the Democrats could at least have kept their hands clean. Principled opposition counts for something even if it doesn't stop the president from doing evil.. The public wouldn't have wanted war if Bush and the Republicans hadn't been pushing for war.

I thought Bush wanted war

PeraclesPlease — Mon, 29 Apr 2013 21:43:14 +0000

In reply to Perhaps when they voted in

I thought Bush wanted war too. I also thought Hussein might have WMDs and be a significant danger in the region.

So as a US representative, which maniac do you back? Or do you try to thread the middle, meaning push to get in inspectors to figure out what's really going on, even though you're out of power and the GOP won't give you dick?

In this case, the compromise bought 5 months delay and when the war did come we at least knew it was a farce. What would a Democratic vote against the war have accomplished? The media ignored millions of people in the street, the bulk of voters in the end wanted the war just to show we could get revenge, even if it meant kicking the cat instead. And the Democrats were getting beat up every day as the "soft-on-security" party. Pretty humiliating time. Considering the public had knowlingly elected a moron in 2000 (or at least gave him near 50% of votes), it was hard to expect that acting like a grown-up would go far.

Perhaps when they voted in

Aaron Carine — Mon, 29 Apr 2013 20:41:21 +0000

In reply to The "de facto green light

Perhaps when they voted in October, they should have realized that Bush wanted war, not inspections. At the time, I thought that he did.

The "de facto green light

PeraclesPlease — Mon, 29 Apr 2013 14:09:56 +0000

In reply to The decision to go to war

The "de facto green light from Democrats" was given to push Hussein to open to serious inspections, 5 months before the war.

This "green light" came a month before the UN did the same, and followed reports from the CIA and other secret services re: Hussein apparently reconstituting WMD programs (the chemical/biological ones being more likely), along with such fallacious info from Powell about longer-range missile launchers & other scary disinformation.

Reprise of Powell's performance before the UN Security Council in Nov 2002 here, as bad or worse than his performance in 2003, along with the usual smears against anyone who disputed the "overwhelming evidence".

That Blix did come in and find proscribed missile components that he destroyed weeks before the war should give balance to this one-sided view. Even as late as Jan 2003, Blix thought that Hussein still had some illegal WMD's (bio-chemical), but as cooperation improved from January, he felt confident that all the weapons had been been destroyed.

There was some reasonable speculating about centrifuge tubes that was not cleared up until well into the war.

I'm also wondering your take on Israeli support for the 2nd Iraq War (even as mainstream American Jews in general opposed the war).

But mostly, I think this shared blame with Democrats is complete bullshit. There was certainly reasonable concern that Hussein was twisting our tail, and that any large-scale mobilization to the Mideast to pressure him would be met by 3 weeks of cooperation with inspectors followed by another standoff and re-deployment of troops, wasting months and a billion dollars. So supporting renewed inspections came to be seen as requiring the option of launching strikes if Hussein started playing his well-known games.

Then Bush & neocons set up the Democrats via lies so that even though we presumed Bush was ginning up the facts to go to war, there were still serious issues that denial of war powers would be gambling with American (or hey, Israeli, security - what's the difference?). Yeah, Hussein might even hit Cyprus with a missile, which after the EU's blunder allowing (Greek) Cyprus in, was then something we should presumably worry about.

Democratic ownership of the 2nd Gulf War became complete with the 2008 campaign, as the shining knight Obama faced down the old corrupt school Hillary. Obama, who'd given his famous Sept 15, 2002 street corner speech as an Illionois state legislator without security clearance or passport, had blithely declared Hussein as completely non-threatening to his neighbors - something Israel undoubtedly disagreed with and I find laughable, even if I often disagree with Israel's frequent hyperbole on the matter - in September 2002, the matter was fraught with "unknown unknowns", as Rumsfeld might say, and post-9/11, those unknowns from a Hussein who often threatened or invaded his neighbors and attacked his own, and in general played the no longer tenable unpredictable wild card for the region.

So why Democrats continue to take umbrage at the Oct 2002 vote to return the inspectors, when the real crime occurred with the Mar 2003 invasion after Blix had cleared the Iraqis - well, it's stupidity. Just like in 2009, when the Dems should have wrapped the crash around Bush's neck instead of "looking forward", we should have wrapped the unjustified Iraqi War around Bush's neck instead of following Rahm's advice and shutting up about it. (Note that those who ignored Rahm's advice in 2004 survived much better than those who tried to play the security card - history isn't kind for those who try to sit on the fence)

The decision to go to war

Bruce Levine — Sun, 28 Apr 2013 20:57:14 +0000

In reply to Iraq's Sunnis Form Tribal Army, As Sectarian Violence Builds

The decision to go to war with Iraq by President Bush, armed with a de facto green light from Democrats who were for the war before they were against it--or something--will share space with similar tragic ventures like the Spanish-American War. For what?

There is something to be said for the plain truth that Senator John McCain did not know the difference between Sunni and Shia back then. In short, folks like him, with Democratic help of the see no evil hear no evil variety, pushed for a war in a country they knew nothing about. States like Jordan, Syria, and Iraq were cobbled together by the "victors" in WWI, including us, with no regard for 1500 years of history. Such national boundaries, which of course focused more on what was best for Britain and France in the Great Game, failed to account for the folks who lived there, and the simmering historical conflicts that continues to endure.

Our Iraqi venture stepped right into this.

Iraq watchdog suspends 10 TV

artappraiser — Sun, 28 Apr 2013 19:30:28 +0000

In reply to Iraq's Sunnis Form Tribal Army, As Sectarian Violence Builds

Iraq watchdog suspends 10 TV channels for inciting violence [including Al Jazeera}
BAGHDAD | Sun Apr 28, 2013 11:19am EDT

(Reuters) - Iraq has suspended the licenses of satellite news network Al Jazeera and nine other channels, accusing them of inciting violence through their coverage of recent sectarian clashes.

The Communication and Media Commission (CMC) regulator criticized their reporting of violence triggered by a security forces raid on a Sunni Muslim protest camp in Hawija on Tuesday.

None of the channels was immediately available for comment.

More than 170 people have been killed in the fighting - the worst Iraq has seen since Sunnis started staging protests in December to complain about their treatment by Prime Minister Nuri al-Maliki's Shi'ite-led government.

The watchdog said sectarian language used in the reports encouraged "criminal acts of revenge by attacking the security forces" [...]