Rafsanjani Warns against US Policy in Iraq
Muqtada Demands Islamic Rule
Former Iranian president Akbar Hashemi Rafsanjani said Monday as he met with young Iraqi Shiite nationalist, Muqtada al-Sadr, that the US sought to divide and rule in Iraq. Iran Focus says, ' “The goals of the occupiers are in contradiction to the wishes of the Iraqi people. By influencing the political events in that country they will try to force their imperialist goals on the future government”, Rafsanjani said, adding that Iraqi groups had a responsibility to work together to thwart the U.S.’s aims.'
It reports of Muqtada, ' He went on to say that the U.S.-led forces in Iraq were attempting to decrease the influence of religion in Iraqi society. “The Iraqi people want a country run under Islamic rule”, Sadr said. '
Bombings and a sectarian kidnapping of two dozen Sunni Arabs in north Baghdad, along with the deaths of 4 GIs, marked events on Monday in Iraq. A head of the Sunni pious endowments board was assassinated.
Under Iraqi law, the new parliament must meet to choose a president within 15 days of the certification of the election results, e.g. around Feb. 18. The parliamentarians are, however, putting aside this provision of the law and are making no promises as to when they will be able to form a government.
Iraqi guerrilla groups attacked US and other targets 34,000 times in 2005, up 30% from the year before. The number of roadside bombs deployed nearly doubled to over 10,000, and the number of casualties was up. Any way you measure it, these statistics indicate that the US has failed miserably in counter-insurgency efforts in Iraq.
Iraqi professionals are fleeing the country, which makes the prospect of rebuilding even dimmer.
A preliminary inspector general report on the US reconstruction effort in Iraq finds it plagued by poor planning and poor implementation, according to the NYT.
US contractors are pulling out of Iraq, as the funds for reconstruction dry up.
Iraq is paying Turkish firms $1 billion in arrears for fuel. They had ceased supplying it in protest against the Iraqi failure to pay. In other news, two Turkish banks are planning to open branches in Iraqi Kurdistan.
These recent photos from Iraq, several of them disturbing (be forewarned), are on the web but never picked up by major newspapers or television in the US.
posted by Juan Cole @ 1/24/2006 06:45:00 AM
Click to join Infoco
6 Comments:
To start out with, my bias is against the war, and i'm pretty sure its going realy badly.
However, I try to cast my net wide in reading about the situation in Iraq, and i feel completely dumfounded when i find pro-Iraq war sites like http://iraqpictures.blogspot.com/.
Why do many of the posters on that site feel so sure that we are winning? Are there some mini-successses (like setting up electricity or sewer or someting) that Mr Cole doesn't feel are significant in the larger picture and therefore doesn't report that these pro-iraq war folks are picking up on as proof were winning?
How can such a well educated country have such disparate conclusions about the same event?
I guess i just have to have faith that my ability to discern truth is better than thiers. But that assumption, despite my faith in it, is not comforting.
Dear Dr. Cole,
It is perpetually frustrating to see the American public overestimating the danger and significance of bin Ladin. Bin Ladin/Al Qaeda’s great stroke of luck/genius was to hit a target that stood as a symbol of American potency, kind of a corporate Statue of Liberty with enough casualties to get our full attention. But the significance of the destruction of the WTC was far greater as a media event than as a military or strategic event. And the likelihood of them ever repeating that feat is very small.
Of course the strategy of terrorists is to use the media to enhance the public perception of their power, but their power is to scare people, not destroy nations. Al Qaeda’s threat is insignificant compared to what we faced in the Cold War, the strategic implications of Al Qaeda are miniscule compared to the surging Asian economic forces or the realignments occurring in the Middle East now as a result of our naïve meddling.
Yet, we as a nation, and certainly our President, remain hypnotized by the media aspects of terrorism. It says a lot that we are willing to spend a trillion dollars (or two) to prevent another “Towering Inferno” while ignoring the practical and strategic blowback from our foolish policies in Iraq and Afghanistan, indeed around the world.
I keep hearing the refrain in our national anthem, “the home of the brave.” I wish we could deal the terrorists a fatal blow of irrelevance, by courageously ignoring their fearsome machinations and refusing to give them a media platform, courageous people around the world undeterred by the terrorists’ sick agenda.
The Bush Administration is all about media management, just like the terrorists. Maybe Mr. Belafonte is onto something.
Has the Bush administration made any more "guesstimates" on the Iraqi casualty rate recently? This is getting ridiculous.
Poppycock: A chronicle of the stupidest things ever said
Interesting that just Muqtada al-Sadr would travel to Iran and speak with, among others, no less than Akbar Hashemi Rafsanjani. Is it unreasonable to speculate that aside from the current situation in Iraq, the two parties discussed what measures they would take if the United States and/or its proxy were to launch an attack on Iran under the guise of the latter constituting a «nuclear threat» ?...
There have been many horrendous pictures from this war over the past 3 years (yes, we are reaching that milestone) and almost none of them have been shown or printed in the mainstream media. Why anyone would take the mainstream media seriously as anything other than an entertainment and propaganda vehicle is beyond me. They have shown their colors time and time again.
What ever happened to the statement made by bush that he would leave Iraq when the Iraqi government (or people?) said to leave. Haven't they said to leave?
It is no secret that we control what goes on in Iraq. How has the US controlled all those government people?
Post a Comment
<< Home