The banned Sunni politicians are mainly from that same ruling class, and do not attract respect or following. Paradoxically, the alternative Sunnis, particularly in Nineveh and Anbar are far more nationalistic, and will benefit from these expulsions!

The very popular anti-Kurd stance Maliki took for a while has been largely forgotten, losing him a big advantage. The Hakimists, who lead the INA, are trying to revive their Iran-initiated and later US-supported alliance with the Talabani and Barazani Peshmerga, but that may actually sink them in the South where the anti-Kurdish sentiment is strongest.

The Kurdish opposition who won 45% of the seats last year are a wild-card which is also being ignored.

Iran, and the strangely the US too, do not want nationalist "trouble-makers" in parliament. But both understimate the Iraqi voters who are far more politically-aware than most.

The key issue now is how far can the current ruling class fiddle the election. They are doomed if they couldn't despite what the Iraqi "experts" say.

http://angryarab.blogspot.com

Other than straight blood and guts, the saddest photo I recall is a orange hooded Iraqi detainee sitting nt he ground in a barbed wire enclosure holding and comforting his young son. No link to offer, but it is out there for the world to see, if not for Americans because it is too disturbing.

Obama wants record $708B for military next year; Cost of Iraq, Afghanistan tops $1 trillion : «Congress has approved $1.05 trillion dollars for the wars in Iraq and Afghanistan, according to the National Priorities Project, a nonpartisan budget research group that has a continuously running war cost counter on its website.

The tally topped $1 trillion last month, when U.S. lawmakers approved the fiscal 2010 defense spending bill that included $128 billion to be spent on the two conflicts through Sept. 30. The trillion-dollar total includes war-related costs incurred by the State Department, like embassy security.

HOW MUCH WENT FOR IRAQ AND HOW MUCH FOR AFGHANISTAN?

The lion's share of the spending — $747.3 billion — has been allocated to the war in Iraq since the U.S.-led invasion there in 2003. [the reason(s) for invading Iraq proved to be entirely bogus or simply unserious. Reasons for subsequently staying in that country; ie., occupying Iraq, at such great cost in U.S. blood and treasure ~ remain difficult for most Americans to express: e.g., "We're fighting them Over There to sustain our security, Over Here."]

The other $299 billion has been for Afghanistan, where the United States invaded to fight al Qaeda and topple the Taliban [?] after the Sept. 11 attacks in 2001.

War funding for fiscal 2010, which ends Sept. 30, included $72.3 billion for Afghanistan and $64.5 billion for Iraq, making this the first year that Afghanistan was more expensive, the National Priorities Project said.

HOW MUCH MORE WILL THESE OPERATIONS COST?

Obama announced in December he was [escalating] adding 30,000 more U.S. troops to the Afghan war effort to join 68,000 already there fighting a resurgent Taliban. [is it a "resurgent" Taliban, or an anti-occupation guerrilla reaction to the US "surge"?] Defense officials say he will shortly ask Congress for $33 billion to pay for ‘the Afghan surge’, when he sends lawmakers his budget request.

That would take care of 2010. Future expenses are a question mark, partly because troop levels are uncertain. Obama says he wants to start withdrawing forces from Afghanistan in mid-2011, but this will depend in part on conditions on the ground: No deadline for leaving Afghanistan has yet been set.»

One Evening In Tal Afar, Iraq 18 January 2005

Among the photos readers voted as among the most influential photos of the decade was this series taken in 2005 by Chris Hondros as he accompanied US Occupation Shock troops in Iraq. Hondros shares the story of what happened after the images were published around the world, and the fate of the boy injured in the incident.