Yesterday, Harvard’s Steve Walt posted an amusingly sharp piece on what’s wrong with America’s so-called foreign policy “debate.” Steve’s piece, titled “Take 2 Ambien and Call Me When It’s Over: I’d Rather Spoon My Own Eye Out Than Sit Through This Year’s Think-Tank-a-Palooza,” see here, appears on his blog at Foreign Policy; we also highlight key excerpts below. The piece includes a nice reference to us; more importantly, it aptly encapsulates the brain-dead quality of most mainstream discussion in the United States about America’s role in and engagement with the wider world and dares to suggest what a more serious discussion would look like.
Steve opens by noting the widespread and mounting dissatisfaction with U.S. foreign policy:
“Nobody seems to be happy with U.S. foreign policy these days. It’s not hard to see why. Relations with Russia are frosty and could get worse. China is throwing sharp elbows and looking for opportunities to shift the status quo in Asia. The NSA is out of control. Afghanistan and Iraq were failures. Libya is a mess, Syria is worse, and Secretary of State John Kerry’s quixotic effort at Middle East peacemaking was a farce. Al Qaeda keeps spreading and morphing no matter how many leaders our drones and Special Forces kill. With criticism mounting, U.S. President Barack Obama defended his basic approach at West Point and hardly anyone came away feeling any better. And now we are having a pointless squabble over repatriated POW Bowe Bergdahl.
With nearly everyone—from Afghanistan War veterans to former envoy Lakhdar Brahimi to former Ambassador Robert Ford to MoveOn.org—upset about how things are going, it’s time for our premier foreign-policy institutions to step up with some outside-the-box thinking on how the United States could do better. Surely well-informed experts can offer fresh thinking on how the United States can deal with a world that seems to spin more out of control each month.”
But, of course, that’s not what America’s premier foreign-policy institutions do—at least not deliberately. On this point, Steve reviews the programs for three annual conferences “on the state of the world and America’s role in it,” convened by three prominent think tanks—the Council on Foreign Relations, the Center for a New American Security, and the “once-iconoclastic” New America Foundation. And after reviewing the three conference programs, Steve writes,
“my first impulse is to yawn. Instead of a diverse array of speakers offering fresh ideas, or a clash of divergent world-views and policy prescriptions, the programs for all these events are heavily populated by the usual suspects: prominent foreign-policy practitioners, policy wonks, and public figures whose views are already familiar to anyone who’s been paying attention to the travails of U.S. foreign policy.”
[Note—representative speakers at the conferences include John MCCain, featured speakers at the conferences include John McCain, Hillary Clinton, Madeleine Albright, Nick Burns, Robert Zoellick, Steve Hadley, and Dennis Ross.]
Steve acknowledges that “it’s easy to understand why conference organizers stick with familiar faces.” Nevertheless, he writes, “given the widespread dissatisfaction with the state of U.S. foreign policy, is this really the best we can do? Wouldn’t it be more interesting, and more importantly, more useful for these organizations to cast the net more widely, and include people whose ideas on foreign policy were serious, well-informed, yet outside the current consensus?”
Steve follows up this challenge with some concrete suggestions for participants at conferences on American foreign policy that aimed to be truly useful:
“How about inviting a serious critic of American over-commitment to speak at one of these internationalist gatherings? What about Andrew Bacevich from Boston University or Barry Posen from MIT? Both have impeccable credentials and Posen has a new book out on U.S. grand strategy that deserves wide exposure. If you wanted to generate some interest and edify the audience, put Posen on a panel with Robert Kagan, who recently defended the neoconservatives’ failed approach to U.S. grand strategy in The New Republic and let them debate the issue of U.S. military engagement at length. Ohio State Professor John Mueller has written some terrific books and articles challenging the alarmist tendencies in the U.S. foreign policy establishment, and he’s an entertaining speaker as well. If you’re looking for a different perspective on terrorism, for example, send him an invitation.
Similarly, it’s hard to think of anyone who has had more impact on debates about U.S. national security policy in the past year than Edward Snowden, Glenn Greenwald, or Laura Poitras. Even if you disagree completely with their views, all three have shown themselves to be knowledgeable and thoughtful critics of our overly energetic surveillance regime. So where’s the panel discussion on secrecy and national security policy, pitting Greenwald against a representative from the intelligence community like Michael Hayden, Mike Morell, or Paul Pillar…
Instead of playing it safe, I wish organizations like these had the imagination and courage to be bold. By all means keep some of the current insiders, but bring in Rashid Khalidi and Chas Freeman on the Middle East, Flynt and Hillary Leverett on U.S. policy toward Iran and Syria, Stephen Cohen on Ukraine, and Robert Kaplan and Australian Hugh White on Sino-American relations. I’m not saying that these people are necessarily right; my point is that an audience interested in being challenged and educated should hear a wider range of views than they typically get at these meetings. Pair them up with other people who are inclined to challenge the conventional wisdom and let a hundred flowers bloom; the resulting exchanges would edify the audience and the speakers might even learn something from each other.
If American foreign policy were going swimmingly, it would be easy to shrug off my proposal and say ‘if it ain’t broke don’t fix it.’ But that’s hardly the case: we’ve had twenty-plus years of foreign policy fiascoes, yet we continue to turn to the architects and supporters of these failures for advice on what to do next. This makes no sense; we need to rethink how we do business.
One of the strengths of U.S. democracy is supposed to be its openness to fresh ideas, and to arguments that challenge deeply embedded beliefs…Since the end of the Cold War, however, establishment thinking about foreign policy has been defined by an alliance of liberal hawks and even more hawkish neoconservatives, with disappointing results for sure. There’s no time like the present for a more wide-open discussion.”
We couldn’t agree more with Steve’s assessment of the urgent need for “more wide-open discussion.” We tend to think that a significant and growing part of the American public is ready for it. Unfortunately, it seems that America’s political class is lagging well behind the curve.
–Flynt Leverett and Hillary Mann Leverett
Iran questions nuclear deal deadline as talks ‘hit wall’
http://www.reuters.com/article/2014/06/10/us-iran-nuclear-idUSKBN0EL18T20140610
Notable quote:
“We are still hitting a wall on one absolutely fundamental point, which is the number of centrifuges which allow enrichment,” Foreign Minister Laurent Fabius told France Inter radio. “We say that there can be a few hundred centrifuges, but the Iranians want thousands, so we’re not in the same framework.”
End Quote
How US Policy on Iran Came to Be Based on Fabricated Documents
http://www.thenation.com/article/180163/how-us-policy-iran-came-be-based-fabricated-documents#
Notable Quotes
Iranian foreign minister Mohammad Javad Zarif explained to me in an interview on June 3 that Iran is proposing to reassure the United States and its negotiating partners that it isn’t interested in breakout; it will do so by converting all low-enriched uranium immediately into a form that would not be available for weapons-grade enrichment (around 90 percent purity), and then into fuel assemblies for a nuclear reactor.
The Obama administration has taken the position that Iran has no legitimate need to produce its own reactor fuel and should rely instead on the Russians and the French for its supply. Zarif told me, however, that it is “thirty years too late” to tell the Iranians that they must rely on other states for their nuclear fuel. He pointed to the long history of agreements with other states, both on nuclear fuel supply and other forms of nuclear cooperation, on which the other states have reneged.
In fact, the breakout concept is based on an entirely implausible assumption—that Iran would deliberately invite confrontation with the United States by rushing to enrich enough uranium for a single bomb—one that would not even be available for use for as long as three or four years, according to US intelligence estimates.
End Quotes
Israel: Hezbollah is now stronger than any Arab army
http://www.csmonitor.com/World/Middle-East/2014/0609/Israel-Hezbollah-is-now-stronger-than-any-Arab-army
I rate this as a propaganda piece intended to stir up the Israeli population in support of an eventual Israeli attack on Lebanon. I rather doubt Hizballah has anywhere near the number of soldiers and weapons that most Arab armies (other than Lebanon, which is very weak) have.
The idea that Hizballah would actually try to invade Israel is ludicrous. Hizballah relies entirely on its prepared territory to defend itself against Israel. Moving off that territory in large numbers would be suicidal given Israeli air and armor superiority. The fact that Hizballah has been successful in fighting insurgents in Syria does not translate to making Hizballah a “fire and movement” conventional military force capable of conducting a conventional war against a professional military like Israel’s.
What this article does prove is that Israel is still committed to trying to destroy Hizballah sooner or later, in preparation for a war with Iran. Israel cannot afford to allow Hizballah to function in support of Iran during a war with Iran. And a war with Iran – preferably fought by the United States – is Israel’s most cherished goal.
Nothing has changed. Obama’s doubling-down on a failed Syria strategy proves that is the case. The goal is still to degrade Syria and Lebanon so they cannot be effective actors in a US-Israel-Iran war.
Speaking of Bacevich, I was greatly amused by his recent takedown of Robert Kaplan in “The Duplicity of the Ideologues” published at Commonweal.
https://www.commonwealmagazine.org/duplicity-ideologues
Here’s the best lines:
“William Buckley once remarked that the country would be better off governed by the first two thousand names in the Boston phone book than by the faculty of Harvard University. Here’s a corollary: When it comes to foreign policy, the president of the United States would be better served to consult a few reasonably informed citizens from Muncie, Indiana, than to take seriously advice offered by seers such as Robert Kagan. “
Iraq is now in flames thanks to “smart” Obama foreign policy of my enemy’s enemies are my friends. We all heard how the US was sending “no-lethal”(satellite radios, AK47 etc etc) to “moderate”(non-existent FSA, Al Nusra, Islamic front etc etc) rebels fighting against the Syrian government.
At the time, short term interest overshadowed logic and we saw the US backing Al-Qaeda type groups. The FSA’s been dead long time ago so whatever aid Obama sends goes straight to ISIS or other sub groups.
Just yesterday, ISIS took over a major province in Iraq. The origin of the ISIS is in the the creation of the “Sunni awakening” by the US in Iraq during the occupation. These awakening guys felt marginalized after the US left so many rejoined Al-Qaeda and made a comeback, under different banner after the US/EU help destabilize Syria to wound Iran.
The situation is now beyond control and all states in the region will be affected directly or indirectly. All this, to protect Israel and some medieval/barbaric Arab monarchs.Enjoy 🙂
Mission accomplished, y’all!!!
Pirouz says:
June 11, 2014 at 4:01 am
The malaise in the United States is deeper than that.
The generation that entered World War II and the one immediately following that were informed by the mythos of the “Lonely Cowboy”; he enters the terrified town over-run by the outlaws, shoots the bad guys dead and chases the remaining ones out and, at the end, may or may not get the Girl – and rides into the sunset.
The contemporary American mythos, on the other hand, is that of the “Godfather” – the movie trilogy and its world has become a case of “Life imitates Art” – very many male Americans consider that world to be the embodiment of Life itself.
Of course, that is a delusion, a form of Madness, but this is what permeates all levels of US society.
When you close rural clinics and let heart attack patient die en routs to another facility which is 75 minutes away – and yet have no qualms funding an fighter jet that is going to cost upwards of $ 50 billion a copy – that, to me, is the very definition of madness.
You see it in Iowa, with the dope-smoking long-hair driving a $ 50 Chevrolet and with Bush-Cheney bumper stickers.
US foreign policy cannot be divorced from the internal degeneration in US, in my opinion.
test1
So what are the foreign policy priorities held in common by John McCain, Hillary Clinton, Madeleine Albright, Nick Burns, Robert Zoellick, Steve Hadley, and Dennis Ross?
Surely knowing that will clarify the list of acceptable speakers.
Castellio says:
June 11, 2014 at 11:34 am
“… made him an offer he could not refuse…”
A few don’t misses:
===============
FT’s David Gardner says US + Saudi’s are panicking and want to make nice with Iran to ward off out-of-control jihadism. see _http://www.ft.com/intl/cms/s/0/529cf7be-f089-11e3-8f3d-00144feabdc0.html#axzz34LLxzUAq
Paul R. Pillar fact-checks WaPo’s fact-checker, and gives Glenn Kessler a few Pinocchios of his own.
_http://consortiumnews.com/2014/06/10/missing-the-facts-on-irans-nuke-talks/
Stephen Hadley says other than an agreement with Iran, US’ plan B is very poor.
Watch at 1:19:51 _http://www.lobelog.com/0002-irans-breakout-timeline-dominates-nuclear-talks/
On this last point, one wonders what exactly impoverished “plan B?”
I’d say, Canning’s line on Iran’s obstinacy on her nuclear rights being responsible for weakening Iran misses the point Hadley is making. US’ plan B would be sparkling with sagacity had it not been for the fact that Iran proved she can develop her nuclear infrastructure despite sanctions and threats of plan B.
@Castellio
They are all globalists in the service of financial oligopolies and oligarchs. As the Leverett and Walt so pertinently state, and to the misfortune of the US: instead of being a place for debates between variety of ideas and perspectives on the future and thus the production-line for thought-out paths, the role of the major think-thanks in the US, and I will add most of the “West”, has morphed into a resonance chamber of a misguided foreign policy.
ISIL kidnaps Turkish consul in Mosul, pushes into Iraqi oil town
OOPS!
It is tough to control chaos! The destabilization plan is not working so well James.
http://america.aljazeera.com/articles/2014/6/11/iraq-mosul-isil.html
In the Financial Times today, David Gardner has interesting comments on the reasons Saudi Arabia is trying to improve its relations with Iran.
I do not see John Kerry’s efforts to foster resolution of Israel/Palestine problem as a “farce”.
Instead, I think back to the disaster for the US that GW Bush won reelection in 2004.
Any “wide-open” discussion in America of US foreign policy in the Middle East would have to take in the insane growth of illegal colonies of Jews in the West Bank. Year after year after year.
What chance is there of this? ZERO?
Even Chris Matthews has been recruited into the effort to prevent free and open discussion in the US of the damage to American interests caused direclty by Israel’s continuing occupation of the West Bank. Suppression of open discussion is the name of the game here.
Jay,
I of course think Obama is quite right to support the Iraqi central government. Your view?
Eric Cantor has lost his seat in the US Congress. This surely is good news for those hoping to see a resolution of Israel/Palestine problem.
Problem is of course the brainwashing in these groups. Basically you take 100 people and they all think the same. Some people would get a heartattack if they listened to Leverett’s, which in a sense maybe would be a great thing for world peace..
It is a war being waged against the Shias. And it is very old.
You see, Mossadeq had a Western PhD, wore Western clothes, spoke English and was in love with Western law and democracy. But when he begged to be given the same share in oil profits (50%), that the Westerners were already paying to camel riding, anti-modernity and democracy hating Wahabi Saudis, the West outright refused, put sanctions on Iran and overthrew Iran’s democracy. (The Saudis at the time, were getting 50% share in oil profits while the West did all the work and investment, a very good deal even in today’s world).
The West allied with Wahabi Sauidis and Sunni Saddam against the majority of Iraqis and Iranians being Shias.
The West takes the side of Bahrain’s Sunni dictators against the Shia populace.
The West allies with Wahabis against humanity in Syria.
The Genocide perpetrators against Afghan Shias are released with honor.
I mean, it is clear enough, isn’t it?
Smith,
I very much doubt the fact Shia Islam is the prevalent religion in Iran had anything to do with the overthrow of Mossadegh in 1953. Some major international oil comp-anies saw an opportunity to gain access to the Iranina oil market. Some of those companies were clients of the law firm (Sullivan & Cromwell) in which Allen Dulles and his brother John Foster Dulles had been partners. Allen was head of CIA, and his brother was US Sec of S.tate
Karl..,
You many recall that the US VP, Joe Biden, strongly opposed the surge in Afghanistan, while the US Sec of State, Hillary Clinton, strongly favoured it. As did Bob Gates.
Obama personally apparently thought the surge would likely prove to be an expensive failure.
There are differnces of opinion in any group.
Smith says:
June 11, 2014 at 1:50 pm
I view this as another provocation to get Iran to enter the quagmire of Iraq.
It won’t happen – just as it did not in Afghanistan.
The Shia and Kurds will almost certainly coalesce around Mr. Maliki’s government.
Look for a repeat to Syrian situation but this time in Iraq.
Largely, the Syrian desert will be ceded to the ISIS and other Jihadists to roam.
fyi says:
June 11, 2014 at 2:27 pm
I certainly hope so. I also hope that these animals will eventually bring down the nations and states of Jordan and Turkey who are to be blamed as the traitors in this war. I hope they are going to suffer more than Pakistanis who brought these animals to Afghanistan. Specially Jordan which is an artificial state.
Jay says:
June 11, 2014 at 12:27 pm
Moon Of Alabama is putting a lot of the blame on “Shia leaning government of Prime Minister Maliki and its rather sectarian security forces.”
I rather think the dishonor meted out to Arabs whether through Abu Ghraib, the night raids of homes in full view of wife and children, and various other excesses of the occupation forces is more a festering direct cause.
I tend to agree with David Gardner: there’s panic in the air. Panic is indeed all that the perps and accomplices of these wrong-headed policies/ war crimes are capable of.
I think the nuclear diplomacy may well be shelved. It has already accomplished the most hoped for outcomes: a) It is now proven that Iran and US can talk to each other; b) the “international community” can live with Iran spinning centrifuges; c) business folks don’t need sanctions to be lifted to prospect in Iran. If the nuclear negotiations were prioritized as the most important thing to talk about to pacify Netanyahu, now surely more urgent issues have emerged to push the ‘manufactured crisis’ to the farthest back burner. There are real crisis out there, and the “resonance chamber” is ill-equipped to shed light on a mess they earlier had intellectualized to be nirvana.
BiBiJon says:
June 11, 2014 at 2:56 pm
Moon Of Alabama is correct.
#Don’t kill us: Refugees from Eastern Ukraine make a plea for peace (VIDEO)
http://rt.com/news/164940-dont-kill-us-refugees-ukraine/
BiBiJon says:
June 11, 2014 at 2:56 pm
There are plenty of blame to go around! It all depends on which point of history one wants to start. In other words, it is too simplistic to lay the blame on Maliki when the recipe involves a complex mixture of influences.
But, we are here, and yes, there is panic. Once again, just as the rosy predictions of Afghanistan and Iraq did not materialize, the rosy predictions of how the destabilization plan would work is being devastated by the light of reality. This time, however, some real bad things are going to happen to folks like BP and Shell, and Bechtel and … Because the folks wreaking havoc did their field training using US and UK weapons and are bringing their ammo, and experience, along. And, they are Uzbeks, Taliban, Chechen, Arab, … a hodgepodge connected with nothing other than extending their mission in Syria – the only thing they know – to wreak havoc in the neighborhood. The West better be in a panic! A lot of it!!
@BibiJon
Moon of Alabama has to present the current situation a result of sectarianism from the government side, since b’s argument is that this is a civil war.
In my opinion, Iraq is not headed towards an internal conflict similar to Syria. These groups presenting themselves as AQ have no grass-root backing in the population, neither in Syria nor in Iraq. They would have been politically decimated long time ago if not backed by powerful actors.
US trying to get the war started in Syria.
“Robert Ford, former U.S. ambassador to Syria, has an Op-Ed that is appears in today’s print edition of the NYT, “Arm Syria’s Opposition,”.”
http://www.moonofalabama.org/2014/06/iraq-the-civil-war-restarted.html#c6a00d8341c640e53ef01a73dd6f1b5970d
bitch, fyi,
A few points on the mental ejaculations you have graciously shared with us:
1. Quoting Goedel wasn’t about “proving” Shia/Islam. It’s simply a statement by the most important mathematician of the last 100 years about his personal religious beliefs. Take it or leave it.
2. As your idol stated (go back read the posts) Goedel shows that mathematics can’t “model” everything. This was in response to your desire to prove “mathematically” that Iran should have nuclear weapons (good luck on that one) as you wrote in your post.
Goedel 1 Bitch 0
3. As usual, fyi brings up historical analogies which have nothing to do with the subject at hand.
After the Islamic revolution and under the leadership of two Shia doctors of law, Iran has reached the highest level of technological advancement and military and political power since Shah Abbas. This is a fact, not an opinion.
Following Shia Islam of the mullahs has been very very very good for Iran.
In fact, Iran is among the nations with fastest rate of technological growth in the world- as stated by the kafers.
As Ayat. Khamenei said: Technology and power without spirituality is useless.
The Islamic Republic has advanced the lives of more Iranians in all areas- literacy, education, technology, basic needs, healthcare, security etc.- than ANY other ruling system in the ENTIRE HISTORY OF IRAN- EVER. It’s a fact. Suck on that for a while.
No liberal dispensation could have ever advanced Iran the way Islam did in these last 35 years. You know why? Because the brick-layers would have eventually driven into Tehran and started chopping your westoxicated heads off- you know kinda like what happened in Afghanistan between Kabul elites and the provincial brick-layers.
Thank God for the mullahs and doctors of law like Imam (r) and Agha (r). You should get on your knees every morning and ask the Lord to protect Agha and the soul of Imam for uniting Iran under the banner of Sharia and Islam.
Like SL said, the great achievement of the Islamic Republic is creating a civil-political system on the basis of Islamic reason. (posted quote earlier)
I doubt you even understand that last statement.
(BTW I noticed how bitch used to go on about velayat and Agha and now you write about “Mr. Khamenei” and Buddhism- another indication that you are a bitch phoney.)
That doesn’t mean there aren’t problems. The issue is how you deal with them. Sitting behind the computer in the US and pontificating or jerking off (that would be you, bitch) doesn’t really help, does it.
Being in Iran and involved in building the country actually helps. In the case of fyi, well you’re retirement age and you refuse to come and visit so the issue is moot.
In the case of bitch, you wouldn’t last a single day working in the real world here in Iran, maybe it’s better you sit behind the desk (you know, jerking off) and we will just use your genius ideas that you so enthusiastically post in great detail.
Deal?
How good if you had some adab and social skills and could put that genius head of yours to use for your “beloved” Iran. But on second thought, no, that might involve interaction with a few “brick-layers” every now and then and well, that’s just not acceptable and it’ beneath you, isn’t it?
Have you ever actually built a brick wall? Sorry, let me rephrase that, have you ever worked in the real world?
I mean you very confidently say sentences like “we could done X, we could have done Y” but where have you actually done anything for Iran? Where? Do have a company, factory, office, think tank, publication, have you ever tried to do any of the things that you so confidently claim are so easy to do if it weren’t for “the idiots”?
I told your idol once, pay attention azizam: Biroon az gowd harf zadan moft-e!
Why don’t you post a link to something you have done. How about that? Believe me, I would be very happy if that existed, but my guess is it doesn’t.
There is a difference between “enteqad” and “takhrib”.
Enteqad is great, takhrib is shit. I’m talking to you, bitch.
One last point: SL recently said that the number one goal of the enemies of Iran and Islam is to sow discord between Sunni and Shia. You wouldn’t want to do something that helps the enemies of Iran, now would you, right?
He also said that the takfiri bitches aren’t our direct enemies, the real enemies are the western intelligence services and financiers that continue to support the takfiris.
Karl..,
Robert Ford is not a spokesman for the US government or for the Obama administration.
BiBiJon,
I think you are a bit wide of the mark in arguing the sanctions will not continue to block most western companies from entering the Iranian marketplace.
Leverett’s
Isnt it time for a ban soon? Even Sassan was banned for much less.
James Canning says:
June 11, 2014 at 5:37 pm
I am not the only one
http://www.cnn.com/2014/06/10/opinion/iran-nuclear-sanctions-parag-khanna/?hpt=hp_c5
People out there have a sense of proportion, as well as irrepressible desire for profits, as well as some sense of justice. Unjustified anctions have a natural shelf life, even if Victoria Nuland hadn’t really upset Russia and EU at the same time.
As Amb. Peter Jenkins laments “fat chance!” to the notion that “in so healthy a democracy, US voters will exact retribution from Congressional enthusiasts for sanctions that are no longer justified.” However, as per Thomas Friedman that congress is bought and paid for.
Business folk have bottom lines to worry about.
BiBiJon,
I continue to think Iran will have to make a deal with P5+1 or the sanctions will largely remain in place. I easily can see why you would hope this is not the case.
Iraq unlike Syria has a very prominent world respected religious leader ( Valley Fagih) his name is ayatollah Sistani in matter of few words he can bring out 100s of thousand men to the theater, having him on the minding this situation means when he gets fed up, he expect one already knows that the masque is no place to fart. That point is very near to us all.
James Canning says:
June 11, 2014 at 7:26 pm
I agree that the sanctions will remain in place and the war against the Islamic Republic and the Shia will continue.
No doubt.
“Thank God for the mullahs and doctors of law like Imam (r) and Agha (r). You should get on your knees every morning and ask the Lord to protect Agha and the soul of Imam for uniting Iran under the banner of Sharia and Islam.”
As a person raised in a nationalist family I agree with this 200 times, if it wasn’t for Islamic revolution, Iran would have got the faith of Yugoslavia or now days Ukraine, good bless Iranian Shieh leaders of Iran likes of Imam and ayatollah Khamenie.
kooshy says:
June 11, 2014 at 7:29 pm
I am doubtful that Mr. Sistani will issue a Jihad Fatwa; the chaos among Shia Factions in Iraq and the rigidity of Mr. Maliki created an opening for enemies of Shia to march in.
If Baghdad falls, years of bloody struggle will be at hand to restore the state in Iraq.
At the present time, I think the Iraqi Army, the Sadrists, and the Badr Organization must take the war to Mosul.
There is no other way.
James Canning says:
June 11, 2014 at 7:26 pm
I can easily see why you hope countries might be dependent on trading with the West. Out of self-interest the Western world should not test that self-serving proposition too much.
fyi says:
June 11, 2014 at 8:05 pm
Particularly in Iraq, Lebanon, Syria They have done it more than once already, through Sadr movement ( it was in news he was calling to organize a new force to confront the Takfiries and defending Shieh holly sites),Hezbollah, Badar , Sepah etc. for sure Shieh community is not going back to where it was if they did, they wouldn’t defend Syria, Lebanon and Iraq back in 2000’s there is no need for declared war on Sunni but there may come a declare Jihad backed by some Al Azhar Sunni scholar on Takfiris, that makes it a common intersect official cover.
On the other hand Defending there gains I am sure shieh will do, but asking for an overt and official declaration of sectarian war I am not sure will ever come, if it did, it would have made a lot of Israelis, Americans and your European barons very happy, but you must have learned by now, that many things this bunch hoped and hopes Iranian planers to make mistake on, has not happened yet, including this suggestion of yours “there is no other way” yes there is like before fighting them unofficially for as long as it takes, until their backers give up. Like our famous proverb “Go and put this trap somewhere else”
پرچم سه رنگ ضامن بقای کشور نیست
آیت الله جوادی آملی با اشاره به دوران دفاع مقدس و نقش پرچم دین در حفظ کشور گفت: در زمان جنگهای جهانی اول و دوم هم پرچم سه رنگ وجود داشت و نتوانست ایران را حفظ کند؛ ایرانی بودیم و پرچم سه رنگ داشتیم ولی 17 شهرمان را تقدیم کردیم.
به گزارش خبرگزاری رسا، آیتالله جوادی آملی در جمع دبیرکل و اعضای شورای مرکزی حزب موتلفه اسلامی با اشاره به این حقیقت که برای حفظ دین، شرف و کشورمان نیازمند وسیله و ابزار هستیم اظهار داشت: آدمی موجودی محتاج است و این یک دستور دینی است که از وسایل و ابزار استفاده کنیم. وی اضافه کرد: دو راه در امور سیاسی در پیش داریم نخست اینکه پرچمی سه رنگ در اختیارمان باشد و دوم هم اینکه پرچمی با عنوان یا زهرا(س) و یا حسین(ع) که یکی اصل و دیگری فرع است.
استاد حوزه علمیه قم در ادامه با بیان اینکه در این میان یکی نمیتواند خودش را حفظ کند و دیگری هر دو را نگاه میدارد یادآورشد: در زمان جنگهای جهانی اول و دوم هم پرچم سه رنگ وجود داشت و نتوانست ایران را حفظ کند؛ ایرانی بودیم و پرچم سه رنگ داشتیم ولی 17 شهرمان را تقدیم کردیم؛ در صبح روز 28 مرداد، هم شعار رسمی مردم تهران مرگ بر شاه بود ولی بعدازظهر همان روز شعار جاویدشاه طنینانداز شد و آن زمان هم پرچم سه رنگ داشتیم.
حضرت آیتالله جوادی آملی به دوران دفاع مقدس اشاره کرد و عنوان داشت: پرچمهای یا زهرا(س)، یا حسین(ع) و یا علی(ع) در دستان رزمندگان اسلام بود و این ظرفیت را داشت که کشور و اسلام را حفظ کند؛ هنر پرچمهای دینی همین است و باید به دنبال همانها برویم.
Fyi: The Iraqi Army is literally FLEEING from the Islamists, according to all reports – that or defecting (presumably the ones that aren’t Shia.)
The US Embassy – you know, that one we spent a billion dollars on – is preparing an evacuation plan. We may see US citizens hanging from helicopters a la Saigon before long.
Iraq is now requesting an emergency arms shipment and US air strikes to be conducted against the insurgents.
The insurgents are tearing down the berm that serves as a wall between Iraq and Syria.
Iraq is literally falling apart as we watch with incredible speed.
The only question now is: who’s going to be the first Senator to demand the US re-invade Iraq? I vote McCain… 🙂
URGENT – U.S. Embassy prepares evacuation plans
http://www.iraqinews.com/iraq-war/urgent-u-s-embassy-prepares-evacuation-plans/
Iraqi Govt Shocked, Angry as Military Routed by al-Qaeda
Army Turned Tail and Ran in the Face of Islamist Militants
http://news.antiwar.com/2014/06/11/iraqi-govt-shocked-angry-as-military-routed-by-al-qaeda/
That would be the army the US taxpayer spent BILLIONS and TEN YEARS training…
Iraq Asking for US Air Strikes Against al-Qaeda
http://news.antiwar.com/2014/06/11/iraq-asking-for-us-air-strikes-against-al-qaeda/
Not What the US Planned: Al-Qaeda Tears Down Syria-Iraq Border
Bulldozers Tearing Down Earthen Border
http://news.antiwar.com/2014/06/11/not-what-the-us-planned-al-qaeda-tears-down-syria-iraq-border/
As al-Qaeda Expands, Baghdad Is in the Crosshairs
Militants Control Major Highways Heading to Capital
http://news.antiwar.com/2014/06/11/as-al-qaeda-expands-baghdad-is-in-the-crosshairs/
US Plans Emergency Arms Shipments to Iraq
As al-Qaeda Grows, US Options Are Limited
http://news.antiwar.com/2014/06/11/us-plans-emergency-arms-shipments-to-iraq/
Yesterday Mosul, Today Tikrit: al-Qaeda Seizing Much of Northern Iraq
AQI Fighters Loot Central Bank in Mosul of $429 Million
http://news.antiwar.com/2014/06/11/yesterday-mosul-today-tikrit-al-qaeda-seizing-much-of-iraqs-northwest/
Quote
Though Iraqi officials remained confident they would retake Mosul in time, they said the same thing about Fallujah in January and don’t seem to have put a dent in AQI’s control of it or the surrounding area.
End Quote
So when will Iran respond to the takeover of northern/western Iraq by Al Qaeda? You know what happens if Iran sends troops into Iraq, right? The US attacks Iran…
RSH
Iran should of course not intervene, I am not sure why US would attack them in that case?
What doesn’t kill you will only make you stronger. Iran and the Resistance Movement are the main target of all these dead brain policy of the West lead by the US.
However just as in Syria, the Resistance lead by Iran will survive this again and it will not only make all these countries more reliant on Iran but will also create a mass of battle hardened oppositions to US position and interest in the middle east, thereby given Iran an edge in the balance of power in the region.
In fact the soft power of Iran can only be on the increase a case in point which is Syria where the minorities in that nation now see Iran as their protector including secular Sunnis.
There will never be an open declaration of war by Shia scholars contrary to what the West want, but the Shias will nevertheless rally round to protect themselves and the sovereignty of their country. And as the SL have said:
” Today, some people in different parts of the world of Islam – which go by the name of takfiri, Wahhabi and Salafi groups – are adopting bad and inappropriate measures against Iran, Shia Muslims and
Shia Islam. But everyone should know that they are not the main
enemies. They show enmity and they adopt foolish measures, but
the main enemy is the person who provokes them, who gives them
money and who motivates them with different means when their
motivation is weakened to some extent.
The main enemy is the person who sows the seeds of rupture and
discord between that foolish and ignorant group and the oppressed
people of Iran. These measures are adopted by the hidden hands of
intelligence and security services. That is why we have constantly
said that we do not consider these foolish groups – who confront the
Islamic Republic in the name of Salafism, takfiri and Islam – to be
our main enemy.
We consider you to be the deceived. We have said to these people:
“If you stretch your hand against me to slay me, it is not for me to
stretch my hand against you to slay you: for I fear Allah, the
Cherisher of the worlds” [The Holy Quran, 5: 28]. If you make a
mistake and if you prepare yourself to kill your Muslim brothers, we
do not consider you to be so important that we try to kill you.
Today, some people in different parts of the world of Islam – which
go by the name of takfiri, Wahhabi and Salafi groups – are adopting
bad and inappropriate measures against Iran, Shia Muslims and
Shia Islam. But everyone should know that they are not the main
enemies. They show enmity and they adopt foolish measures, but
the main enemy is the person who provokes them, who gives them
money and who motivates them with different means when their
motivation is weakened to some extent.
The main enemy is the person who sows the seeds of rupture and
discord between that foolish and ignorant group and the oppressed
people of Iran. These measures are adopted by the hidden hands of
intelligence and security services. That is why we have constantly
said that we do not consider these foolish groups – who confront the
Islamic Republic in the name of Salafism, takfiri and Islam – to be
our main enemy.
We consider you to be the deceived. We have said to these people:
“If you stretch your hand against me to slay me, it is not for me to
stretch my hand against you to slay you: for I fear Allah, the
Cherisher of the worlds” [The Holy Quran, 5: 28]. If you make a
mistake and if you prepare yourself to kill your Muslim brothers, we
do not consider you to be so important that we try to kill you.
, but we believe that these people are not
our main enemies. They have been deceived. The main enemy is the
person who acts be Of course, we defend ourselves. Anyone who attacks us will face our firm fist. This is natural hind the scenes. The main enemy is the visible hand that comes out of the sleeve of intelligence services, that confronts Muslims and that pits them against one another. but we believe that these people are not
our main enemies. They have been deceived. The main enemy is the
person who acts behind the scenes. The main enemy is the visible
hand that comes out of the sleeve of intelligence services, that
confronts Muslims and that pits them against one another.”
You think you had seen it all, nope check this:
HRW glorifies ISS!
https://twitter.com/KekHamo/status/476917859885780992/photo/1
uh I meant HRW glorifies ISIS
I think soon west will start say that Maliki have to step down. THis could indeed be a new “syria”.
Karl.. says:
June 12, 2014 at 9:39 am
It matters not.
The aim still is the wounding of Iran – even if it destroys Iraq.
Karl.. says:
June 12, 2014 at 9:18 am
HRW and several other “human rights” outfits endorsed US rendition programs back in 2009 and have been silent on numerous violations by the West and Western allied countries.
These are Marketing outlets where people with language skills are hired to pose as “someone who cares”, or “some expert”, in order to bloviate stuff like “20%”, “Saudi fear”, “Repression”, .. simply an arm of the Ministry of you know what.
fyi
Dont matter for whom? It surely matter for Iraq and the neighbours.
Jay
Makes me wonder where hrw gets it money from…
Karl.. says:
June 12, 2014 at 10:35 am
Sourcewatch is a good place to glean basic information.
http://www.sourcewatch.org/index.php/Human_Rights_Watch
Sandler Foundation was the initial source of funds. It all looks innocuous because Sandler also supports ACLU. But,Sandler supports Center for American Progress – yes, the same folks that supported the escalation of war in Afghanistan.
My own take is that HRW is one brick in the facade of neoliberal institutions being built to support interventionism everywhere.
Jay
Right, my suspicion though is that they get funds from states, not obvious, but covertly.
Nice quote from Lavrov referring to “English Colleagues” ability to twist things!
“We’ve known that our English colleagues have a unique ability to twist everything. But I didn’t expect such cynicism, because the events that are taking place in Iraq are an illustration of a complete failure of the venture started by the US and the UK that allowed it to spiral out of control completely.”
The statement was in response to UK foreign Sec.
“It has been reported that the UK foreign minister declared that the events in Iraq are, according to him, an illustration that terrorism is rampant in the region due to the absence of reconciliation in Syria,” Lavrov said.
Karl.. says:
June 12, 2014 at 10:35 am
It does not matter what EU says, the situation on the ground is not amenable to change by their desires or assertions.
This latest provocation against the legitimate and duly & legally constructed and organized Government of Iraq has its roots in EU and US.
Axis Powers are – at least publicly – are at the horn of a dilemma.
They hate Iran and wish it great harm.
Yet, they do not seem to be willing to have Iraq destroyed in the process of wounding Iran.
At least publicly.
That also matters not; Iranians will do whatever it takes to keep the elected government in power in Iraq.
These provocations only drives the Shia, the Kurds, the Druze, the Christians, the Yazidis, the Alawites, and the sane Sunnis together.
As I wrote here before, Axis Powers have no positive program for the Middle East except more death and more bloodshed.
We are watching another demonstration of that fact.
Their man-servant states – specially Turkey and Jordan – have done their utmost to carry the instructions received by their masters among Axis Powers.
This is what you get.
Mr. Erdogan and King Abdullah can go pray as many times as they like each day, all the while claiming to be pious Muslims, but what they have wrought – on behalf of Axis Powers – has caused tens of thousands of dead & wounded Muslims as well as millions of Muslim refugees.
fyi
Right I just meant that if this conflict keeps on we will soon hear that he must go and that the opposition must be armed, helped, put to power et.c.
Karl.. says:
“Makes me wonder where hrw gets it money from…”
HRW is apparently a revolving door for former US intelligent and National security officers;
http://www.democracynow.org/2014/6/11/debate_is_human_rights_watch_too
kooshy says:
June 11, 2014 at 11:21 pm
There are 6 places in the world that use the tri-color flag of White, Green, and Red (only).
Iran, Italy, Bulgaria, Tajikistan, Hungary, Iraqi Kurdistan,
White is the symbol of “Faith”
Green is that of “Hope”
Red is that of “Love”
All of that symbolism is eminently religious and consistent with Shia Islam.
The old Lion & Sword were a Symbol of Imam Ali and Zulfaqar.
And the “rising Sun”, the Prophet.
I do not think it useful to spend one’s time with the ill-informed and the un-educated.
As evident from my posts, I do believe that the Western Axis has “problems”. However, putting the events in context and recalling recent history is helpful.
I recall your attention to, for example, two items
a) The Grand Chessboard: American Primacy and Its Geo-strategic Imperatives, by Zbigniew Brzezinski
He alluded to the modern Middle East as a control lever of an area he, Brzezinski, calls the Eurasian Balkans. The Eurasian Balkans consists of the Caucasus (Georgia, the Republic of Azerbaijan, and Armenia) and Central Asia (Kazakhstan, Uzbekistan, Kyrgyzstan, Tajikistan, Turkmenistan, Afghanistan, and Tajikistan) and to some extent both Iran and Turkey. Iran and Turkey both form the northernmost tiers of the Middle East (excluding the Caucasus4) that edge into Europe and the former Soviet Union.
and
b) the map of the “new middle east” as envisioned by the neo-xxs and illustrated by Ms. Wright in NYT
http://geocurrents.info/geopolitics/myth-nation-state/robin-wrights-audacious-remapping-middle-east
moonofalabama on how western propagandists already talk about the need to kick out iraqi leader.
http://www.moonofalabama.org/2014/06/cordesman-laments-confirms-russian-radically-different-views.html
Karl..,
Norui al-Maliki clearly has made some serious mistakes, especially in the area of stirring up Sunni anger and resentment by attacking Sunni leaders in Iraq. Correct?
fyi,
I suggest you read the leader in the Financial Times today, on how Nouri al-Maliki’s mistakes are doing so much to foster chaos in Iraq.
fyi,
Your notion that Nato countries “hate Iran” is RUBBISH. Complete and utter cr*p.
fyi,
Most of the well-nformed and well-traveled people I know in Britain and the US have a higher esteem for Iran than they do for Israel. History, culture etc etc etc. They may not like the Iranian government especially, but notions of a “hatred of Iran” are silly.
BiBiJon,
You appear to be predicting that Iran can evade the sanctions through barter schemes, and perhaps by using Chinese or some other non-US medium of exhange? No need for a deal with P5+1?
fyi,
Most countries observing the sanctions do not view it as participating in a “war on Iran”. I think they see it as part of an effort to avoid a war.
I call again on Leverett’s to ban this man from this site.
At LobeLog.com, James Russell has some trenchant comments on the situation in Iraq: “The fall of Mosul”.
Karl..,
BibiJon argues today that Iran can avoid war and not make a deal with P5+1. FYI argues that Iran already is engaged in a war with Nato and other countries.
Your response? You object to my pointing this out!
Karl..,
If you think Russia and China went along with sanctions in the hope of setting up a war with Iran, you are simply mistaken.
James Canning says:
June 12, 2014 at 1:47 pm
I suppose when this or that potentate was starving this or that city he did not consider that war either.
I recall the happy reports in EU and US papers 3 years ago, elated that Iran could not import this or that food item.
James Canning says:
June 12, 2014 at 1:40 pm
Those people are not setting US or EU policy.
James Canning says:
June 12, 2014 at 1:37 pm
Oh, no NATO loves Iran, after all they did their best to create hyper-inflation in Iran and in that manner wreck the social fabric of Iran to shreds.
An Act of Hatred, in my book.
Your response?
James Canning says:
June 12, 2014 at 1:45 pm
James, it takes two to make a deal.
Unjust and immoral sanctions can and will be left on the books, but enforcing them will be more and more difficult. To the extent that sanctions can be enforced, it is not all bad for the Iranian economy; it is a kind of a protectionism for domestic industries.
Escalation to blockades is of course an act of war, and in all likelihood will be responded to.
James Canning says:
June 12, 2014 at 2:13 pm
Making a deal with P5+1 will not prevent US war against Iran; in fact, it will make it more likely.
Since August of 2013 we have learnt that the military destruction of Iran remains the aim of the United States.
Nothing has changed.
To All
Iran to reduce Arak plutonium production. Shocking, just shocking
http://www.presstv.ir/detail/2014/06/12/366606/iran-to-cut-arak-plutonium-production/
Khomeini says:
June 12, 2014 at 3:29 pm
I think it is rather smart. Iran either leaves NPT, goes full ahead with weapon production, the hell with anybody’s concerns, and the hell with risks of others acquiring deterrent weapons of their own, etc. Or, she alleys fears and concerns in the short term, so as to leave no excuses for Jeffery Lewis to egg Saudis on to proliferate.
What surely would be shocking is if one didn’t have any intention of developing weapons, but left the propagandists unnecessary excuses.
fyi,
How do you see the events of Aug. 21st last year as establishing Obama wants to destroy Iran?
Obama took and continues to take a good deal of flak for not attacking Syria.
BiBiJon,
So you see sanctions as a fairly minor problem and perhaps on the whole a net gain for Iran? Whereas FYI sees them as part of a “war on Iran”.
fyi,
“Nato” did not impose the sanctions on Iran.
James Canning says:
June 12, 2014 at 4:27 pm
Again we are back to GCHQ Turin robotics.
I think you know very well everybody’s positions. If GCHQ had programmed so much as an ounce of shame in you, you would quit brandishing your nonsensical positions so darned often.
There are certain things that you cannot put a price on, that you can bribe or coerce, etc. Of course you know that. But what you’ve been coded to do is to make out that if there were to be a deal, it was because Iran ‘sold’ her principles for x amount of economic benefits.
The only thing worth focusing on here is whether or not a balance can be struck between Iran’s rights, and Western alleged concerns. The matter is entirely political, and 99.99% of it is to do with Iran’s independent foreign policy which is not for sale at any price.
don’t miss http://www.lobelog.com/iran-rethinking-the-prevention-of-nuclear-proliferation/
The question:
“Would the US and EU be wise to walk away from the negotiation if, for domestic political reasons, Iran were to refuse to dismantle any of its 19,000 centrifuges and to operate any fewer than 9,000 at any one time?”
“Should the US and EU be ready to close the deal if Iran can demonstrate convincingly that it has no interest in acquiring nuclear weapons — with no motive for incurring the near-universal condemnation that a nuclear “break-out” would trigger — and backs up the demonstration by accepting that verification of its nuclear program can remain at current levels indefinitely?”
And, let me add another question: If the US and EU did walk away, will there be in ten years new negotiations to see if Iran might reduce her 200,000 centrifuges down to 100,000?
James Canning says:
June 12, 2014 at 4:29 pm
No NATO formally did not – on legal technicality you are right.
Every single member did, together with Australia.
Aims was the destruction of Iranian social fabric through hyper-inflation.
I am sure all of that was for the love of Iranian people….
Don’t miss https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=9sX1WxJ9u0s
The Emir of Q8 seems a little not with it.
fyi,
The purpose of the sanctions was to avoid war by inflicting sufficient pain to rein in Iran’s nuclear programme.
You argue the sanctions themselves were part of a war. Wrong. Idea is to avoid a war.
Admittedly, many ardent supporters of Israel wanted sanctions in order to block an improvement in US relations with Iran, and many of these ardent supporters of Israel apparently would welcome a war. Which in turn has much to do with illegal colonisation programme in the West Bank.
BiBiJon,
I have suggested for years now Iran may be able to make a tacit deal with P5+1, provided it limits its nuclear programme voluntarily. Key proviso.
BiBiJon,
I think you simply are mistaken, to beleive that virtually the entire basis of the Iranian nuclear dispute has to do with Iranian foreign policy.
I think Iran could make a deal, get rid of the sanctions, and continue to support Hezbollah and Hamas, and the Syrian governemnt if it holds on. etc etc.
Khomeini says:
June 12, 2014 at 3:29 pm
Plutonium is the unsafest and most detectable of nuclear proliferation, if Iran ever has the intention of making nuclear bomb it would be stupid to go the plutonium way firstly need to make a reprocessing plant which is not easy to hide and can be bombed, while the process of uranium can be done in any building or basement.
I think the Irak plant was not made for bomb making or a deterrent measure, I think beside mastering the technology ,it was meant to be a mind diverter measure ( you can called a “Persian decoy”) while uranium plants were constructed.
US Readies Air Strikes Against al-Qaeda in Iraq
http://news.antiwar.com/2014/06/12/us-readies-air-strikes-against-al-qaeda-in-iraq/
How long will it take before the failure of US air strikes and the Iraqi military to halt the advance of Al Qaeda in Iraq leads Obama to re-commit troops into Iraq?
So what does his Nobel Peace Prize mean then?
Iran Deploys Troops to Guard Baghdad, Fight al-Qaeda
http://news.antiwar.com/2014/06/12/iran-deploys-troops-to-guard-baghdad-fight-al-qaeda/
Supposedly two battalions of Quds Force now in Iran.
And what happens if Obama decides to send troops into Iran alongside them?
Talking about wining
I mean not the world but the cup of hearths and minds
“World Cup: Support for Iran reaches fever pitch in south Beirut”
http://www.aawsat.net/2014/06/article55333163
The Canadian-born US-Cuban Senator Rafael (Ted) Cruz, is an Israeli lackey. Recently, addressing a conference of paranoid leaders of the Jewish Institute for (Israel’s) National Security Affairs (JINSA) he said that if Barack Obama is too scared to attack Iran, Israel might be forced to go ahead alone this year. He said that he got that impression from his meeting with Netanyahu in Tel Aviv last month.
“In my views, here is what a “responsible president” would do. A responsible president would stand up on the world stage and say, “Let me be clear: Under no circumstances the nation of Iran be allowed to acquire nuclear weapons capability. We will impose crippling sanctions but they will either stop or we will stop them using all available means, including if necessary direct military force,” said Cruz.
I’m afraid, either this fellow is totally moron or he is trying to fool the Jewish Lobby in a bid to get Jewish money and support for his dream of receiving GOP nomination for the 2016 presidential election.
Barack Obama not only made that pledge but also equated Jewish holocaust with Christian and Muslim religions during his speech at the UN General Assembly in September 2012.
http://rehmat1.com/2014/06/13/sen-cruz-israel-to-strike-iran-this-year/
Richard Steven Hack – Why would Iran send its forces in Iraq when it did not send forces to its top Arab ally Bashar al-Assad? Iran let Hizbullah fighters defeat the pro-Israel ISIL in Syria. Hizbullah fighters can defend Baghdad too if Sheikh Nasrallah decide.
As far American or Israel forces coming to Iran – I know Iranian have been waiting for those cowards since 1980.
James Canning says:
June 12, 2014 at 7:06 pm
Well, maybe it ain’t political, it just good ol’ racists
http://www2.gwu.edu/~nsarchiv/nukevault/ebb268/
THERE ARE THOSE WHO REPEAT OVER AND OVER WHAT THE TV TEACHES THEM:
“MALEKI ANGERED THE SUNNIS, THEREFORE….”
CONSIDER THE FOLLOWING:
MOST OF THE POPULATION IN MOSUL FLED. MOSUL IS A SUNNI CITY. WHY WOULD SUNNIS FLEE MOSUL, TIKRIT AND EVEN FALUJA?
THOSE WHO ADVANCE SUCH NONSENSE WHOULD HAVE YOU BELIEVE THAT THE APPROPRIATE ANSWER TO FEELING EXCLUDED IS PICK UP ARMS AND KILL EVERYONE AROUND YOU. THOSE WHO ADVANCE SUCH IDEAS PREACHED BY THEIR TV STATIONS MUST HAVE DEEP SENSE OF SUPPORT FOR ALL THOSE SHOOTERS WHO KILL CHILDREN AT SCHOOLS IN SANTA BARBARA, OREGON, OR CONNECTICUT.
BUT THE REALITY IS COMPLETELY DIFFERENT. SUNNIS ARE RUNNING AWAY EQUALLY FROM THESE SAUDI BACKED RELIGIOUS NUT JOBS. MOST SYRIANS SUPPORT ASSAD.
CURIOUS HOW THE ISIS IS CAPTURING EXACTLY THE TERRITORY THE US/QATAR/SAUDI/TURKEY HAVE PROPOSED TO BUILD THEIR GAS AND OIL PIPE LINE
THE PROPOSED Iran-Iraq-Syrian pipeline is now blocked.
Pouya, both excellent observations (just get rid of the caps so it doesn’t feel as if you’re yelling).
You are suggesting that the Saudi-Israeli-American-Turkish response to the rule of Maliki and the longevity of Assad, both supporters of Iran, is to support the radicals (finances, arms and intelligence) in both Syria and Iraq and claim it’s all about a traditional Sunni – Shia conflict.
Yes. I agree.
What can be done about it?
Rehmat: Richard Steven Hack – Why would Iran send its forces in Iraq when it did not send forces to its top Arab ally Bashar al-Assad?”
Because Iraq is NEXT DOOR TO IRAN? Duh…
Rehmat
Is right imo, Iran wont send any troops, the big question is of course why would they?
Ayatollah Sistani issues Fatwa in which he asks the Iraqis to take arms and fight the terrorists.
“Sabah al Nasseri explains that ISIS was able to take control of Mosul, Tikrit & Baiji due to the weak state that arose from the occupation, and places it in the context of U.S. policy towards the Arab revolutions”
http://therealnews.com/t2/index.php?option=com_content&task=view&id=31&Itemid=74&jumival=11986
BiBiJon,
I have a good number of friends in Britain and the US who are well-educated and well-traveled, and none of them to my knowledge regards Iranians as non-white. Where do you get the notion of “racism” as being a factor in the nuclear dispute?
Castellio
Thanks for the tip. Don’t want to appear I am yelling.
First, It must be recognized this is not Sunni against Shia, nor is it about Maleki’s policies. How can we ignore the chaos in Syria and blame it on Maleki. Those fighter simply could not go anywhere in Syria and have made a 180 degree turn backed by their backers.
Second, they need to arm Sunni tribes who have also fled. This was not just an army collapse, this was a collapse of the Iraqi army followed by Sunni population fleeing every corner of the country. They need to rearm everyone and push back but this time all the way in Syria.
Third, we must recognize that ISIS is an empty force only made larger than life by US media. The ISIS has lost one battle after another to the Syrian opposition forces who in turn have lost big chuncks of territory to the Syrian army. So how good can they be?
Fourth, Iran will end up getting deeper involved WITHOUT being too obvious.There is no role for the US unless the two sides reach broad agreements to cooperate. I don’t see that happening anytime soon.