| Topic: |
Politics > Politics-USA |
| User: |
"can_o_worms" |
| Date: |
25 Mar 2006 12:58:06 AM |
| Object: |
The coming Battle for Baghdad |
Battle for Baghdad 'has already started'
http://news.independent.co.uk/world/middle_east/article353501.ece
By Patrick Cockburn in Arbil 25 March 2006
Published:
The battle between Sunni and Shia Muslims for control of Baghdad has
already started, say Iraqi political leaders who predict fierce street
fighting will break out as each community takes over districts in
which it is strongest.
"The fighting will only stop when a new balance of power has emerged,"
Fuad Hussein, the chief of staff of Massoud Barzani, the Kurdish
leader, said. "Sunni and Shia will each take control of their own
area." He said sectarian cleansing had already begun.
Many Iraqi leaders now believe that civil war is inevitable but it
will be confined, at least at first, to the capital and surrounding
provinces where the population is mixed. "The real battle will be the
battle for Baghdad where the Shia have increasing control," said one
senior official who did not want his name published. "The army will
disintegrate in the first moments of the war because the soldiers are
loyal to the Shia, Sunni or Kurdish communities and not to the
government." He expected the Americans to stay largely on the
sidelines.
Throughout the capital, communities, both Sunni and Shia, are on the
move, fleeing districts where they are in a minority and feel under
threat. Sometimes they fight back. In the mixed but majority Shia
al-Amel district, Sunni householders recently received envelopes
containing a Kalashnikov bullet and a letter telling them to get out
at once. In this case they contacted the insurgents who killed several
Shia neighbours suspected of sending the letters.
"The Sunni will fight for Baghdad," said Mr Hussein. "The Baath party
already controls al-Dohra and other Sunni groups dominate Ghazaliyah
and Abu Ghraib [districts in south and west Baghdad]."
The Iraqi army is likely to fall apart once inter-communal fighting
begins. According to Peter Galbraith, former US diplomat and expert on
Iraq, the Iraqi army last summer contained 60 Shia battalions, 45
Sunni battalions, nine Kurdish battalions and one mixed battalion.
The police are even more divided and in Baghdad are largely controlled
by the Mehdi Army of the radical nationalist cleric Muqtada al-Sadr
and the Badr Organisation that has largely been in control of the
interior ministry since last May. Sunni Arabs in Baghdad regard the
ministry's paramilitary police commanders as Shia death squads
Mr Hussein gave another reason why the army is weak. "Where you have
3,000 soldiers there will in fact be only 2,000 men [because of ghost
soldiers who do not exist and whose salaries are taken by senior
officers]," he said. "When it comes to fighting only 500 of those men
will turn up."
Iraqi officials and ministers are increasingly in despair at the
failure to put together an effective administration in Baghdad. A
senior Arab minister, who asked not to be named, said: "The government
could end up being only a few buildings in the Green Zone."
The mood among Iraqi leaders, both Arabs and Kurds, is far gloomier in
private than the public declarations of the US and British
governments. The US President George W Bush called this week for a
national unity government in Iraq but Iraqi observers do not expect
this to be any more effective than the present government of Prime
Minister Ibrahim al-Jaafari. One said this week: "The real problem is
that the Shia and Sunni hate each other and not that we haven't been
able to form a government."
The Shia and Kurds will have the advantage in the coming conflict
because they have leaders and organisations. The Sunni are divided and
only about 30 per cent of the population of the capital. Nevertheless
they should be able to hold on to their stronghold in west Baghdad and
the Adhamiyah district east of the Tigris. The Shia do not have the
strength and probably do not wish to take over the Sunni towns and
villages north and west of Baghdad.
Though the Kurds have long sought autonomy close to
quasi-independence, their leaders are worried that civil war will
increase Iranian and Turkish involvement in Iraq. Mr Hussein said he
feared that civil war in Baghdad could spread north to Mosul and
Kirkuk where the division is between Kurd and Arab rather than Sunni
and Shia.
Already Baghdad resembles Beirut at the start of the Lebanese civil
war in 1975, when Christians and Muslims fought each other for control
of the city.
http://news.independent.co.uk/world/middle_east/article353501.ece
This article linked from: antiwar.com
--
other choices:
www.lp.org
www.gp.org
.
|
|
| User: "" |
|
| Title: Re: The coming Battle for Baghdad |
25 Mar 2006 01:12:51 AM |
|
|
Letter to editor: 3/18/06 San Diego Union Tribune
"Since Iraq is headed for a civil war no matter what we do now, and
Iran is persuing nuclear weapons to use against us, why not move from
Iraq into Iran (and Syria) and let the Iraq civil war just play itself
out? With the US troops in Iran, Syria and Afganistan, thus surrounding
Iraq, the Middle East should beome stabilized fairly quickly.
BILL KETCHUM
Point Loma"
Looks like Sect. of State material to me.
With thanks to the person who told me about this.
HCL, Jr fan
.
|
|
|
| User: "£ - E A R T H L I N G Ƨ" |
|
| Title: Re: The coming Battle for Baghdad |
25 Mar 2006 03:28:31 AM |
|
|
<midlant@earthlink.net> wrote in message
news:1143270771.644889.127500@j33g2000cwa.googlegroups.com...
Letter to editor: 3/18/06 San Diego Union Tribune
"Since Iraq is headed for a civil war no matter what we do now, and
Iran is persuing nuclear weapons to use against us, why not move from
Iraq into Iran (and Syria) and let the Iraq civil war just play itself
out? With the US troops in Iran, Syria and Afganistan, thus surrounding
Iraq, the Middle East should beome stabilized fairly quickly.
BILL KETCHUM
Point Loma"
Looks like Sect. of State material to me.
With thanks to the person who told me about this.
HCL, Jr fan
Bush's nightmare: Iraq-Iran-Syria-Saudi Arabia-Lebannon-Palestine Union.
If Bush persists his nightmare will be realized
.
|
|
|
| User: "Jim E" |
|
| Title: Re: The coming Battle for Baghdad |
25 Mar 2006 09:40:50 AM |
|
|
"£ - E A R T H L I N G Ƨ" <never@bush.net> wrote in message
news:338Vf.8478$tN3.2659@newssvr27.news.prodigy.net...
<midlant@earthlink.net> wrote in message
news:1143270771.644889.127500@j33g2000cwa.googlegroups.com...
Letter to editor: 3/18/06 San Diego Union Tribune
"Since Iraq is headed for a civil war no matter what we do now, and
Iran is persuing nuclear weapons to use against us, why not move from
Iraq into Iran (and Syria) and let the Iraq civil war just play itself
out? With the US troops in Iran, Syria and Afganistan, thus surrounding
Iraq, the Middle East should beome stabilized fairly quickly.
BILL KETCHUM
Point Loma"
Looks like Sect. of State material to me.
With thanks to the person who told me about this.
HCL, Jr fan
Bush's nightmare: Iraq-Iran-Syria-Saudi Arabia-Lebannon-Palestine Union.
If Bush persists his nightmare will be realized
You forget that all arab nations have refused the palis any support, except
for terrorism.
They all need the diversion from their own total failure.
Jim E
.
|
|
|
|
| User: "can_o_worms" |
|
| Title: Re: The coming Battle for Baghdad |
25 Mar 2006 02:09:52 PM |
|
|
On Sat, 25 Mar 2006 09:28:31 GMT, "£ - E A R T H L I N G Ƨ"
<never@bush.net> wrote:
<midlant@earthlink.net> wrote in message
news:1143270771.644889.127500@j33g2000cwa.googlegroups.com...
Letter to editor: 3/18/06 San Diego Union Tribune
"Since Iraq is headed for a civil war no matter what we do now, and
Iran is persuing nuclear weapons to use against us, why not move from
Iraq into Iran (and Syria) and let the Iraq civil war just play itself
out? With the US troops in Iran, Syria and Afganistan, thus surrounding
Iraq, the Middle East should beome stabilized fairly quickly.
BILL KETCHUM
Point Loma"
Looks like Sect. of State material to me.
With thanks to the person who told me about this.
HCL, Jr fan
Bush's nightmare: Iraq-Iran-Syria-Saudi Arabia-Lebannon-Palestine Union.
If Bush persists his nightmare will be realized
Oh that's the neoCON scam-plan.......drag us into the ***** with as
many Muslims as possible cause they're real scary and might take
over us all someday.......first Israel and then the U.S.......the old
domino theory.......We need to take over the Middle East and
round up all the razor blades.
--
other choices:
www.lp.org
www.gp.org
.
|
|
|
|
|
| User: "can_o_worms" |
|
| Title: Re: The coming Battle for Baghdad |
25 Mar 2006 01:31:07 AM |
|
|
On 24 Mar 2006 23:12:51 -0800, wrote:
Letter to editor: 3/18/06 San Diego Union Tribune
"Since Iraq is headed for a civil war no matter what we do now, and
Iran is persuing nuclear weapons to use against us, why not move from
Iraq into Iran (and Syria) and let the Iraq civil war just play itself
out? With the US troops in Iran, Syria and Afganistan, thus surrounding
Iraq, the Middle East should beome stabilized fairly quickly.
BILL KETCHUM
Point Loma"
This guy has obviously been in the Submarine a little too long.
Not a cost effective foreign policy.
How about a nuke standoff between the Mullahs and Israelis
instead......Much more cost effective and low risk for the U.S.
Looks like Sect. of State material to me.
With thanks to the person who told me about this.
HCL, Jr fan
Condi would luv it !
--
another choice:
www.lp.org
.
|
|
|
| User: "Jim E" |
|
| Title: Re: The coming Battle for Baghdad |
25 Mar 2006 09:39:09 AM |
|
|
"can_o_worms" <can_o_worms@bogus.com> wrote in message
news:31s922dte2c7ofd619lqsp58mo1d4hja7g@4ax.com...
On 24 Mar 2006 23:12:51 -0800, wrote:
Letter to editor: 3/18/06 San Diego Union Tribune
"Since Iraq is headed for a civil war no matter what we do now, and
Iran is persuing nuclear weapons to use against us, why not move from
Iraq into Iran (and Syria) and let the Iraq civil war just play itself
out? With the US troops in Iran, Syria and Afganistan, thus surrounding
Iraq, the Middle East should beome stabilized fairly quickly.
BILL KETCHUM
Point Loma"
This guy has obviously been in the Submarine a little too long.
Not a cost effective foreign policy.
How about a nuke standoff between the Mullahs and Israelis
instead......Much more cost effective and low risk for the U.S.
How about just nuking Iran's weapon facilities, and avoiding the whole brow
sweating experience.
Who wants ninth century brains owning nuclear weapons?
Be real, they can't be trusted with AK's.
No harm, no foul.
Jim E
.
|
|
|
| User: "can_o_worms" |
|
| Title: Re: The coming Battle for Baghdad |
25 Mar 2006 12:44:25 PM |
|
|
On Sat, 25 Mar 2006 07:39:09 -0800, "Jim E" <YD653126@sea.edu> wrote:
"can_o_worms" <can_o_worms@bogus.com> wrote in message
news:31s922dte2c7ofd619lqsp58mo1d4hja7g@4ax.com...
On 24 Mar 2006 23:12:51 -0800, wrote:
Letter to editor: 3/18/06 San Diego Union Tribune
"Since Iraq is headed for a civil war no matter what we do now, and
Iran is persuing nuclear weapons to use against us, why not move from
Iraq into Iran (and Syria) and let the Iraq civil war just play itself
out? With the US troops in Iran, Syria and Afganistan, thus surrounding
Iraq, the Middle East should beome stabilized fairly quickly.
BILL KETCHUM
Point Loma"
This guy has obviously been in the Submarine a little too long.
Not a cost effective foreign policy.
How about a nuke standoff between the Mullahs and Israelis
instead......Much more cost effective and low risk for the U.S.
How about just nuking Iran's weapon facilities, and avoiding the whole brow
sweating experience.
Who wants ninth century brains owning nuclear weapons?
Be real, they can't be trusted with AK's.
No harm, no foul.
Jim E
You G.O.P. guys who say that the threat is to the U.S. sound like a
bunch of old women. I'm not worried because I don't live in F.O.X..
country......I live in the U.S.
Your typical Israel-first prescription prescription actually endangers
U.S. citizens which you don't mind at all as long as we keep your
precious promised land safe for Israelis.
If your real country is such hot *****....wait until we bail out of
operation disaster and do the job yourselves.....entertain us.
--
Just some favorite sites:
http://www.antiwar.com/
http://www.ussliberty.org/
http://www.ipsnews.net/new_focus/neo-cons/index.asp
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=fAoe26MaTew&search=fox%20news
.
|
|
|
| User: "Jim E" |
|
| Title: Re: The coming Battle for Baghdad |
25 Mar 2006 04:06:01 PM |
|
|
"can_o_worms" <can_o_worms@bogus.com> wrote in message
news:9u2b221am19ds13rfbl5aubmpju6fg279e@4ax.com...
On Sat, 25 Mar 2006 07:39:09 -0800, "Jim E" <YD653126@sea.edu> wrote:
"can_o_worms" <can_o_worms@bogus.com> wrote in message
news:31s922dte2c7ofd619lqsp58mo1d4hja7g@4ax.com...
On 24 Mar 2006 23:12:51 -0800, wrote:
Letter to editor: 3/18/06 San Diego Union Tribune
"Since Iraq is headed for a civil war no matter what we do now, and
Iran is persuing nuclear weapons to use against us, why not move from
Iraq into Iran (and Syria) and let the Iraq civil war just play itself
out? With the US troops in Iran, Syria and Afganistan, thus surrounding
Iraq, the Middle East should beome stabilized fairly quickly.
BILL KETCHUM
Point Loma"
This guy has obviously been in the Submarine a little too long.
Not a cost effective foreign policy.
How about a nuke standoff between the Mullahs and Israelis
instead......Much more cost effective and low risk for the U.S.
How about just nuking Iran's weapon facilities, and avoiding the whole
brow
sweating experience.
Who wants ninth century brains owning nuclear weapons?
Be real, they can't be trusted with AK's.
No harm, no foul.
Jim E
You G.O.P. guys who say that the threat is to the U.S. sound like a
bunch of old women. I'm not worried because I don't live in F.O.X..
country......I live in the U.S.
Your typical Israel-first prescription prescription actually endangers
U.S. citizens which you don't mind at all as long as we keep your
precious promised land safe for Israelis.
If your real country is such hot *****....wait until we bail out of
operation disaster and do the job yourselves.....entertain us.
--
Just some favorite sites:
Ah, you're just another anti Semite goof, and therefore ignorable.
Thanks for straightening that out.
Jim E
.
|
|
|
| User: "can_o_worms" |
|
| Title: Re: The coming Battle for Baghdad |
25 Mar 2006 05:07:08 PM |
|
|
On Sat, 25 Mar 2006 14:06:01 -0800, "Jim E" <YD653126@sea.edu> wrote:
"can_o_worms" <can_o_worms@bogus.com> wrote in message
news:9u2b221am19ds13rfbl5aubmpju6fg279e@4ax.com...
On Sat, 25 Mar 2006 07:39:09 -0800, "Jim E" <YD653126@sea.edu> wrote:
"can_o_worms" <can_o_worms@bogus.com> wrote in message
news:31s922dte2c7ofd619lqsp58mo1d4hja7g@4ax.com...
On 24 Mar 2006 23:12:51 -0800, wrote:
Letter to editor: 3/18/06 San Diego Union Tribune
"Since Iraq is headed for a civil war no matter what we do now, and
Iran is persuing nuclear weapons to use against us, why not move from
Iraq into Iran (and Syria) and let the Iraq civil war just play itself
out? With the US troops in Iran, Syria and Afganistan, thus surrounding
Iraq, the Middle East should beome stabilized fairly quickly.
BILL KETCHUM
Point Loma"
This guy has obviously been in the Submarine a little too long.
Not a cost effective foreign policy.
How about a nuke standoff between the Mullahs and Israelis
instead......Much more cost effective and low risk for the U.S.
How about just nuking Iran's weapon facilities, and avoiding the whole
brow
sweating experience.
Who wants ninth century brains owning nuclear weapons?
Be real, they can't be trusted with AK's.
No harm, no foul.
Jim E
You G.O.P. guys who say that the threat is to the U.S. sound like a
bunch of old women. I'm not worried because I don't live in F.O.X..
country......I live in the U.S.
Your typical Israel-first prescription prescription actually endangers
U.S. citizens which you don't mind at all as long as we keep your
precious promised land safe for Israelis.
If your real country is such hot *****....wait until we bail out of
operation disaster and do the job yourselves.....entertain us.
Ah, you're just another anti Semite goof, and therefore ignorable.
Thanks for straightening that out.
Jim E
Not hardly PC Jim.
I don't think there is any doubt that the threat is to Israel and
that lots of WASP Israel firsters realize who the threat is
to.......unless you're really a-sceered o' them Muslims.
Now be honest Jim.
quote from article:
Bush warns Iran on Israel
US President George W. Bush said he hoped to resolve the nuclear
dispute with Iran with diplomacy, but warned Tehran he would "use
military might" if necessary to defend Israel.
http://news.yahoo.com/s/afp/20060320/pl_afp/usirannuclearisrael_060320195105&printer=1;_ylt=AiBTLQVksHFzUczvC2wDeRmtOrgF;_ylu=X3oDMTA3MXN1bHE0BHNlYwN0bWE-
(end of quote)
btw
While Iran war shills at Rupert Murdoch's FOX News and the.
neoCON Weekly Standard are beating the war drums, here's some
realpolitic for ya.
http://www.amconmag.com/2006/2006_03_27/feature.html
Realpolitic for now but McCain or Hillary are gonna be under some
pressure to defend Israel from nuke parity with the Mullahs of Iran.
.
|
|
|
| User: "Marinus van der Lubbe" |
|
| Title: Re: The coming Battle for Baghdad |
26 Mar 2006 01:08:58 AM |
|
|
can_o_worms wrote:
On Sat, 25 Mar 2006 14:06:01 -0800, "Jim E" <YD653126@sea.edu> wrote:
"can_o_worms" <can_o_worms@bogus.com> wrote in message
news:9u2b221am19ds13rfbl5aubmpju6fg279e@4ax.com...
On Sat, 25 Mar 2006 07:39:09 -0800, "Jim E" <YD653126@sea.edu> wrote:
"can_o_worms" <can_o_worms@bogus.com> wrote in message
news:31s922dte2c7ofd619lqsp58mo1d4hja7g@4ax.com...
On 24 Mar 2006 23:12:51 -0800, wrote:
Letter to editor: 3/18/06 San Diego Union Tribune
"Since Iraq is headed for a civil war no matter what we do now, and
Iran is persuing nuclear weapons to use against us, why not move from
Iraq into Iran (and Syria) and let the Iraq civil war just play itself
out? With the US troops in Iran, Syria and Afghanistan, thus
surrounding Iraq, the Middle East should become stabilized fairly
quickly.
How about just nuking Iran's weapon facilities, and avoiding the whole
brow
sweating experience.
Who wants ninth century brains owning nuclear weapons?
Be real, they can't be trusted with AK's.
What nuclear weapons facilities Jimbo? You guys fall for the same lie over
and over again.
Another thing Jimbo, Iranians are Semites. I think Abramham came from there.
You G.O.P. guys who say that the threat is to the U.S. sound like a
bunch of old women. I'm not worried because I don't live in F.O.X..
country......I live in the U.S.
Your typical Israel-first prescription prescription actually endangers
U.S. citizens which you don't mind at all as long as we keep your
precious promised land safe for Israelis.
If your real country is such hot *****....wait until we bail out of
operation disaster and do the job yourselves.....entertain us.
Ah, you're just another anti Semite goof, and therefore ignorable.
Thanks for straightening that out.
Jim E
Not hardly PC Jim.
I don't think there is any doubt that the threat is to Israel and
that lots of WASP Israel firsters realize who the threat is
to.......unless you're really a-sceered o' them Muslims.
Now be honest Jim.
quote from article:
Bush warns Iran on Israel
US President George W. Bush said he hoped to resolve the nuclear
dispute with Iran with diplomacy, but warned Tehran he would "use
military might" if necessary to defend Israel.
That brings a tingly feeling to my mind. Oh, if only I were not an American,
I would be able recall important events from 3 and half years ago.
http://www.whitehouse.gov/news/releases/2002/10/20021016-1.html
"I've carefully weighed the human cost of every option before us. If we go
into battle, *as a last resort*, we will confront an enemy capable of
irrational miscalculations, capable of terrible deeds. As the
Commander-in-Chief, I know the risks to our country. I'm fully responsible
to the young men and women in uniform who may face these risks."
Now I remember, Bush is a war-mongering lying moron!
.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Related Articles |
|
|
