Just as predicted here, the tensions between the different factions in Iraq are increasing. "Fanatics lay claim to separate Sunni state," by Oliver Poole in the Telegraph, with thanks to Ruth King:
An alliance of Sunni insurgent groups claimed yesterday to be establishing a separate Sunni state in the west of Iraq in the latest demonstration of the growing fragmentation of the country. The statement by the Mujahideen Shura Council, an umbrella organisation of fanatical Sunni groups that includes al-Qa'eda, is the first time a Sunni body has supported the break-up of Iraq.It said the move was in response to the passing by the Iraqi parliament last week of a federalism law which would permit provinces to join together to form self-ruling regions. That is expected to result in the creation of a semi-autonomous Shia zone in the south, similar to the Kurdish state in the north.
A separate Sunni state was needed to protect itself from such an eventuality, the insurgent group said.
At least 117 people have been killed in sectarian attacks since Friday and at least 57 died yesterday in shootings and bombings. They included the brother of the chief prosecutor in Saddam Hussein's trial, shot in front of his wife.
Too bad Iraq can't be officially divided into a couple of new states. Then we could pull out and watch the Sunni state and the Shiite state try to wipe one another out, just like Iran vs Iraq in the 1980's. Those lunatics deserve nothing less.
Seams that it might be hard to get coaco because they are burning it in the Ivory-coast
Better buy it up while we still can gals
Oh I wonder how many murders they have been in the whole USA in the last month??
Last time I looked was June and in just 6 city's there were over 6,000
Now thats not like finding headless people in your streets but we have to admit here that mulsums seam to kill their own to get the west to do what they want us to do.
But they don't understand what will happen as more people see how savage these people are the more the people in the west are ready to pull back and just send in the big bombs and clean house.
Shame they just don't get it?
I'm sure people are more worried about their coaco...
Not to make lite of those who lost their lifes but it is hard to tell if they were bad guys or good guys?
The more this goes on around the world the harder the hearts grow people are seeing and hearing mulsums killing others.
Remember saddam[YELLOW COWARD FOUND IN A HOLE DON'T SHOOT I'M A YELLOW COWARD] killed over 300,000 and that is just what we have found so far.
In the Sudan they have killed [head count] over 170,000 and displaced over 3,000,000 people and not much is said by the mulsums OH YEA BECAUSE IT IS THE MULSUMS DOING THE KILLING
sunni's shia what is the differance?
Is it the hat There I always think of Vlad with the hat thing.
They both believe in the qu-ran yes the same book we will not fight their fight for them.
Part of the American Tribe
Squirrel Hunter
Spider Killer
GOD BLESS THE USA AND HER FIGHTING FORCES AND ALL WHO FIGHT WITH HER GIVE THEM STRENGTH, WISDOM, SIGHT, AND COURAGE TO DESTROY ALL ISLAMIC TERRORIST AND ALL WHO SUPPORT THEM AMEN
PS
The problem is pandoras box has been opened
Catherine..you mean Aminah's box don't you? it has released more evil upon the world than has pandora's :)
Hmmmm.....only in islam.
Much has been made in Washington about so-called "neo-cons" and their presumed connection to the Mearsheimer-Walt fantasm, that "unified Israel lobby." But the two lobbies that have mattered most in the tarbaby Iraq disaster are the Americans who, instead of seeing Islam as it is, have either cheered for the Shi'a (sometimes without quite realizing it), and those who wish to do the bidding of Sunni Arabs in Iraq.
In the former category we have many who write for My Weekly Standard: Reuel Gerecht, the ineffable Stephen Schwartz, and less naive than the others but still a cheerleader for the Iraq business, Amir Taheri. Others who have thought the Americans have a stake in making Iraq safe for Shi'ism, rather than in weakening the camp of Islam by allowing Iraq to dissolve into permanent sectarian and ethnic hostilities (at whatever level) include Fouad Ajami and Valli Nasr. Indeed, the latter's soft-voiced presence at one of the military schools no doubt inhibits his colleagues even from considering the idea that the task of American policy is not to strengthen this or that branch of Islam but to do nothing to dampen, and to do everything to exploit, for the sake of Infidels, the sectarian and ethnic divisions that present themselves on a platter in Iraq.
In the latter category we have the so-called "
realists" of the James Baker school. These people are Yesterday's Men, who knew little and cared less about Islam, and who continue to think of the problem as manageable if only we throw Israel to the wolves, or rather, if only we do as the Sunni rulers of Egypt, Jordan, and Saudi Arabia -- who themselves, and their countries, continue to be described as "staunch allies" of the United States. Baker is a Sunni Arab man -- that is, he's all in favor of listening and believing Mubarak, and Abdullah, and above all the daggers-and-dishdasha plutocrats of Riyadh, when they tell us -- and what else would you expect them now to be telling us -- that
1) we have to stay in Iraq or somehow arrange a conference that will allow in other -- i.e., Sunni-- Arab forces, in other words we must shore up the Sunnis in Iraq lest the "Shi'a crescent" solidify and
2) we must push Israel harder and harder to give up more territory in order to win a victory for our "staunch allies" among the "moderate" Sunni forces -- "moderate" Saudi Arabia leading the pack -- so that they can win back those on the Sunni Arab street who may be tempted to see Iran and the Shi'a as their champion against Israel.
All perfectly predictable, all perfectly plausible -- if you ignore the promptings, and full menace, of Islam, and in so doing, fail to understand that we should work to divide and demoralize the camp of Islam in Iraq, and outside Iraq (if it is allowed to happen within Iraq, it will automatically happen outside Iraq) and not to fall for the latest scheme to have the Americans and Europeans, in the hope of buying time, winning hearts and minds, or something else as yet unthought-of, throw Israel, not for the first time, and not for the last, to the wolves, those conducting the endless Lesser Jihad against that permanently imperilled sliver of a country.
Wouldn't it be nice, if in addition to seeing Sunnis and Shi'a go at it in Iraq, and then to have that have repercussions in Pakistan, in Yemen, in Bahrain, in Kuwait, in Saudi Arabia, in Lebanon, even in Afghanistan, to also see the two armies of their supporters in this country --go at it tooth and nail.
So in this corner one would have Gerecht, Kagan, Kristol, Schwartz, Vali Nasr, and others who found all those Shi'a in exile -- Chalabi, Makiya, Rend al-Rahim Francke, Allawi -- so persuasive, so convincing about all the wonderful things that would happen, all the gratitude that would be permanently expressed by the locals, once American troops "liberated" Iraq from the Ba'athist (i.e., disguised Sunni despotism) regime of Saddam Hussein.
And in that corner, all those so wrongly described as "realists" -- such "realist" appeasers of Islam as Scowcroft, Brzezinski, James Baker, who were against the Iraq War not because they knew that Bush was so execrably obstinately stupid that he would actually seek as a goal the very opposite of what he should have been seeking to achieve, and to squander lives, money, and materiel in order to dampen sectarian and ethnic divisions rather than recognizing that such divisions are ancient, are unavoidable (Islam does not encourage any spirit of compromise with one's enemies but rather a mentality that sees victor and vanquished), and from the Infidel point of view, are most welcome. These "realists" were or are not happy about the Iraq War, but for all the wrong reasons - that the transfer of power to the majority Shi'a weakens Sunnis in Iraq and offends Sunnis outside Iraq, and that it worries "our Egyptian friends" and "our Jordanian friends" and above all "our Saudi friends").
Let them go at it. Let those who fell for the Shi'a arguments, and still think that Al-Sistani is practically Albert Schweitzer (see Fouad Ajami's remarks in his last book, the one tellingly titled "The Foreigner's Gift" when it should more accurately have been titled "The Infidel's Gift" but of course Islam is the one subject Fouad Ajami will not touch, can not touch, and that is why he has had his uses, but is severly limited now in his value in explaining things to us -- he can't touch the main subject, and won't) in this country, including the contributors and editors at My Weekly Standard, go to polemical war against the Baker-Scowcroft-Brzezinski brigade of comletely unrealistic "realists" -- unrealistic because they still remain, after so many years, unable or unwilling to comprehend the real nature of Islam, and to the islamization of Western Europe (which is surely the most important problem, after the possible acquisition of nuclear weapons by Iran).
Let them knock each other out, checkmate each other.
Meanwhile, those who, disappointed and alarmed in their own ruling classes and elites who have failed to study Islam, failed to instruct others in the nature of Islam, have already gone off to study on their own -- and their numbers are increasing every day, and they are giving new, legitimate meaning to that otherwise obnoxious bumpersticker: Question Authority.
When the "authorities" are at the level of such former CIA analysts as Stephen Scheuer or Reuel Gerecht, or such former high officials as James Baker, Brzezinksi, Scowcroft, then their authority deserves to be questioned -- from first to last. They have not earned, they have un-earned, any claim on our attention or respect.
The brother was shot in front of the wife. She was lucky that they didn't shoot her too. See, Girls, chivalry is alive in Iraq.
What's bizarre is that the press/media and the "left" and US government spokesmen call these mass murderers "insurgents." Isn't that just another euphemism for mass murderer?
I saw a report that Brazil has about 120 murders daily.
I kind of doubt the 6,000 murders in 6 cities in the US this year that someone reported above .. seems exaggerated or just inaccurate.
Stephen Schwartz
Hugh
I thought he was a mulsum a sunni if I'm not mistaken
Just for laughs:
My fellow liberals, as the leading gay Party, we need to get the gay Gannon to become liberal; my suggestion is to get that cute Edwards to lay with him. Teddys too fat and Kerry is afraid of losing his allowance from Teraaazza if he lays with Gannon. US LIBS MUST DO WHAT WE ARE BEST AT: SURRENDER!
OK my fellow liberals, its now official, all of our uncalled for recounts have failed(although we will continue the recounts for the next 2 years and may still win), and Bush is our president for another term, don't burn and destroy America, for sometime in the far off future we may rule again.
And we lost again with the large percentage of Iraqis voting! We tried to stop their democracy, but as usual us liberals have lost there too! Lets face it my liberals, we are the losers of the world!
I agree my fellow liberals! Ain't none of us liberals going to join no American military! We might join the terrorists or the French, but no way do us liberals support America. We must keep the hate up! We liberals do not want an American company profiting in Iraq! After the America we hate invaded, and spent OUR billions and OUR military lifes, we should let only the French, German, Belgium, China and Russians get the contracts and make the money in Iraq! And defend our hero Sen Durbin for being a true liberal/Dem and bashing the American military, because us libs hate them!
We liberals will allow OUR military to continue being killed to provide security for the EU countries, that should get all contracts in Iraq! That will help with our liberal agenda to destroy America!
As a real America hating leftest liberal, I have been going around the country counseling all the suicidal liberals and leading demonstrations against America! I have been, with a bunch of my fellow liberals hanging around the great UN, and praising France, Kofi and all the smart America hating countries that were not doing anything wrong(only America is wrong, ask any of us liberals), they were just making themselves and their countries rich by selling illegal items to Saddam and of course stealing as much oil for food money as possible.
Us liberals told the UN, EU and Muslim officials to close the books to any America Congressional investigation, and just ignore America demands, because as long as you bash America, slap America, and rebuff America, all of America's liberals will back you all the way. You know we will, because you have already seen how we back and support all terrorists that are against America.
France, you are our(USA liberals)real leader, and if our hero Kerry had of won(The Reps stole the election)you Chirac would have been our actual president, with Kerry our hero as your puppet! We also would have only obeyed the great UN leadership, and we would have made Kofi's son, Americas Secretary of the Treasury!
With the help of all the America hating liberals we would get back in control and abolish all USA military, and rely on the great UN and France to protect the United States of America! Only with the UN protecting us, can the USA ever be safe again! Just ask any of us liberals!
And again us liberals showed our inability to govern; we failed to do our jobs before and after the hurricane; and then we lib leaders tried to blame our hated scape-goat Bush, because we are incapable of accepting our responsibilities!
Viva La IRAN!
P.S. Just because President Bush got RE-inaugurated, is no reason to commit suicide, cause we need all the votes we can get for 2006 and 2008! Sure, we don't have no chance, but if we bus in the felons with false docs we might be able to pad more! We tried it this last time, but ran out of crack before we bribed enough!
With what is happening all over the ME, it looks like Bush has been right all along! Plus his poll numbers are rising!
This is also rather funny:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=B7xtg4sspD4
watch it before its gone!
Hugh, you are so right about bringing the Sunni's into the fold of government and serious negotiations should be going on right now to accomplish that. In order to have a unified government in Iraq, Sunni's need to turn against Al Qaeda and stop sheltering them for the stability of their country, lest we end up with another Iran. What a disastrous mess! I blame Bremer for kicking the Baathists out of government and disbanding the Iraqi army and Wolfowitz for believing that scum Chalabi, and his incompetence in the after planning. Furthermore I think Gen. Abizaid needs to be replaced. He has proven to be incompetent as well.
Regarding Israel giving up more land, I used to agree with that, but now realize that it won't make the problem go away. They gave up Gaza and a few months later, Hamas kidnaps the Israeli soldier and those 2 Fox reporters. They don't have enough land to defend themselves now as it is.
sheik yer'mami,
Hi sheik. Read the comments, they are better than the video. Always one in the bunch to threaten to kill someone.
"Say islam is a religion of peace, or I'll kill you!" Heh heh.
Americaningermany, I replied to your other comment. Do you remember what name he was using before? Don't let it upset you. We're smart enough to figure out what is what.
@Bonniea
You wrote:
"Hugh, you are so right about bringing the Sunni's into the fold of government..."
Bonniea,
Hugh said NO SUCH THING. Go back and read his comments again. You are completely clueless.
@sheik yer'mami
Get off the Liberal vs. Conservative thing! It's blinding you. Read Hugh's excellent post. Try to clear your head.
Hugh,
Careful!, even though,"Tar baby" is a great word to use in this situation, it is considered a racist term by the facist liberals - Just ask Gov. Mitt Romney about that one:
http://www.boston.com/news/local/articles/2006/07/31/romney_apologizes_for_use_of_expression/
Bonnie & Hugh,
How do you think we can get the cooperation of the Sunni's and Shiites to stop fighting amongst themselves, and go after the Jihazis that are causing all this madness?
I'm just asking, 'cause I know you care...
P.S. - Hugh, Bonnie's right about Israel. It has nothing to do with concessions, and everything to do with extermination. The Jihazis are left over Nazis from WWII - read your history...
http://doctorbulldog.wordpress.com/
Americaningermany...if you can put me in touch with 'clod', I would like to invite him over for beer and wrestling.
sheik yer'mami...You forgot to mention the 'liberals' #1. problem...bedwetting. They need some help with that. Wrecks thier sex lives, leading to more Bush hating. Liberal bedwetting has been traced to Bushs policies and Bush himself. My advice is, 'never sleep with a liberal bedwetter'. If you date, or are married to a liberal, ask them about bedwetting before you get in there with them...if you dont..it's on you...literally...
OT
Look at C&F entry in the Iranian "Holocaust cartoon extravaganza".
Look closely.
http://www.coxandforkum.com/archives/000953.html
americaningermany,
What a lowlife. I will keep an eye out for Claude although I suspect you have already frightened it off with your post. A lot like roaches they are, turn on the light and they scurry out of sight.
A footnote to Hugh's excellent post, in which he mentions James Baker, the same Baker who said "F**k the Jews; they didn't vote for us anyway," the same Baker whom the current President Bush appointed to that commission: we should not forget that Secretary of State Condoleezza Rice is a protegee of his. Her recent monstrous speech to the "Palestinians" who are supposedly languishing under "humiliating" "occupation" by the Israelis shows the connection between the Bakerian policy toward Iraq and the Bush administration's policy toward Israel. It's time to stop repeating the lie that Bush is Israel's best friend among American Presidents. Rice is Bush's appointee; what she says is what he says by proxy.
Ynkedoodl2, here is what Hugh posted:
1) we have to stay in Iraq or somehow arrange a conference that will allow in other -- i.e., Sunni-- Arab forces, in other words we must shore up the Sunnis in Iraq lest the "Shi'a crescent" solidify and...
I was referring to that paragraph. It may not be exactly what he said, but for me, has a similar meaning of bringing Sunni's into the fold. They're used to being in power and now outnumbered by Shiites, thus grasping with terror attacks and now we have civil war. Our troops will never get to come home until Sunni's and Shiites begin to work together in rebuilding their country.
Calling me clueless is just plain rude. I have friends who have served there, from grunts to commanders, and some who work as high risk security contractors, former special ops. I know many things that go on in Iraq that aren't reported.
I think it's time admit the experiment has failed.
I recall a much more peaceful Iraq when it was run by the USA.
What were they thinking to allow these upstarts the freedom to include Islam as the final word in their constitution?
The USA should work with Russia and other nations to set up a non Islamic government in Iraq -- run by non- Muslims.
Doctor Bulldog, we need a really good negotiator to get both sides to work together, someone with prominence and stature like Bill Clinton or James Baker, but definitely not Condy Rice. LOL!
I'm glad I discovered your site last night and the article from Worldnetdaily.com. I forwarded it to my friends and family.
A really good negotiator is indeed needed ... and seeing how these sides are of the same coin Islam's threat will be neatly back in the jeni bottle. Not.
Islam needs to be removed from the equation.
It's not imnportant to me to see them getting along, Sunni and Shiite.
It's important to me that our troops murdered every day -- didn't die for nothing. Islam as a governing force in Iraq, even if through a democratic process, is not in the USA's long term interests nor those of the people of the world and Iraq.
I don't recall seeing brooklyguy. Maybe he's some kind of spy. Al Qaeda has singled out Mr. Spencer in one of their latest communique's. I'm sure they read this site as well and possibly comment under a disguise which might explain the anal comment from the other post. LOL!
Have a blessed day Americaningermany!
aig,
I think I remember a troll posting as Claude months ago.
@Bonniea
I apologize for calling you clueless.
Still, it seems that Hugh has consistently called for a "do-nothing" approach regarding Muslims.
Am I clueless???
I read Hugh's posts as saying (in essence)"a pox on both their houses."
And that's my attitude also.
Once again, I am sorry for my rudeness. Please forgive.
I am puzzled. A poster above writes:
"Ynkedoodl2, here is what Hugh posted:
1) we have to stay in Iraq or somehow arrange a conference that will allow in other -- i.e., Sunni-- Arab forces, in other words we must shore up the Sunnis in Iraq lest the "Shi'a crescent" solidify and...
I was referring to that paragraph. It may not be exactly what he said, but for me, has a similar meaning of bringing Sunni's into the fold."
I have posted several hundred items on tarbaby Iraq, and the foolishness of remaining there, when the Sunnis and Shi'a, and Kurds and Arabs, will be at each other's throats if we simply get out of the way, always retaining the right, of course, to favor one side or the other as we see fit (the only side I can conceive of favoring would be that of the Kurds, because an independnet Kurdistan would weaken both Iran and Syria, and possibly inspire other non-Arab Muslims to their own political, or cultural, rebellions against Arab supremacism, as well).
I did not suggest that there should be a conference to shore up the Sunnis. I was mocking the "Sunni lobby" of Baker, Scowcroft, and others who have fallen for what the governments of Egypt, Jordan, and Saudi Arabia -- representing Sunni Arab interests -- are no doubt suggesting to them.
I don't want a "conference" on the goddam future of Iraq. I don't want anything done to favor the Sunnis or to in any way rescue them. On the other hand, I would do nothing to prevent Sunni Arab states from trying to do so, by sending their "volunteers" or regular forces, spend their money, use up their war materiel, in fighting the Shi'a of Iraq who, I hope, will be similarly aided by Hezbollah volunteers from Lebanon, and Iranians as well.
But not a "conference." And certainly not a cent more in American aid, of the kind contemplated by those two famously appeasement-minded guides to the Muslim Arabs (and one of them, for a time, a paid agent of the Arabs), George McGovern and William Polk. McGovern knows nothing, and Polk, to judge by his latest jejune "study" of Iraq, reflects all that is most disturbing and dangerous about the old-school State Department ignoring-the-nature-of-Islam "Middle East experts," of whom William Polk is a monitory example. In the latest Harper's both of them collaborate on a silly article on getting out of Iraq, in which they argue that,after the expenditure of hundreds of billions to free Iraq from a despotism and make the lives of its citizens better (an effort that received no real gratitude, and little cooperation, from those it was intended to help), American taxpayers should continue to shell out billions to Iraqis, as if we "owe" them something. No, we don't. Not a cent.
But for god's sake please distinguish what I wrote from what I attributed to the imagined minds of others. Baker wants the damned Conference and possibly those Sunni Arab troops formally brought in. I don't. I want chaos and confusion and non-stop hostlilites, expanding every outward -- within the camp of Islam. And I don't want further American aid extended, I want an end to all payments of Jizyah (the payments, other than for oil and gas, that go as foreign aid from Infidels to Muslims, or within Infidel lands, as benefits to Muslims from Infidel taxpayers).
Hugh,
I am vindicated though I shouldn't have been so harsh in correcting Bonniea's misreading.
Ynkedoodl2, thank you for your apology. Yes, I'm sensitive and my feelings get hurt easily. I'm no expert, but at least I try.
Hugh, I want our troops to come home too and the aid cut off. I'm bloody sick of the Iraq mess. I suggested a Sunni/Shiite meeting to help end this quagmire because Bush REFUSES to bring our troops home. Maybe when the Dems come into power, that will shake things up in Washington. Iraq can not continue as it is and a solution must be found for the sake of our finances and the lives of our soldiers. One of my soldier friends trained the Iraqi army and stated the Kurds were the only capable ones out of the lot.
May the Sunni and Shia slaughter each other right off the surface of our once-lovely planet. The sooner the better.
Bonniea: I agreee with you that we need a new government in Washington. However, it will not be Dems if I have anything to say about it.
Pythagoras, I'm a lifelong Republican, but this Administration has bungled things so badly, I just want something new, and the polls are not looking good for my party in November. There is a good chance the Dems will take over. We do need a change, even though I don't feel Dems are the answer either and they would put us in greater danger than we already are now. Somebody has got to get us out of Iraq.
Factual Error Alert:
In 2005 there were 16,692 "non-negligent" homicides in the US according to the FBI. To those of you who graduated from high school after the Jimmy Carter established the Department of Education, "non-negligent" means murder.
http://www.fbi.gov/ucr/05cius/data/table_01.html
6,000 murders in one month is flatly incorrect.
"Myth vs. Reality: Cheney's Iraq "
http://electroniciraq.net/news/2542.shtml