Report: U.S. in secret talks with Iraq insurgents

[truthpusher]

http://www.chron.com/cs/CDA/rssstory.mpl/front/3048691

Feb. 20, 2005, 10:30AM

Report: U.S. in secret talks with Iraq insurgents
Reuters News Service

WASHINGTON- U.S. diplomats and intelligence officers are conducting secret talks with Iraq's Sunni insurgents on ways to end fighting there, Time magazine reported today, citing Pentagon and other sources.

The Bush administration has said it would not negotiate with Iraqi fighters and there is no authorized dialogue but the U.S. is having "back-channel" communications with certain insurgents, unidentified Washington and Iraqi sources told the magazine.

The magazine cited a secret meeting between two members of the U.S. military and an Iraqi negotiator, a middle-aged former member of Saddam Hussein's regime and the senior representative of what he called the nationalist insurgency.

A U.S. officer tried to get names of other insurgent leaders while the Iraqi complained the new Shi'ite-dominated government was being controlled by Iran, according to an account of the meeting provided by the Iraqi negotiator.

"We are ready to work with you," the Iraqi negotiator said, according to Time.

more:
http://www.chron.com/cs/CDA/rssstory.mpl/front/3048691

[Straight Shooter]

1. Now we know why bush was asking for the additional $80+ billion.

Fine. We should have paid them off to begin with and bribed them to take Saddam out a long time ago.

[pretzel4gore]

10. the distraction, the news filler

iraq was nothing but a distraction run by the media to stop people looking at the bush crims; as soon as we get bored of iraq(the news stop any reporting) something else will be run by the dupes...it's called 'entertaining the fat people' or taking candy from a baby

[Wright Patman]

2. Deleted

[Wright Patman]

3. U.S. is about to switch sides again

if it cannot control the Shi'ites.

The Saudis are Sunnis and are tight with the BFEE. I always thought it was premature to count the Sunnis out, even though they are only 20 percent of the population.

Every "Western-oriented" (i.e., petrodollar-recycling) sheikdom in the Gulf prefers Sunni rule of Iraq to a government influenced by Iran.

[Fridays Child]

4. Sounds like business as usual for the DC Mongrel horde.

[Mark E. Smith]

5. Translation

The Bush people have obviously woken up to the fact that if they are going to prevent the disaster a Shi'ite South Asian Empire (AKA Greater Iran) would be to their interests, they're going to need the Sunnis to help them.

Some weeks back I predicted that the Bushies would soon decide that the natural enmity the Sunnis feel for their Shi'ite neighbors would be useful in their upcoming campaign to derail Iran's designs on Iraq. After all, they're hardly going to be able to depend on the newly empowered Iranian born Shi'ite Grand Ayatollah Ali al Sistani to help them.

And besides, isn't Saddam Hussein living proof that this is not the first time we've turned to the Sunnis to help us with our Iran/Shi'ite problems?

[Strelnikov_]

8. Yep. Just Waiting To See How The Reich-Wing Media Spins This

Ver. 1 - WMD

Ver. 2 - Overthrow Tyrant (War on Evil^TM)

Ver. 3 - Establish Freedom^TM and Democracy^TM

Ver. 4 - ? War on Terra^TM. Resist rogue regime (Iran) that have co-opted the election, necessitating alliance with the Sunni's who have always (really) been our allies.

We are at war with Eastasia. We have always been at war with Eastasia.

[cliss]

12. (head is spinning) have to get up for a while.....

Let's see.....trying to get the facts straight.....we invaded Iraq, ousted Saddam Hussein who is a Sunni, installed a US Provisional Government with L. Paul Bremer which didn't work because the insurgency was growing exponentially. Next, we installed an Iraqi puppet government with Ayad Allawi who is a CIA employee.

Next, we have a national election. The Shi'Ites win big, as was expected (Shi'Ites are the majority in Iraq; about 60%). Where does this leave the US? In trouble, that's where.

And.....as if that wasn't bad enough, there's another disenfranchised group of people in Northern Iraq, the Kurds. They have a natural alliance with their brothers in Turkey, the Turkish Kurds. Now, as Lady Luck would have it, the Kurds in N. Iraq are sitting on the biggest, most lucrative $ pile of oil in the region.

They want to secede. And their brothers to the North agree. The Turkish government now has big sweat rings under their arms. And they are pissed. They are hugely pissed at... the US government.

Who else? Who else would jump in there with a big stick and stir the pot? And manage to piss off every last human being within 5,000 miles.

Now, back to the bribes. We have burned through close to $300 billion on this little adventure. How much of that was bribery money? Probably a good chunk of it. And what did it accomplish? Did we really buy anybody? Any loyalty there to see? Or is Iraq a seething Dante's Inferno?

This is what happens when you put amateurs in charge of wars. All you get is crap, and a drained treasury.

[Strelnikov_]

18. Would This Be The Catastrophic Success Phase? nt

[Lexingtonian]

26. nah, more like Paris 1973/74

Ugly threats, rigidity, and the design still amounting to creating "a decent interval". This time with Middle Eastern cultural facets to the endeavor rather than East Asian ones.

[tabasco]

6. The Bush corporate cabal just wants the oil.

There have been many attacks on the pipelines lately. I guess this is why we have negotiations with insurgents now. The Bush cabal only wants the oil and will pay off anybody to help secure the pipelines. That is worth billions to the cronies.

[still_one]

7. there is not just one group of insurgents

[LinuxInsurgent]

9. FLIP-FLOP!!!!!

"back-channel" communications = negotiation.

[Barrett808]

11. Robert Fisk predicted this several weeks ago

Hopefully, this is the beginning of the end of the Bush's vanity war.

[Barrett808]

43. Robert Fisk prediction from January 3rd

The Mire of Death, Lies and Atrocities: Robert Fisk Looks Back at 2004
Monday, January 3rd, 2005

...Ultimately, I think what we are going to see, as we have seen in all Middle East wars of occupation, is the opening of some kind of contact between the Americans and the insurgents. This is what the French did after years of saying they would never talk to terrorists, they talked to the FLN. After years of saying they would never talk to terrorists, the British talked to the IRA. After years of saying they would never talk to terrorists, the British talked to the militants fighting them in Aden and to EOKA in Cyprus, and indeed, to both militant sides in Palestine that they tried to escape from what Churchill called a hell disaster in 1948.

The Americans will soon, if they have not already, establish contact with the insurgents, and that will mean the beginning of end. It means that the project is over. That they have accepted, as I think, you know, they have already in terms of soldiers on the ground. If you are going to talk to the colonels, and they may -- the majors and the generals in Iraq, they know that the game is up. But the generals back at the Pentagon and the Centcom and down there in old Florida and the gentleman in the State Department and at the White House, they don't accept this because this is a screen of self-delusion between them and the reality on the ground. But it's over in Iraq. It's finished. What we're going to see this year is the beginning of the endgame, which is how do we get Americans out without losing face and ultimately - I should say faith as well - and ultimately, how do you start negotiation with the insurgents.

I mean, that doesn't mean that some American colonel is going to sit down with Zarqawi, though I wouldn't put it past the realm of possibility. It means that we're going to have in effect an understanding between the insurgents and the United States forces that the project has failed, that at some point the powers behind the insurgency or the resistance or the terrorists or whatever you would like to call them, will move into place to control the country and they probably will. In the meantime, I fear the Western powers will go on trying to promote the idea of civil war as an alternative to their occupation and oppression and I hope very much that that won't work. As I said to you before, Iraq has never had a civil war. Iraqis don't want a civil war. The only people who fear or talk about civil war are the Americans and British.

(more)

http://www.democracynow.org/article.pl?sid=05/01/03/1447225

[NNN0LHI]

13. "Mission Accomplished" has turned into "Mission Lets Make A Deal"

I guess this is more proof that the Iraqis are getting desperate?

Don

[Mark E. Smith]

14. It Is Rather Astonishing

A third of a trillion dollars spent (most of it borrowed), 13,000 US casualties, along with God knows how many maimed and killed Iraqis, and now we're back to aligning with...the Sunnis?

What's next, the rehabilitation of Saddam Hussein?

Who knows, it might be the price demanded by our new pals.


Rummy and the Butcher of Baghdad. Can we look
forward to a tearful and heartfelt reunion soon?

[NNN0LHI]

19. "What's next, the rehabilitation of Saddam Hussein?"

>>>Who knows, it might be the price demanded by our new pals.<<<

Then on the other hand it just might be one of Bush's demands?

Don

[leftchick]

15. I thought bushboy** did NOT negotiate with terraists???

:eyes:

[solinvictus]

16. This will be taken as a sign of weakness...

as it should be. The fact that we're negotiating with the insurgents is a tacit admission that we, with all our might, are unable to maintain order and will likely be incapable of rebuilding Iraq. Elections, rhetoric about "freedom", and all of it have proven meaningless. If there's even the appearance that our government is going to anoint Sunnis to lead, we're looking at a bloody civil war.

[Igel]

20. It's equally an admission that the insurgents--or at least this one

subgroup--aren't able to gain their ends.

[NNN0LHI]

22. The North Vietnamese held talks with the USA too. They won by the way n/t

[Igel]

38. Ah. So anybody that negotiates with their enemy is

automatically going to lose?

Or does that apply just to the US?

Reasoning from a specific case to the general case is called abduction. That type of logic has interesting properties.

[John Q. Citizen]

27. If they gain thier ends through negotiation, what difference does it make?

There's more than one way to skin a cat.

[Igel]

39. True.

Not sure who "their" is, but it's true in any event.

Goose. Gander.

[bluestateguy]

17. Shouldn't they call this appeasement?

That's what conservatives would do if Clinton was the Commander in Chief and the US was negotiating with the Iraqi resistance.

[solinvictus]

21. You're right...

They'd be all over Clinton for even hinting at negotiations.

[NNN0LHI]

23. And the media would be piling on right along with the Rethugs

So far cable news has not even mentioned this story.

Don

[BrotherBuzz]

24. Who says they are just talking

Can anyone locate the article from last week (AsiaTimes?) that reported the US secretly flying in foreign weapons (AK47's and the like) acquired from Pakistan or India to supply the insurgents? There may be some truth to that bit of news...

[0007]

25. The United States and the American Indians had many secret

meetings also. Look where they are today!

[MrPrax]

28. On Second Thought...

maybe this article from last week wasn't so 'twilight zone'

US fights back against 'rule by clerics'
By Syed Saleem Shahzad


<snip>

Of these calls for autonomy or federalism, the most disconcerting for US authorities is the call for religious rule. Already, leading Shi'ite clerics in Iraq are pushing for "Islam to be recognized as the guiding principle of the new constitution".

To head off this threat of a Shi'ite clergy-driven religious movement, the US has, according to Asia Times Online investigations, resolved to arm small militias backed by US troops and entrenched in the population to "nip the evil in the bud".

Asia Times Online has learned that in a highly clandestine operation, the US has procured Pakistan-manufactured weapons, including rifles, rocket-propelled grenade launchers, ammunition, rockets and other light weaponry. Consignments have been loaded in bulk onto US military cargo aircraft at Chaklala airbase in the past few weeks. The aircraft arrived from and departed for Iraq.

The US-armed and supported militias in the south will comprise former members of the Ba'ath Party, which has already split into three factions, only one of which is pro-Saddam Hussein. They would be expected to receive assistance from pro-US interim Prime Minister Iyad Allawi's Iraqi National Accord.

<snip>

http://www.atimes.com/atimes/Middle_East/GB15Ak02.html

[NNN0LHI]

29. Over the years I have found Asia Times Online to be about 100% accurate nt

[annabanana]

30. Bingo! We've already started!............................n/t

[lala_rawraw]

31. Sorry?

Now which insurgents were allowed past the gunfire into some sort of talks? How were they notified? Um... does anyone find this a bit too fucked up? Or is the US not happy with the outcome of the election, so secret talks with people who cannot be identified, killed, etc., and who happen to be killing our own soldiers...no joke, did they just dial them up on 411 to get their phone numbers, because we know the electricity is NOT working. Sorry, this boggles the mind.

[annabanana]

34. Welcome to the world of "WTF!?!?!?!?" lala-rawraw

Just because it seems incredible doesn't mean it can't be true.

[daleo]

32. 10s to 100s thousands dead, $300 million dollars

Just to replace Saddam with some other puppet, which is what BFEE is angling for here. Monstrous. I think the "insurgents" that the U.S. is negotiating with will just take the money and run. It will come in handy to buy more weapons to kill Americans, though. Bush is nuts.

[ckramer]

37. Try 300 BILLION

[daleo]

40. Of course. I knew that, but mis-typed it.

Thanks for pointing out the error, for the number is obviously critical to the argument.

[DU GrovelBot]

33. ## PLEASE DONATE TO DEMOCRATIC UNDERGROUND! ##

==================
GROVELBOT.EXE v3.0
==================



This week is our first quarter 2005 fund drive. Democratic
Underground is a completely independent website. We depend almost entirely
on donations from our members to cover our costs. Thank you so much for
your support.

[annabanana]

36. fer Gawd's sake!..put this guy out of his misery..we're almost there! n/t

[ckramer]

35. Let me guess

1. US lost the will to fight insurgents or
2. the insurgents are finally out of control or
3. US wishes that Saddam is still in power due to the result of election

Iraq war = the most stupid war in American histroy.

[Igel]

41. And in other good news ...

http://story.news.yahoo.com/news?tmpl=story&cid=514&e=3&u=/ap/20050220/ap_on_re_mi_ea/iraq_050220185125

'"When we said that we are not going to take part, that didn't mean that we are not going to take part in the political process. We have to take part in the political process and draft the new constitution," said Adnan al-Duleimi, the head of Sunni Endowments in Baghdad.'

No idea how large the tribes represented are.

[Barrett808]

42. The war costs $5.8 billion / month; I say, just give the insurgents $6 bil

"What'll it take to buy you off? 5 billion? 6 billion?"

$10 billion would be a bargain. They can do anything they like with it, but they have to lay down arms.