"More fuel on Iraq's spreading flames" aka: You Ain't Seen Nothin Yet....

[leftchick]

:scared:

http://atimes.com/atimes/Middle_East/IA03Ak01.html

The year 2003 marked the implementation of bold and reckless strategies aimed at handing the US and Britain virtual ownership of the crucial Middle East region and far beyond, but 2006 was the year all the negative repercussions of their failed policies finally converged, obliging the two reckless powers to stare into the yawning chasm of a regional forfeiture.

Now, 2007 is the year that marks the full-blown arrival of the endgame in the Middle East, when the US, Britain and Israel attempt somehow to pull a "win" from the mauling flames of regionwide failure. Their desperate policy of "one last push" to achieve that win is already shoving all the region's fractious players into a similar endgame stance, powerfully accelerating the region's descent into instability and upheaval as all its players take postures to make their final moves to prevent the loss of their respective goals and interests, each one attempting to win the game before time and opportunity run out.

<snip>

In 2007 the final consequences of the United States' failed policies will arrive. Those consequences are extremely unlikely to include anything resembling the "win" still hoped for by the US, Britain and Israel, for the simple reason that all the evidence points to the conclusion that the regional tipping point toward ascendancy by the Shi'ite faction may already have been reached.

Now, the US and Britain are faced with the insurmountable problem of finding a way, at this extremely late date, to restore a rough balance of power to the region by attempting to reconstruct something similar to the mechanisms they eliminated and failed to replace in 2003. And they now have but one last chance, and they must be successful before the sectarian tinderbox they helped create is set aflame by only one of many impending sparks. All the odds are entirely against them.

[annabanana]

1. This is a well written, concise & to the point article.. . . n/t

[babylonsister]

2. "All the odds are entirely against them." But, no, no one can admit

their failures and save some lives on both sides by withdrawing.
I hope the Dems (and thinking rethugs) have a plan to block them at every pass.

[kineneb]

3. another great article from atimes.com

Some of the internet's best reporting and commentary can be found there. I found that article this morning and printed out a copy to share with friends.

ATimes has several other outstanding articles by the same author.

[leftchick]

5. isn't it the best?

I also love Pepe Escobar. These folks are top notch!

[tnlefty]

4. Uh, Uh, Uh, Happy New Year?

Leaders in the Arab world warned against bombing and invading Iraq, as did the Security Council, but BushCo** just had to do it anyway. Too much money to be made!!!

The carnage and misery brought about makes me sick.

Dark humor doesn't even seem to work anymore.

[Tierra_y_Libertad]

6. The "surge" is the Custer option.

Or, perhaps, the Light Brigade option.

[leftchick]

9. Custer

I vote for Custer. Either way it sucks. :(

[radfringe]

15. big difference between custer and bush

custer rode into the battle

bush sends someone else

[enough]

7. That article is a model of clarity, and frightening.

Well worth reading the whole thing.

[Junkdrawer]

10. Self Delete - Posted at the wrong spot.

[vickitulsa]

13. I agree, and I hope many people do read it.

Another couple of paragraphs from the article:

If the US and Britain imagine they can play the Sunni-Shi'ite sectarian rivalry card and somehow keep the repercussions contained within the realm of orderliness or "manageable chaos" by means of their naval and other forces, they are every bit as dense now as they were when they went into Iraq in the first place, imagining that that strategy would succeed.

Sectarian passions on both sides are already running far too high across the region to facilitate any form of manageable transition from the current simmering and mounting chaos to a hoped-for return to a rough balance of power. The US and Britain are playing with the lighting of the fuse of a regionwide sectarian explosion.

(I added the emphases.)

And, as another poster in this thread noted, this exact dire dilemma was indeed what many warned of during the "push for war" period when (remember?) we still hoped this administration might actually listen to wiser heads.

Eerily, I happened to punch the wrong buttons when I was changing channels today and found myself on Faux so-called "news" -- but hearing something VERY interesting, so I left it on for a couple of minutes. One of their regular "experts" from one of the conservative thinktanks was telling an anchor (I think it was Shepard Smith) in a segment with just those two in it, talking quietly and very seriously, that what exists in Iraq already at this point is GENOCIDE. He compared the situation right now in Iraq to what was going on in Bosnia in the 90's, which was genocide so blatant it caused the U.S. and other powers to intervene to stop the slaughter of innocents and tamp down the chaos!

The thinktank guy went so far as to say in reply to Shep's questions that there simply IS NO GOOD SOLUTION in Iraq anymore. The demeanor of both men as I watched their quiet discussion was soooo serious and obviously very "down," and I could just see their minds working, wishing they could somehow make the truth go away so that their "heroic" faux pResident and the U.S. could come out of this positively.

But they were facing the bitter truth head-on this time. Iraq cannot be fixed at this point, and the unspoken end of that sentence -- "because this administration made too big a mess of it" after the U.S. and British invasion which toppled Saddam. Shep and his guest were clearly very aware that this was precisely the outcome that they'd been warned about by a wide range of qualified people, though they didn't speak this thought aloud, either, of course. It just hung there in the air between them, like a death sentence pronounced in court....

I believe what the Bushites are thinking now in their last-ditch insanity is that they can use long-range military might from our naval forces offshore to bully Iran into submission, while the "surge" of added U.S. troops in Iraq soon to come subdues the bloodthirsty genocide by the vengeful Shia within that country. No doubt Bush&Co won't admit they have utterly FAILED, even after this latest lunatic campaign goes awry. I expect them to blame it all on the Iraqis in the end, who just couldn't get their shit together, damn 'em!

One other thing I haven't heard anyone else talking about yet, but it has bothered me for the last couple of years: What about the fact that the U.S. has been ARMING huge numbers of Iraqi troops and police as they have been engaged in "training" them? When the U.S. is finally forced to bail out of the country in scenes likely to be reminiscent of Vietnam in 1975, won't they be leaving behind a cauldron of bitterly warring factions who now have more modern military hardware than ever to do their killing with??

This whole thing is way more than just a nasty and embarrassing black eye for the Bu$h administration. In a world where the very culture and heartbeat of many Western nations -- but especially the United States -- depends so heavily on imported oil from the Middle East region, a radical upsetting of the balance of power which has kept oil flowing our way could easily throw every aspect of our economy and daily life into dire stress.

In their botched, buffoonish, childish efforts to bully our way into energy stability (and make their corporate pals even more stinking rich), those maniacs in the White House may well have cast us all headlong into a nightmare of energy deprivation that we cannot remedy by any means. How happy would a Shia-dominated Middle East be to see the Great Satan America forced into collapse? All around the world, nations will be pushed to the edge of chaos -- and maybe over it -- by further turmoil and chaos all across the oil-rich Middle East.

There's a REASON that region has long been called a "powder keg"!

I have this deeply unsettling feeling that one day in the near future we will look back on 2006 as the time "before everything blew up".........

[Morgana LaFey]

8. Tracks 100% with what "the experts" predicted pre-war

Not a thing "new" or unexpected here. Great article.

[Junkdrawer]

11. So, the others in world sees the US/Britain playing "Divide and Conquer"...

And they also predict it will backfire.

By now, this "play the Sunnis against the Shia" game is obvious to all...and scaring the piss out of everyone.

[lyonn]

12. Articles like this causes that ol' sinking feeling again

"........that all the evidence points to the conclusion that the regional tipping point toward ascendancy by the Shi'ite faction may already have been reached."


Well who would have thought? (Sarcasm) It is unbelievable that bushco didn't have a clue as to the real problems with invading that country. It was easier to buy off the locals for info on Saddam's location than Osama's. No doubt bush thought he was Finally a Hero! I hear he has Saddam's gun in the oval office.

[leftchick]

14. Iran....

<snip>

But now the old strategy of indirect US/British involvement has a new twist, seeing that Iran and its proxies have advanced on the region to such a great extent since 2003. US and British military forces, primarily naval forces, are being massively increased inside and outside the Persian Gulf to facilitate certain "measured" actions against Iran.

These will begin with sanctions and an embargo enforced at sea and in the global financial arena, and clandestine support for opposition groups and sabotage within Iran itself. A massive air attack on Iran will be held in immediate readiness. The US and Britain hope such "measured" action will weaken the Iranian regime financially and politically over a period of months, starting early in 2007, and lead to a West-favorable regime change later in the year without the need to resort to massive air attacks.

:scared: