Our presence in Iraq, one unintended positive development?

[TR_GOP]

Did anyone catch the CNN roundtable on the challenges facing the Obama Administration last night? It was noted that Iran is carefully sending signals that it desires a Paradigm shift in the Iranian-US relationship model. Iran's Ambassador to Iraq (name escapes me) is a leader within the elite military organization that has been training and equipping militia members in IED ordinance and small unit tactics, and even he has developed a marked willingness to engage in diplomacy with US representatives.

Aside from Obama's election I'm wondering if the continued presence of US forces inside Iraq has unintentionally aided in shifting their opinions on American society? Of course guerrilla warfare isn't exactly an ideal way to get to know your adversaries, but stay with me. First a review of General Petraeus' strategy that ultimately proved successful;

The surge has ended: the additional units are out of Iraq. The gains are holding, with monthly US military fatalities dramatically down, from a peak of 126 as the surge got under way to 18 last month. They are holding because the surge involved much more than extra US troops.

Militarily, it underpinned the switch, masterminded by General Petraeus, to a counter-insurgency strategy that moved forces out of barracks into Iraqi streets with a mission to protect the Iraqi population and earn their trust. Politically, the surge sent the all-important message that the US was not, after all, going to cut its losses and run.

That altered the dynamics in Iraq. Factions that had been jostling for power ahead of America's discomfited departure realised that the US would stay around until it could in some confidence leave Iraq to manage its own destiny. The Sunni switch to alliance with US forces was the most dramatic consequence, a turnaround that General Petraeus shrewdly encouraged and financed. Political conciliation is not yet a fact but at least it is talked about.

Think about the pattern of warfare Iran last experienced during the Iran-Iraq war, it was vicious, brutal, and barbaric. Placed in comparison our revised strategy displays the best traits of the US serviceman. Deadly when confronted but genuinely more interested in working out conditions for peace than destroying or subjugating a population. Of course our commitments to Israel remains a bone of contention, but by being in such close proximity to an adversary for such a length of time affords the opportunity to reconsider opinions formed by long held suspicions and rumor.

Maybe they've learned something about America from daily observance of our military along with first hand accounts from Iraqis? And besides, we did eliminate their greatest threat (Saddam).

 

[BlackAsCoal]

Iran has no intention of stopping their development of nuclear weapons .. nor should they in my opinon.

They agree with the Iraqi government proposals for US withdrawal because the Iraqi government is Shite. Shrewd move.

In the end, neither Iraq nor Iran .. which eventually seem like the same entity .. will be dependent nor beholden to the US .. and the Obama Administration, which is totally beholden to Israel, will not be able to move outside of the box that has constrained every American administration from seeking true peace and equity in the region.

 

[DiamondDave]

Iran has no intention of stopping their development of nuclear weapons .. nor should they in my opinon.

I kinda hope they don't stop their development of Nuke technology too... I will enjoy watching video of the Israelis putting smoldering craters all over that country

 

[Red Dawn]

I kinda hope they don't stop their development of Nuke technology too... I will enjoy watching video of the Israelis putting smoldering craters all over that country

I always say, that republicans love war.

 

[TR_GOP]

Iran has no intention of stopping their development of nuclear weapons .. nor should they in my opinon.

They agree with the Iraqi government proposals for US withdrawal because the Iraqi government is Shite. Shrewd move.

In the end, neither Iraq nor Iran .. which eventually seem like the same entity .. will be dependent nor beholden to the US .. and the Obama Administration, which is totally beholden to Israel, will not be able to move outside of the box that has constrained every American administration from seeking true peace and equity in the region.

No one expects them to give up on their nuclear program. I'm not convinced Iran is suicidal either. They want recognition and status. Their nuclear program an element towards achieving that end, but establishing diplomatic ties with the US is even more valuable. In Iran's eyes the best scenario is achieving both aims, but which do you thinks offers more; being isolated into a corner with a bomb, or moving into the center stage of international politics (and all the economic and internal political advantages)?

Is the US in a position to physically seize and destroy Iran's underground nuclear development facilities while simutaneously working the Pakistani-Taliban issue? Iran quietly assisted the US during the opening months of the Afghanistan conflict. Should Pakistan become more unstable we might need an Iranian port and an air corridor in order to maintain our Afghan presence.

 

[DiamondDave]

I always say, that republicans love war.

Love war? Nah.. Accept it? Yep... Enjoy when an evil enemy is finally ass-kicked? Yep

It's like when I did serve... Did I look forward to being put into a combat situation? Nope.... Did I celebrate when we accomplished what we had to and kicked some ass? Yep

 

[Old Rocks]

As more and more unstable nations develop nuclear capability, eventually a city in some industrialized nation will be a smoking hole in the ground. And there will not be a nation state to blame. Attacking any nation as a result of the terrorist action will result in the creation of more terrorists. Does anyone see a nice feedback loop here? Time to treat terrorism as what it actually is, a problem for police work. Using the military to root out terrorists, particulary when several nations are involved, is liking lancing a boil with a ten pound sledge.

 

[Old Rocks]

Love war? Nah.. Accept it? Yep... Enjoy when an evil enemy is finally ass-kicked? Yep

It's like when I did serve... Did I look forward to being put into a combat situation? Nope.... Did I celebrate when we accomplished what we had to and kicked some ass? Yep

No matter what war, no matter who speaks these words, it all ends up the same. Evil enemy, a wonderful phrase, to be used by anybody in any cause. And make sure no one takes photos of the dead children.

 

[BlackAsCoal]

I kinda hope they don't stop their development of Nuke technology too... I will enjoy watching video of the Israelis putting smoldering craters all over that country

I bet you think "anti-semitism" is why Israel is the most hated nation on the planet.

Any idea what the blowback from that will be?

What happens if Iran comes under the SCO umbrella?

Are you under the illusion that Iran can be prevented from acquiring nukes?

Are you ready to get your natural resources from Isreal?

Iran has every right to acquire the same weapons Israel has .. which will definately shift the balance of power.

 

[BlackAsCoal]

No one expects them to give up on their nuclear program. I'm not convinced Iran is suicidal either. They want recognition and status. Their nuclear program an element towards achieving that end, but establishing diplomatic ties with the US is even more valuable. In Iran's eyes the best scenario is achieving both aims, but which do you thinks offers more; being isolated into a corner with a bomb, or moving into the center stage of international politics (and all the economic and internal political advantages)?

Is the US in a position to physically seize and destroy Iran's underground nuclear development facilities while simutaneously working the Pakistani-Taliban issue? Iran quietly assisted the US during the opening months of the Afghanistan conflict. Should Pakistan become more unstable we might need an Iranian port and an air corridor in order to maintain our Afghan presence.

Surely you don't believe Iran is ever going to give the US access to it's ports.

Americans always believe that if we don't have relations with a country, they are thus "isolated" .. but that is quite often not the case as evidenced by not only Iran, but Venezula. Look no further than the emergence of the SCO, which includes the ever emerging powers of China and India. AND, even europe wants to forge its own way independent of US desires.. North Korea is that example.

The bottom line is the US is no longer in control, and with a faltering economy and Pakistan, Afghanistan, Iraq, Russia, Syria, Latin America, and Iran all on our plate along with a plethora of other issues .. such as Israeli domionance of our foreign policy, it would be unwise to believe that the Iranians don't smell blood in the water.

I view their recent actions as very shrewd, but not necessarily a good development for US Israeli dominated foreign policy.

 

[BlackAsCoal]

As more and more unstable nations develop nuclear capability, eventually a city in some industrialized nation will be a smoking hole in the ground. And there will not be a nation state to blame. Attacking any nation as a result of the terrorist action will result in the creation of more terrorists. Does anyone see a nice feedback loop here? Time to treat terrorism as what it actually is, a problem for police work. Using the military to root out terrorists, particulary when several nations are involved, is liking lancing a boil with a ten pound sledge.

Exactly .. and confirmed by the Rand Corporation.

However, the so-called war on terrorism is designed to accomplish goals set out by the plutocracy that controls this nation. Our military and our government have been reduced to mere tools of the corporate will.

Somehow, the only terrorists worth invading for are those near oil and pipelines.

Imagine that.

 

[TR_GOP]

Surely you don't believe Iran is ever going to give the US access to it's ports.
.

Do you think Iran wants an Afghanistan ruled by the Taliban again, except this time armed with a nuke or two smuggled out of Pakistan? There's also very vigorous trading between the present Afghan govt and Iran that'll dissappear overnight should the Taliban regain power.



PRAGUE, May 28, 2006 (RFE/RL) -- After meeting with his Iranian counterpart, Mahmud Ahmadinejad, on May 27, President Karzai thanked Iran for the support in the past difficult years and especially for accepting Afghan refugees.

"We will never forget Iran's goodwill in accepting our refugees in the past 20 years and Iran's cooperation with Afghanistan in the past four years," Karzai said. "Afghanistan hopes to strengthen further trade and economic ties between the two countries."

Karzai said that Iranian exports to Afghanistan have risen from several million dollars four years ago to $500 million now.

Ahmadinejad also said the two countries have good potential to deepen their cooperation.

"As he [Karzai] said, [Afghanistan and Iran] both are big countries, and there are a lot of opportunities for cooperation in all fields - industry, agriculture and culture, transport, science, new technologies, education and culture, and any other field that the two countries choose to," Ahmadinejad said. "It is a good opportunity for mutual cooperation between the two countries."

After the U.S.-led war in Afghanistan toppled the Taliban government, American and Iranian diplomats met together in Bonn, with a handful of representatives from other UN members, to form a new government and constitution for Kabul. “None was more [helpful] than the Iranians,” said James Dobbins, the U.S. special envoy to Afghanistan at the time, writing in the Washington Post. “The original version of the Bonn agreement ... neglected to mention either democracy or the war on terrorism. It was the Iranian representative who spotted these omissions and successfully urged that the newly emerging Afghan government be required to commit to both.”

Timeline: U.S.-Iran Contacts - Council on Foreign Relations

Americans always believe that if we don't have relations with a country, they are thus "isolated" .. but that is quite often not the case as evidenced by not only Iran, but Venezula. Look no further than the emergence of the SCO, which includes the ever emerging powers of China and India. AND, even europe wants to forge its own way independent of US desires.. North Korea is that example.

The bottom line is the US is no longer in control, and with a faltering economy and Pakistan, Afghanistan, Iraq, Russia, Syria, Latin America, and Iran all on our plate along with a plethora of other issues .. such as Israeli domionance of our foreign policy, it would be unwise to believe that the Iranians don't smell blood in the water.

I view their recent actions as very shrewd, but not necessarily a good development for US Israeli dominated foreign policy

I agree on all counts. So in who's sphere of influence should Iran exist in the interest of furthering our national interest and the security interest of the gulf nations? The state of normalized US/Libyan relations today were unimaginable just handful of years ago.

 

[Navy1960]

Israel's deputy prime minister, Shaul Mofaz, told the paper Yediot Ahronot: "If Iran continues its programme to develop nuclear weapons, we will attack it. The window of opportunity has closed. The sanctions are not effective. There will be no alternative but to attack Iran in order to stop the Iranian nuclear programme."

Israel asked US for green light to bomb nuclear sites in Iran | World news | guardian.co.uk

Personally, I don't think it's a question of if Israel will attack Iran over the Nuclear issue at this point but when. They have asked President Bush his support to do so once before and he turned them down flat earlier this year. If Iran continues it's development and it appears they will, of a nuclear weapon or weapons then Israel it appears is intent on making sure that does not happen.

 

[BlackAsCoal]

Do you think Iran wants an Afghanistan ruled by the Taliban again, except this time armed with a nuke or two smuggled out of Pakistan? There's also very vigorous trading between the present Afghan govt and Iran that'll dissappear overnight should the Taliban regain power.



PRAGUE, May 28, 2006 (RFE/RL) -- After meeting with his Iranian counterpart, Mahmud Ahmadinejad, on May 27, President Karzai thanked Iran for the support in the past difficult years and especially for accepting Afghan refugees.

"We will never forget Iran's goodwill in accepting our refugees in the past 20 years and Iran's cooperation with Afghanistan in the past four years," Karzai said. "Afghanistan hopes to strengthen further trade and economic ties between the two countries."

Karzai said that Iranian exports to Afghanistan have risen from several million dollars four years ago to $500 million now.

Ahmadinejad also said the two countries have good potential to deepen their cooperation.

"As he [Karzai] said, [Afghanistan and Iran] both are big countries, and there are a lot of opportunities for cooperation in all fields - industry, agriculture and culture, transport, science, new technologies, education and culture, and any other field that the two countries choose to," Ahmadinejad said. "It is a good opportunity for mutual cooperation between the two countries."

After the U.S.-led war in Afghanistan toppled the Taliban government, American and Iranian diplomats met together in Bonn, with a handful of representatives from other UN members, to form a new government and constitution for Kabul. “None was more [helpful] than the Iranians,” said James Dobbins, the U.S. special envoy to Afghanistan at the time, writing in the Washington Post. “The original version of the Bonn agreement ... neglected to mention either democracy or the war on terrorism. It was the Iranian representative who spotted these omissions and successfully urged that the newly emerging Afghan government be required to commit to both.”

Timeline: U.S.-Iran Contacts - Council on Foreign Relations

What I think my good brother is that Iran is being shrewd as I suggested. They recognize that their best bet is making nice directly with the Afghan government, not through the US. They're doing the same thing with the Pakistani government.

Question: If Iran is as cooperative as you suggest .. which I do not doubt for a moment .. why is Obama increasingly using cowboy bluster in regards to Iran which has only extended him goodwill since his election?

Answer: Because Obama is controlled by Israel and you'd have to be in the Israeli government to be surrounded by more Israeli politicians and operatives than Obama.

That's the point I think you miss.

US foreign policy ain't going anywhere near "change" as long as it is dominated by Israel.

 

[Chris]

Obama's election was Iran's hardliners worst nightmare.

His willingness to negotiate has pushed them into a corner. It is very difficult to paint the U.S. as the Great Satan when they are willing to negotiate. Bush was the hardliners best recruiter, a cartoonish baffoon cowboy. We are in a political war, and this is something that Bush never understood.

 

[DiamondDave]

I bet you think "anti-semitism" is why Israel is the most hated nation on the planet.

Any idea what the blowback from that will be?

What happens if Iran comes under the SCO umbrella?

Are you under the illusion that Iran can be prevented from acquiring nukes?

Are you ready to get your natural resources from Isreal?

Iran has every right to acquire the same weapons Israel has .. which will definately shift the balance of power.

No... they don't have that "right"

They as a government have not shown that they are worthy of having a nuke program, let alone a nuke arsenal...

And if they continue to try and obtain nukes, I will continue to support us and Israel or any other free country that bombs the living shit out of those facilities and their governmental headquarters

Israel has many reasons why it is hated, and particularly by extremist nations in the middle east... it is not solely because of their religious background/stance/etc...

 

[BlackAsCoal]

No... they don't have that "right"

They as a government have not shown that they are worthy of having a nuke program, let alone a nuke arsenal...

And if they continue to try and obtain nukes, I will continue to support us and Israel or any other free country that bombs the living shit out of those facilities and their governmental headquarters

Israel has many reasons why it is hated, and particularly by extremist nations in the middle east... it is not solely because of their religious background/stance/etc...

As the only nation on the planet to ever use nuclear weapons .. twice .. didn't have to either time .. we were testing .. still talk of its "tactical" use .. we don't have the "right" to determine who else gets them.

Every nation has a right to protect itself and Israel remains a threat to the Iranians, thus they have every right to the same weapons Israel has.

Additionally, no nation on the face of the earth is or has been in violation of more UN Resolutions than Israel, which is also guilty of many atrocoities of Palestinian people.

Israel isn't just hated by "extremist nations" it's the most hated nation on the planet.

Feel free to put Israel before the best interests of the US is you choose. That's your perogative.

 

[TR_GOP]

Exactly .. and confirmed by the Rand Corporation.

However, the so-called war on terrorism is designed to accomplish goals set out by the plutocracy that controls this nation. Our military and our government have been reduced to mere tools of the corporate will.

Somehow, the only terrorists worth invading for are those near oil and pipelines.

Imagine that.

CNN's Scream Bloody Murder drove that point home. It's embarassing how clearly guided by strictly financial concerns our foreign policy has been over the past two decades. Between 800,000 - 1,000,000 slaughtered in Rwanda, 500,000 - 1,000,000 in Dafur, and only after 3 years and upwards of 100,000 deaths did the US finally rain steel on the Serb militia. Why? No oil in it for us. Make one wonder if Hitler came to power today would anyone lift a finger in opposition?

 

[BlackAsCoal]

Israel's deputy prime minister, Shaul Mofaz, told the paper Yediot Ahronot: "If Iran continues its programme to develop nuclear weapons, we will attack it. The window of opportunity has closed. The sanctions are not effective. There will be no alternative but to attack Iran in order to stop the Iranian nuclear programme."

Israel asked US for green light to bomb nuclear sites in Iran | World news | guardian.co.uk

Personally, I don't think it's a question of if Israel will attack Iran over the Nuclear issue at this point but when. They have asked President Bush his support to do so once before and he turned them down flat earlier this year. If Iran continues it's development and it appears they will, of a nuclear weapon or weapons then Israel it appears is intent on making sure that does not happen.

There are a myriad of reasons why Israel has not attacked Iran, not the least of which is the blowback and possible ineffectiveness of such a strike. Plus, there are no guarantees, given the distance and wide dispersal of Iran's underground facilities that such a strike would even work .. and whether it works or not, such an attack will only strengthen the hardliners.

Iran will obtain nuclear weapons .. that's a reality the world will have to live with .. just as it lived with Pakistan having nukes.

Underneath the "nuclear" question, Iran is buying Russian made S-300 ballistic misslies, which would be an effective sheild against Israels mid and long range missiles. Israel wants to attack before they get them because they don't want Iran to have ANY deterance to their own weapons of mass destruction.

At what point does American interests come before the interests of Israel .. which has not behaved as a civil nation.

 

[BlackAsCoal]

CNN's Scream Bloody Murder drove that point home. It's embarassing how clearly guided by strictly financial concerns our foreign policy has been over the past two decades. Between 800,000 - 1,000,000 slaughtered in Rwanda, 500,000 - 1,000,000 in Dafur, and only after 3 years and upwards of 100,000 deaths did the US finally rain steel on the Serb militia. Why? No oil in it for us. Make one wonder if Hitler came to power today would anyone lift a finger in opposition?

Well said.

The war on terror is a hoax and has been from the very beginning.