The U.S. Is Winning In Iraq

Oh, boy, you’re saying – here we go again; yet another tired claim by a Bush apologist who is blind to the realities of our losing effort. Except it’s not me saying it, or any Bush supporter. It’s the terrorists, as revealed in a document uncovered after the raid that kill al-Zarqawi:

…[T]ime is now beginning to be of service to the American forces and harmful to the resistance for the following reasons:

1. By allowing the American forces to form the forces of the National Guard, to reinforce them and enable them to undertake military operations against the resistance.

2. By undertaking massive arrest operations, invading regions that have an impact on the resistance, and hence causing the resistance to lose many of its elements.

3. By undertaking a media campaign against the resistance resulting in weakening its influence inside the country and presenting its work as harmful to the population rather than being beneficial to the population.

4. By tightening the resistance’s financial outlets, restricting its moral options and by confiscating its ammunition and weapons.

5. By creating a big division among the ranks of the resistance and jeopardizing its attack operations, it has weakened its influence and internal support of its elements, thus resulting in a decline of the resistance’s assaults.

6. By allowing an increase in the number of countries and elements supporting the occupation or at least allowing to become neutral in their stand toward us in contrast to their previous stand or refusal of the occupation.

7. By taking advantage of the resistance’s mistakes and magnifying them in order to misinform.

Now, this is interesting, and it’s a warning to those (including myself) who have been relatively belligerent towards Iran – the terrorists are counting on the outbreak of hostilities to haul their butts out of the fire.

We have noticed that the best of these wars to be ignited is the one between the Americans and Iran, because it will have many benefits in favor of the Sunni and the resistance, such as:

1. Freeing the Sunni people in Iraq, who are (30 percent) of the population and under the Shi’a Rule.

2. Drowning the Americans in another war that will engage many of their forces.

3. The possibility of acquiring new weapons from the Iranian side, either after the fall of Iran or during the battles.

4. To entice Iran towards helping the resistance because of its need for its help.

5. Weakening the Shi’a supply line.

The question remains, how to draw the Americans into fighting a war against Iran? It is not known whether American is serious in its animosity towards Iraq, because of the big support Iran is offering to America in its war in Afghanistan and in Iraq. Hence, it is necessary first to exaggerate the Iranian danger and to convince America and the west in general, of the real danger coming from Iran, and this would be done by the following:

1. By disseminating threatening messages against American interests and the American people and attribute them to a Shi’a Iranian side.

2. By executing operations of kidnapping hostages and implicating the Shi’a Iranian side.

3. By advertising that Iran has chemical and nuclear weapons and is threatening the west with these weapons.

4. By executing exploding operations in the west and accusing Iran by planting Iranian Shi’a fingerprints and evidence.

5. By declaring the existence of a relationship between Iran and terrorist groups (as termed by the Americans).

6. By disseminating bogus messages about confessions showing that Iran is in possession of weapons of mass destruction or that there are attempts by the Iranian intelligence to undertake terrorist operations in America and the west and against western interests.

All intelligence related to Iran must be weighed with this in mind; similarly, since a strong Iraq is the last thing Iran wants, we must be cognizant that even official Iranian statements and actions may be provocations aimed at weakening our position in Iraq.

Nevertheless, the letter is an astonishing admission that our policies are squeezing the terrorists. We have them on the defensive, and the John Kerrys of the world who would choose this time, of all times, to pull out must be opposed vigorously. Our commitment must remain firm…

5 comments to The U.S. Is Winning In Iraq

  • Great work Mark. This is just more evidence of a Bush conspiracy and cover up. al-Zarqawi was working for the administration all along. Cheney must have orchestrated this while the media was focused on Rove. Those Neo-Con’s are good, but not as good as your investigative blogging. Keep up the great work.

  • mtl

    JFK sez:

    Al-Queda has got nuthin’ on the yakuza.

  • No, not Mission Accomplished – but not Mission Failed, either…

  • mtl

    I’m getting a weird vibe on this whole Iran part.

    Iran’s motives? Destabilize Iraq. Elevate the value of your own oil. Diminish Bush’s stature at home. Weaken the US desire for foreign wars.

    It’s all pretty simple.

    Except now there is an offer to ‘help’. The timing is critical, because it comes immediately after a government had been established. The Zarqawi letter provides some critical insight-

    Sistani Shia are on the side of the US. (Interesting that Mookie only got 2000 people in the street to protest Bush-might it mean that his support is not as large as we have been led to believe? Were his followers away at work?)

    The insurgents percieved Iran as a tool, and most definitely not an ally.

    So what is Iran(potentially) doing now?

    Iraq is now a place where Shia is a plurality, and represented so in the govt. It is also the center of religion for Shia. Sistani who is the highest cleric in the religion is ‘supportive’ of the US. Iran is dealing with inner turmoil as the mullahs(they Shia, right?) are holding down about 80% of the population. It is very likely that sistani has many allies within the Iranian Shia, enough that the mullahs worry about taking action against his wishes.

    They can no longer make effort to destabilize. The govt is legit and could turn hostile.

    Does that mean Iran is no longer a threat? There is still a nihilistic group of clerics, that aid Hamas and would/have hid(e) UBL. Iran is being forced to come to terms with Iraq, and they have no other available long term plan other than establishing diplomatic relations-but all their schemes, if they have any, can’t begin until the US is gone.

    Bush would be wise to send a letter to Mo Amjd telling him-
    “Your offer of help should be made to Iraq, not the US, they are a sovereign state.”

Leave a Reply

 

 

 

You can use these HTML tags

<a href="" title=""> <abbr title=""> <acronym title=""> <b> <blockquote cite=""> <cite> <code> <del datetime=""> <em> <i> <q cite=""> <strike> <strong>