Free Republic
Browse · Search
Bloggers & Personal
Topics · Post Article

Skip to comments.

The reason why they chose 'Buratha' (Iran behind bombings to affect the political process)
Iraq the Model ^ | April 7 2006 | Omar

Posted on 04/07/2006 10:21:05 AM PDT by jmc1969

click here to read article


Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first 1-2021-4041-53 next last
from http://iraqthemodel.blogspot.com/

This is a clear message from Sadr and Iran to the SCIRI that if they don't support Jaafari for PM they will be killed. Those that have said al-Qaeda in Iraq have become a handmaiden of Iran are correct.

1 posted on 04/07/2006 10:21:08 AM PDT by jmc1969
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | View Replies]

To: Allegra

pong


2 posted on 04/07/2006 10:26:12 AM PDT by nuconvert ([there's a lot of bad people in the pistachio business])
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: nuconvert

I'll try to resist the urge to feel smug. ;-)


3 posted on 04/07/2006 10:30:45 AM PDT by Allegra (No mosques were entered or damaged during this post.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 2 | View Replies]

To: jmc1969

More evidence that Iran is scared sh*tless of a strong, free Iraq. I think part of the reason Iran got involved was to retaliate Saddam's invasion of Iran in the 80s, misdirected as it is. But now that it's common knowledge that Iran is behind the insurgency, they should be even more afraid of a strong, free Iraq.

The Middle East has alot of growing up to do. There won't be peace as long as one country bombs another country's innocent civilians just to keep them in a state of turmoil and fear.


4 posted on 04/07/2006 10:34:51 AM PDT by Zeppelin (Texas Longhorns === National Champions !!!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Allegra

It is clear that al-Qaeda did do the bombings as I said before Shia just don't do suicide bombings. That said it is also clear Iran and al-Qaeda are working together and Iran wanted al-Qaeda to send a message to the SCIRI for them.


5 posted on 04/07/2006 11:04:27 AM PDT by jmc1969
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 3 | View Replies]

To: Marine_Uncle; Ernest_at_the_Beach; Grampa Dave; DevSix; SandRat; McGavin999; Southack; bnelson44; ..

Ping


6 posted on 04/07/2006 11:07:29 AM PDT by jmc1969
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 5 | View Replies]

To: jmc1969
I never said the Shia do suicide bombings. What I said was I suspected Sadr and his thugs were behind this as they have been other similar but smaller attacks in Baghdad over the past few weeks.

And Sadr is in bed with Iran and has been all along.

I stand by what I said and so do most of the Iraqis I know here.

But, what do we know?

7 posted on 04/07/2006 11:09:04 AM PDT by Allegra (No mosques were entered or damaged during this post.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 5 | View Replies]

To: Allegra

These aren't mutally exclusive things we are saying. Its clear that Sadr, al-Qaeda, and Iran all have the same vision for Iraq (a destabilized wasteland). And, I have said it is quite possible and even likely that Sadr's boys are working with al-Qaeda to get these guys into position in order to attack targets that will send a message politically.

But, I remember the last time a large number of people here and Bill Roggio blamed Sadr for the suicide attacks in Sadr city as a ruse to discredit the ISF and make himself look like the victim. The problem with the idea that Sadr's boys were the ones that blew themselves up was the fact children were using the head of one of the suicide bombers as a kick ball after the attack and the head was that from an African.

Clearly it is not Sadr's boys blowing themselves up, but that said the real question one should be asking is how an African got though Madhi Army check points in Sadr city.

That is where the focus should be on. If Sadr is helping the Waahibis get certain places in Iraq to cause mass casulity attacks that will help Sadr and Iran.


8 posted on 04/07/2006 11:17:03 AM PDT by jmc1969
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 7 | View Replies]

To: Allegra; Dog; Marine_Uncle; Rokke; MikeinIraq; onyx
"I suspected Sadr and his thugs were behind this as they have been other similar but smaller attacks in Baghdad over the past few weeks. And Sadr is in bed with Iran and has been all along."

Sadr has a militia, but no great role in the new Iraqi government. Now he wants such a role.

But like the man with only a hammer, everything looks like a nail to Sadr. I.E. he only knows to use his militia to further his aims.

It's even possible (though much less likely) that Iran approves of this sort of thing.

I doubt that this is a very successful process for Sadr, though. If he had the votes for Jafari, then he wouldn't have needed this attack...and without killing the local imam in this attack, he's unlikely to gain any new support, either.

As for "civil war" or other such possibilities, Iraq's militias and Mullahs are generally tied to a particular mosque. Thus, we know where they live.

This is an entirely different scenario than what we dealt with when Al Qaeda was itself the bigger threat in Iraq. We didn't know where to find Zarqawi. Not so for Sadr.

So we have different dynamics going on now.

Of course, the communist news media will focus on the violence and the negatives...neglecting to note the different dynamics (probably wouldn't grasp such distinctions even if they cared, anyway).

But dealing with a Mullah and Militia tied to a Mosque (a 3M problem) is a very different thing from that of dealing with a foreign financed terror organization that has no visible headquarters/leadership.

And perhaps the mullahs/militias are acting up *because* Al Qaeda has withered so much in Iraq. Al Qaeda's time has mostly passed now in Iraq. The Mullahs are going to give it a go next, but they have different goals than Al Qaeda.

This is a less dangerous game now. It is different. Beware the newscasters who tell you more of the same.

It's not the same now. The dynamics have changed.

9 posted on 04/07/2006 1:12:37 PM PDT by Southack (Media Bias means that Castro won't be punished for Cuban war crimes against Black Angolans in Africa)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 7 | View Replies]

To: Southack

The dynamics have changed. I was heartened to hear or read here, that Iraqi's are thinking of themselves as Iraqis first, and Shiite, Sunni or Kurd, second.


Thanks for the ping, Southack.


10 posted on 04/07/2006 1:21:19 PM PDT by onyx (It's easier to indict a ham sandwich or Tom DeLay than it is to indict a Democrat.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 9 | View Replies]

To: jmc1969; Allegra
Come on. Kiss and make up. Both your arguments are based on rational thinking as well as supported by many things a group of us agree upon in principle.
At least in my mind one cannot expect to be in accord with everyone on every possible combination.
That being said, you both contribute worthwhile information on the issues in Iraq. So don't throw rotten eggs at me.
I am sure what is foremost in our minds is when the Iraqi forces with US backup is going to take action against Sadr. We saw perhaps the first move in that direction, when they went into the neighborhood of Ur and took out those Sadrist hold up in the mosque.
Surely all the plans are in place. But Jaafari is still the PM. So heaven knows how much his DM/IM, are permitted to sign off on.
This whole deal continues to play out like a bad dream.
11 posted on 04/07/2006 1:43:23 PM PDT by Marine_Uncle (Honor must be earned)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 8 | View Replies]

To: jmc1969; Allegra
Its clear that Sadr, al-Qaeda, and Iran all have the same vision for Iraq (a destabilized wasteland).

No it isn't. AQ and Iran have simliar ideas, but Sadr wants to be the next Saddam or Kohimeni.....
12 posted on 04/07/2006 1:49:43 PM PDT by MikefromOhio (FREE PAUL_DENTON!!!!!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 8 | View Replies]

To: MikefromOhio

So does Zarqawi, but he is smart enough to do that he won't get that so he wants the next best thing a fractured militant Iraq. If Sadr can't get it all he will go for the Zarqawi method of a destabilized Iraq that he can carve a part off for himself.


13 posted on 04/07/2006 1:55:31 PM PDT by jmc1969
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 12 | View Replies]

To: Marine_Uncle

I am not disagreeing with her, I think Sadr is in part behind it.


14 posted on 04/07/2006 1:56:45 PM PDT by jmc1969
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 11 | View Replies]

To: jmc1969

Zarqawi is AQ. He knows he won't EVER be a leader of anything other than his roving bands of terrorists.

He wants to be a kingmaker, not the king.


15 posted on 04/07/2006 1:56:45 PM PDT by MikefromOhio (FREE PAUL_DENTON!!!!!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 13 | View Replies]

To: Southack
" This is a less dangerous game now. It is different. Beware the newscasters who tell you more of the same. It's not the same now. The dynamics have changed."
AGREE. And one can envision particular type SOF/SOCOM/ mixed with Iraqi forces or without, performing specific actions that would fit into this proposed 3M model. Frag orders could change on the fly, flexibility, as conditions rapidly change.
And I can see where the US could actually stay quite neutral and just let the Iraqi's do the fighting. Of course if whole neighborhoods such as Sadr City where involved, I an US airsupport being required.
Who knows we many soon be reading about T72's pumping rounds into both Sunni and Shiite mosques.
16 posted on 04/07/2006 1:57:07 PM PDT by Marine_Uncle (Honor must be earned)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 9 | View Replies]

To: jmc1969

Sadr has already tried that two times and gotten his arse kicked two times.

His own men fragged him the second time. Don't overestimate his pull because he has some hardcore followers. He doesn't resonate with most Iraqis.


17 posted on 04/07/2006 1:57:40 PM PDT by MikefromOhio (FREE PAUL_DENTON!!!!!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 13 | View Replies]

To: MikefromOhio

Back in Fallujah when he had a city and thousands of fighters and his own Shira council he did think he could be king, that changed after the second battle of Fallujah.

Our mistake with Sadr was never kicking him and the Madhi Army out of Sadr city for good.


18 posted on 04/07/2006 1:58:48 PM PDT by jmc1969
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 15 | View Replies]

To: jmc1969
Our mistake with Sadr was never kicking him and the Madhi Army out of Sadr city for good.

Sadr isn't based in Sadr city. He's based further south. Sadr city is a suburb in Baghdad named after his father (whom he had killed).

Secondly, after the FIRST Battle of Fallujah, Z-man has effectively been on the run since. We've nearly gotten him at least 5 times now and it's thought we wounded him at the First Battle of Fallujah as well as in another engagement in Baghdad.

He's not stupid. Otherwise we would have gotten him by now. He knows that he can force things to happen, but he can't make them happen on his own.
19 posted on 04/07/2006 2:01:52 PM PDT by MikefromOhio (FREE PAUL_DENTON!!!!!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 18 | View Replies]

To: MikefromOhio

Secondly, after the FIRST Battle of Fallujah, Z-man has effectively been on the run since.




Zarqawi was living in the Jolan District of Fallujah beheading people after the first battle of Fallujah. Those beheading stopped when they lost their base in the city.


20 posted on 04/07/2006 2:03:38 PM PDT by jmc1969
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 19 | View Replies]


Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first 1-2021-4041-53 next last

Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.

Free Republic
Browse · Search
Bloggers & Personal
Topics · Post Article

FreeRepublic, LLC, PO BOX 9771, FRESNO, CA 93794
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson