Click HERE to see this thread with all of the graphics, features, and links.

http://www.guardian.co.uk/Iraq/Story/0,,2100698,00.html

so apparently the old fallacy "the enemy of my enemy is my friend" is being applied to the iraq policy, over the heads of iraq's "free" government and police force. it seems we are supplying weapons and armor to sunni militias who not only operate outside the law, but who have attacked u.s. troops in the past. the hope being that they will fulfill a promise to only use them against al qaeda forces in iraq.



also check here for more info:
http://www.guardian.co.uk/Iraq/Story/0,,2100698,00.html

its like they want this to turn into another afghanistan debacle.

Those "loyalist" aren't really loyal to Saddam, as he is dead; they're also the Sunni minority. More importantly, they're not Islamic fundamentalist like Al Qaeda and they're not aligned with Iran like Al Qaeda. America ultimately needs Iraq under Sunni control, as Saudi Arabia is Sunni...

Will they use those arm to kill U.S. soldiers after Al Qaeda is pushed out? Probably, but the larger issue needs to be handled first. Is it one huge silly cluster-fvck? Yes it is.

Originally posted by Robtard
Those "loyalist" aren't really loyal to Saddam, as he is dead; they're also the Sunni minority. More importantly, they're not Islamic fundamentalist like Al Qaeda and they're not aligned with Iran like Al Qaeda. America ultimately needs Iraq under Sunni control, as Saudi Arabia is Sunni...

Will they use those arm to kill U.S. soldiers after Al Qaeda is pushed out? Probably, but the larger issue needs to be handled first. Is it one huge silly cluster-fvck? Yes it is.

You are right they aren't loyal to Saddam, they are however more then willing to become the next Saddam, they aren't going to be friendly to the US either. Al-Qaeda also has no links to Iran, although they would definitely like Iran more then Iraq under Saddam, the leaders of Iran however would never really like Al-Qaeda as it's a threat to their own power.

Anyways this new tactic destroys every last reason the US had for Iraq. It will just end up reinstalling much of the old government and restore Iraq to what it was before, including people like Saddam.

Originally posted by Fishy
You are right they aren't loyal to Saddam, they are however more then willing to become the next Saddam, they aren't going to be friendly to the US either. Al-Qaeda also has no links to Iran, although they would definitely like Iran more then Iraq under Saddam, the leaders of Iran however would never really like Al-Qaeda as it's a threat to their own power.

Anyways this new tactic destroys every last reason the US had for Iraq. It will just end up reinstalling much of the old government and restore Iraq to what it was before, including people like Saddam.

There are plausible ties between Iran and Al Qaeda, as they are dealing with a common enemy, i.e. America. Someone is supplying them, Iran is the likely culprit.

That has yet to be seen, though a definitely possibility as a true Democracy in that region is highly unlikely considering the mindset of the factions.

Originally posted by Robtard
There are plausible ties between Iran and Al Qaeda, as they are dealing with a common enemy, i.e. America. Someone is supplying them, Iran is the likely culprit.

That has yet to be seen, though a definitely possibility as a true Democracy in that region is highly unlikely considering the mindset of the factions.

Plausible ties between Iran and Al Qaeda? Iran is Shi'ite Muslim, Osama bin Laden a devout Sunni. Those two don't get along. Iran would do nothing to help Al-Qaeda they would certainly do a lot to help the opposition of Al-Qaeda though, that much is for certain. Why do you think Iran is interested in working with the US? They want to prevent Al-Qaeda from taking over control in the country. Which is stupid because the US definitely wants Sunni Muslims in power, seeing as Saudi Arabia wouldn't be happy otherwise, and the US definitely wants Saudi Arabia happy.

I also find it really strange that the US would ally itself with Sunni Muslims, seeing as Osama is one. Al-Qaeda is a Sunni muslim organization. They could very well be making Osama more powerful in this way. And if not then there is a large chance that the people they are arming aren't in this for religious reasons, and would probably just want the power back they have lost after Saddam was removed. So I think it's highly likely that this will create another Saddam. Or will backfire and arm Al-Qaeda even more.

Originally posted by Fishy
Plausible ties between Iran and Al Qaeda? Iran is Shi'ite Muslim, Osama bin Laden a devout Sunni. Those two don't get along. Iran would do nothing to help Al-Qaeda they would certainly do a lot to help the opposition of Al-Qaeda though, that much is for certain. Why do you think Iran is interested in working with the US? They want to prevent Al-Qaeda from taking over control in the country. Which is stupid because the US definitely wants Sunni Muslims in power, seeing as Saudi Arabia wouldn't be happy otherwise, and the US definitely wants Saudi Arabia happy.

I also find it really strange that the US would ally itself with Sunni Muslims, seeing as Osama is one. Al-Qaeda is a Sunni muslim organization. They could very well be making Osama more powerful in this way. And if not then there is a large chance that the people they are arming aren't in this for religious reasons, and would probably just want the power back they have lost after Saddam was removed. So I think it's highly likely that this will create another Saddam. Or will backfire and arm Al-Qaeda even more.

They do get along temporarily when facing a common enemy, America.

There are different factions of Sunnis within the group, these "loyalist" are Sunnis; they're aren't Islamic radicals like Al Qaeda though. Yea, that is a definite possibility; it also wouldn't be the first time Western powers, especially America arms those that turn around and use said arms against. Unfortunately, in those parts of the world, with so many factions and infighting, someone like a Saddam is needed to keep the "peace" it seems.

i disagree. it was never a peace. the more we keep the region under our thumb and enable dictators/change regimes/create power vaccumes/install new dictators, etc (a.k.a. spreading freedom) the more we hobble every society's chances to evolve and become genuinely peaceful. (not wanting to kill eachother as opposed to being bombed into terror and submission)

Originally posted by Schecter
i disagree. it was never a peace. the more we keep the region under our thumb and enable dictators/change regimes/create power vaccumes/install new dictators, etc (a.k.a. spreading freedom) the more we hobble every society's chances to evolve and become genuinely peaceful. (not wanting to kill eachother as opposed to being bombed into terror and submission)

That's why I said "peace" in quotes... Saddam gassing thousands, torture camps, rapes etc. isn't really peace, just stability in the sense of all out warfare.

Not sure about the "under thumb" thing though, like I said, that region has been under it's own sword for hundreds and hundreds of years, with so many factions seeking to be in power and wanting their own "special" view of Islam at the head, it won't ever be peaceful. Unfortunate as it may be for the "common people" who just want to live their lives. Are the Western powers to blame? They sure are, but they are not the sole reason.

Originally posted by Robtard
They do get along temporarily when facing a common enemy, America.

There are different factions of Sunnis within the group, these "loyalist" are Sunnis; they're aren't Islamic radicals like Al Qaeda though. Yea, that is a definite possibility; it also wouldn't be the first time Western powers, especially America arms those that turn around and use said arms against. Unfortunately, in those parts of the world, with so many factions and infighting, someone like a Saddam is needed to keep the "peace" it seems.

But only temporarily, Iran would never make Al-Qaeda to powerful or give them to much. Enough to annoy America not enough to seize power they don't want Al-Qaeda to seize power anymore then they want a pro-American government.

Now you are right there are different streams of Sunni Muslims in Iraq, and there would undoubtedly be those that would seek to recreate a state like Saddam had made, a relatively secular state where the decisions are not made on religion but rather on how much power they can quickly get without destroying themselves. Still I think and I'm no expert on the groups fighting there, but I think it's likely that at a time the Sunni Muslims will unite together, or be more likely to unite with each other then with any other group. Personally I wouldn't take the chance of arming these people.

Now like you said the region does need somebody like Saddam who can create some kind of stability at least that's what it looks like now. Problem is however that Al-Qaeda can provide that stability and the Sunni who are supported by the US might see that as well, ally themselves with Osama while getting weapons from the US and use that to destroy the US and take power, divide the country. They rule under religious law as requested by Al-Qaeda, allow Al-Qaeda to train there and to create a stronger and more powerful organization. I mean that's what I'd be looking to do.

The other obvious downside to creating another Saddam is that this new Saddam isn't going to stay pro-America for long, will possibly find himself in war with Iran within no time, and would if he's equally bad or perhaps even worse then Saddam be exactly the opposite of what the US is trying to create there, and the last justification they have for being there would be completely destroyed by such actions.

Personally I just think it's an incredibly risky attempt with so many possible downsides and so little hope of a good ending that perhaps they should have never even started it.

i cant believe this only has 89 hits. i mean...this isnt news? im baffled










:edit:

moderation request: please put words "paris hilton" somewhere in thread title.

thank you