Comments on: Civil War http://www.mahablog.com/2006/11/27/civil-war/ Exposing the ugly truths about the Bush Administration. Mon, 01 Dec 2008 19:24:37 +0000 http://wordpress.org/?v=1.5.1.3 by: frankh99 http://www.mahablog.com/2006/11/27/civil-war/#comment-52368 Fri, 01 Dec 2006 11:49:13 +0000 http://www.mahablog.com/2006/11/27/civil-war/#comment-52368 Let's impeach Bush who is in denial that we must leave Iraq forthwith. Malaki dissed Bush becaue Al-Sadr threatened Malaki not to meet with Bush, or else. The only solution in Iraq is to make a truce with Al-Sadr; we already tried killing him, that didn't work (although it left 850,000 dead Iraquis in its wake and another 3,00,000 disfigured and amputated). Germany will try Rummy for war crimes and Bush will be next after he leaves office. He's another Pinochet waiting to happen. In Miami, not another third world country, Colorado politicians be damned. Let’s impeach Bush who is in denial that we must leave Iraq forthwith. Malaki dissed Bush becaue Al-Sadr threatened Malaki not to meet with Bush, or else. The only solution in Iraq is to make a truce with Al-Sadr; we already tried killing him, that didn’t work (although it left 850,000 dead Iraquis in its wake and another 3,00,000 disfigured and amputated). Germany will try Rummy for war crimes and Bush will be next after he leaves office. He’s another Pinochet waiting to happen.
In Miami, not another third world country, Colorado politicians be damned.

]]> by: Doug Hughes http://www.mahablog.com/2006/11/27/civil-war/#comment-51827 Thu, 30 Nov 2006 03:04:44 +0000 http://www.mahablog.com/2006/11/27/civil-war/#comment-51827 I don't expect anyone is reading posts this late, and you have posted some juicy ones since, but I wanted to put this up for you to use later. It may prove relevent. Hadley (WH talking head) said Monday. "You have not yet had a situation also where you have two clearly defined and opposing groups vying not only for power but for territory." Take the statement apart point by point. "two clearly defined and opposing groups" Well the fighting seems to be between Sunis and Shiites. They seem to be clearly defined. Do they have to decide one side will wear blue and the other gray? "vying not only for power" The 'unity' governemnt is reportedly bent on establishing a Shiite majority in every department. The police and military are perceived as Shiite-dominated, to the extent that (reportedly) police watched as 6 or 7 Sunis were doused with kerosine and set on fire after prayers at a Mosque. Police did nothing. Sunis were in power under Sadaam and maintained power through fear. Though they are the minority, they are trying to bully the Shiites into submission. The tactic worked when the Shiites lacked weapons but now it's payback time. This is about power. "but for territory" Look at the map. Kurds control the North; there is oil there. Shiites control the South; there is oil there. If you partition the country, the Sunis get the center and the shaft. There's not much oil there. Perhaps you think that Sunis have not noticed what partitioning would do and territory does not play. The Sunis will negotiate for big slices of oil rich territory before they will agree to SIT at the table, even though they are gettng their butts kicked. True, neither side has conventional armies with tanks and cannon to take land and hold it against a corresponding army. But this is about territory and the wealth under the sand. I don’t expect anyone is reading posts this late, and you have posted some juicy ones since, but I wanted to put this up for you to use later. It may prove relevent.

Hadley (WH talking head) said Monday. “You have not yet had a situation also where you have two clearly defined and opposing groups vying not only for power but for territory.”

Take the statement apart point by point.

“two clearly defined and opposing groups”

Well the fighting seems to be between Sunis and Shiites. They seem to be clearly defined. Do they have to decide one side will wear blue and the other gray?

“vying not only for power”

The ‘unity’ governemnt is reportedly bent on establishing a Shiite majority in every department. The police and military are perceived as Shiite-dominated, to the extent that (reportedly) police watched as 6 or 7 Sunis were doused with kerosine and set on fire after prayers at a Mosque. Police did nothing. Sunis were in power under Sadaam and maintained power through fear. Though they are the minority, they are trying to bully the Shiites into submission. The tactic worked when the Shiites lacked weapons but now it’s payback time. This is about power.

“but for territory”

Look at the map. Kurds control the North; there is oil there. Shiites control the South; there is oil there. If you partition the country, the Sunis get the center and the shaft. There’s not much oil there.

Perhaps you think that Sunis have not noticed what partitioning would do and territory does not play. The Sunis will negotiate for big slices of oil rich territory before they will agree to SIT at the table, even though they are gettng their butts kicked.

True, neither side has conventional armies with tanks and cannon to take land and hold it against a corresponding army. But this is about territory and the wealth under the sand.

]]> by: Mike http://www.mahablog.com/2006/11/27/civil-war/#comment-51382 Wed, 29 Nov 2006 00:30:27 +0000 http://www.mahablog.com/2006/11/27/civil-war/#comment-51382 Heard somebody say it isn't a civil war because the sides aren't trying to take territory. But if that's the definition, then the War on Terror isn't a war either... Heard somebody say it isn’t a civil war because the sides aren’t trying to take territory.

But if that’s the definition, then the War on Terror isn’t a war either…

]]> by: Sachem515 http://www.mahablog.com/2006/11/27/civil-war/#comment-51293 Tue, 28 Nov 2006 19:46:29 +0000 http://www.mahablog.com/2006/11/27/civil-war/#comment-51293 McCaffrey and Priest were both so on target with Chris Matthews last night. Transcript: http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/15935496/ MATTHEWS: The American people have walked away from this thing. They‘re not going to come back. It is a civil war. They are struggling to control areas—the Kirkuk oil basin, the crossroads of Iraq, Baghdad. This is a civil war. Senator John Warner and Chuck Hagle and these distinguished Republicans said, If it‘s a civil war, we are coming home. So that‘s, I think—a lot of this is inside the beltway nonsense, trying to avoid the political consequences of talking to reality. McCaffrey and Priest were both so on target with Chris Matthews last night.

Transcript: http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/15935496/

MATTHEWS: The American people have walked away from this thing. They‘re not going to come back. It is a civil war. They are struggling to control areas—the Kirkuk oil basin, the crossroads of Iraq, Baghdad. This is a civil war. Senator John Warner and Chuck Hagle and these distinguished Republicans said, If it‘s a civil war, we are coming home.

So that‘s, I think—a lot of this is inside the beltway nonsense, trying to avoid the political consequences of talking to reality.

]]> by: felicity smith http://www.mahablog.com/2006/11/27/civil-war/#comment-51258 Tue, 28 Nov 2006 18:01:12 +0000 http://www.mahablog.com/2006/11/27/civil-war/#comment-51258 Maha, your post absolutely cracked me up. Somebody at Comedy Central should do it exactly as you wrote it. Somehow this whole what-is-it-called thing reminds me of when the inimitable Tony Snow - newly on the scene - was asked to comment on the number of American casualties in Iraq and his reply was, "Well, it's just a number." Suffering from a severe case of denial as they seem to be, the Bush Administration will never deal effectively with Iraq because there is nothing happening in Iraq that needs dealing with. Maha, your post absolutely cracked me up. Somebody at Comedy Central should do it exactly as you wrote it.

Somehow this whole what-is-it-called thing reminds me of when the inimitable Tony Snow - newly on the scene - was asked to comment on the number of American casualties in Iraq and his reply was, “Well, it’s just a number.” Suffering from a severe case of denial as they seem to be, the Bush Administration will never deal effectively with Iraq because there is nothing happening in Iraq that needs dealing with.

]]> by: Zeus http://www.mahablog.com/2006/11/27/civil-war/#comment-51082 Tue, 28 Nov 2006 06:12:34 +0000 http://www.mahablog.com/2006/11/27/civil-war/#comment-51082 You say potato and I say ...... I think the Iraqi dead and their families don't care what we call it - their loved one's are still dead! .....meanwhile on Faux News with Greta - it's Natalie Holloway's mother again..... You say potato and I say …… I think the Iraqi dead and their families don’t care what we call it - their loved one’s are still dead!

…..meanwhile on Faux News with Greta - it’s Natalie Holloway’s mother again…..

]]> by: lafrance http://www.mahablog.com/2006/11/27/civil-war/#comment-51055 Tue, 28 Nov 2006 04:26:53 +0000 http://www.mahablog.com/2006/11/27/civil-war/#comment-51055 I think the reluctance to call it a civil war is that the people will compare Bush and Lincoln...and then have Jr.s picture taken by Matthew Brady. I heard someone suggest it was because they thought the people would compare it to our civil war. Oh, like trying to compare it to WWII isn't weird, righties??? But, I look at it this way, if it walks like a civil war and talks like a civil war....it's a civil war. I think the reluctance to call it a civil war is that the people will compare Bush and Lincoln…and then have Jr.s picture taken by Matthew Brady.
I heard someone suggest it was because they thought the people would compare it to our civil war. Oh, like trying to compare it to WWII isn’t weird, righties???
But, I look at it this way, if it walks like a civil war and talks like a civil war….it’s a civil war.

]]> by: charles moore http://www.mahablog.com/2006/11/27/civil-war/#comment-51041 Tue, 28 Nov 2006 03:12:25 +0000 http://www.mahablog.com/2006/11/27/civil-war/#comment-51041 As Juan Cole says today: What is the US military's current mission? Somebody define the mission. How do members of the military decide each day who to shoot at, who to kill? (My own bet is that they decide that any Iraqi will do.) With no plan, I guess we'll be surprised when people in the Green Zone are held hostage by a large number of angry Iraqis. Charles As Juan Cole says today: What is the US military’s current mission? Somebody define the mission. How do members of the military decide each day who to shoot at, who to kill? (My own bet is that they decide that any Iraqi will do.) With no plan, I guess we’ll be surprised when people in the Green Zone are held hostage by a large number of angry Iraqis.

Charles

]]> by: marijam http://www.mahablog.com/2006/11/27/civil-war/#comment-50999 Tue, 28 Nov 2006 00:56:46 +0000 http://www.mahablog.com/2006/11/27/civil-war/#comment-50999 I was semi listening to Hardball today and I do believe I heard Tony Blankely argue that if Iraq is in a civil war, that would prove President Bush’s policies were wrong. Therefore, it isn’t a civil war. I was wondering why Bush was so not wanting it to be a Civil War. Its more of that 'State of Denial' stuff. You know, with this alternative reality that Bush is in I really do wonder if he's half 'mad'. You know, like King George was. I was semi listening to Hardball today and I do believe I heard Tony Blankely argue that if Iraq is in a civil war, that would prove President Bush’s policies were wrong. Therefore, it isn’t a civil war.

I was wondering why Bush was so not wanting it to be a Civil War. Its more of that ‘State of Denial’ stuff. You know, with this alternative reality that Bush is in I really do wonder if he’s half ‘mad’. You know, like King George was.

]]> by: Linkmeister http://www.mahablog.com/2006/11/27/civil-war/#comment-50992 Tue, 28 Nov 2006 00:37:06 +0000 http://www.mahablog.com/2006/11/27/civil-war/#comment-50992 I heard somebody on All Things Considered just eviscerate the argument that has been put forth that it wasn't a civil war because it wasn't countrywide. The guy on NPR said "by those standards, the American Civil War wasn't a civil war either, since there was no fighting in Maine." I heard somebody on All Things Considered just eviscerate the argument that has been put forth that it wasn’t a civil war because it wasn’t countrywide. The guy on NPR said “by those standards, the American Civil War wasn’t a civil war either, since there was no fighting in Maine.”

]]>