Civil war imminent in Iraq

l think Hugh will be pleased, as more US military will be pulled back, and more sunni will be killing more shites, kurds, etc. think we will be getting more bang for the buck. when will these monsterous islamic tire of killing all their women and children? what kind of mindset would go out and deliberately kill all these children and women? l guess if your a muslim you have no mind, heart or humanity.

Uh-huh, uh-huh...*tsk*tsk*tsk*...very bad, very bad indeed.

Yeah.

Now, what do y'all think Gens. Pace and Abizaid say to each other when the door is closed and between them sits a bottle of scotch? If I didn't think the post would get deleted, I'd tell ya what the privates and sergeants, lieutenants and captains say.

Something to the effect of "So the f**k what? Let these s**theads kill each other. They get off on it anyway."

The war on Iraq was uneccassary. Now America is stuck in a situation where it is partly responsible for the instability; at least that's what the world thinks. Instead; the US should have focused more on Iran and Pakistan and North Korea. The US should pull out of Iraq asap and focus more on rogue nations like iran and pakistan. Of course; pulling out hastily may create another 'Afghanistan'

Thermalpaste:

The US and the UK were picking a fight they had reasonable hopes of winning.

If you think Iraq has been messy, what makes you think "focussing" on Iran, Pakistan and N. Korea would have produced better results in the shorter term?

Waterdragon:

North Korea test fires it's missiles over the Japanese sea; NK is a threat to Japan. Obviously; the Japanese are going to assist the US even if they have a pacifist constitution. Apart from the Japs; the US has strategic advantage because the troops can easily be deployed from South Korea.
Pakistan and Iran are really close allies. In fact Pakistan possesses nuclear weapons and terrorists are capable of taking control of the nukes; if this ever happens; then India and Israel will join the West to crush Pakistan and Iran.
There was no concrete evidence of Iraq possessing biological and chemical weapons and obviously many countries opposed the war. But this is different; this is a war against rogue nations; we have ample proof, the UN dislikes Iran's policies etc etc....
The war on Iraq was a proper war to get rid of Saddam; but the war i'm talking about is using precision bombs to destroy key installations and nuclear facilities in Iran and Pakistan and North Korea; something like the war on Afghanistan.

the Iraq war has only speeded up the collision of islam with the rest of the world. it will be seen as necessary to bring about the destruction of islam.
BinLaden could see that with Western influence, Islam would suffer, as educated people who want freedom will eventually caste off this cult of death. When Regan pulled out of Lebanon after all the Marines were murdered in the sleep, after Clinton ordered the retreat from Somali, all these empowered muslims that the West headed by the Americans were paper tigers, weak. The war in Iraq
has killed more muslim fanatics than the US army would be allowed civily to kill. We have rules of war but terrorist do not.

General Abizaid, General Pace, and Captain Obvious.

I read in the USA TODAY (today)that Hezbollah is planning a protest march in Bagdad. The report states young men from where ever are beginning to arrive.
I am now wondering if the USA knows something in going to happen as they recently reinforced Bagdad with about 3500 troops.
Watch this developing story closely.

These people are going to kill each other no matter what. They can't evolve , they don't want to evolve, and they proved it by basing their constitution on islam. These people are so set into islam, they love the cruelty, injustice, suffering, savagary and victimization that the koran brings them. If they didn't, they would get out of islam.

ZenaWarrriorPrincess said: "BinLaden could see that with Western influence, Islam would suffer, as educated people who want freedom will eventually caste off this cult of death."

I used to think the same thing; that a western education brings enlightenment to the masses. Events of the last few years dictate a different scenario.

Education has nothing to do with terrorism. Bin Laden is educated, Al Zawahiri is a doctor, Al Zarkawi was educated, Ahmadinejad is educated, the fifteen Saudis that were in 9/11 were educated, the Iranian that drove his car through the campus quad in North Carolina had a masters degree, the "I am an American muslim" in Seattle that killed one woman and wounded 5 more in the Jewish Center in Seattle has a masters degree. I can go on an on but I need not say more.

What we need is a UN resolution!

A resolution that resolves to have a study on how a none binding resolution can be implemented so that a resolution can be put in place.

Heck with it -- let them kill each other!

Cover story in today's WSJ -- the shia now have their own taquiyya spewer (vali nasr) who has Bush's ear whilst his saudi friends shout in the other ear. How confusing this must be to the dolt. (At least he is giving these geniouses a little history along with the iranian sales pitch)

"They should have been reading Jihad Watch."
-- from Robert's comment on the statements of Generals Pace and Abizaid (and Secretary Rumsfeld) in the Congressional hearings held on August 2, 2006

To refresh memories, the Year of Scouring Dangerously Came To an End (dating its beginning from the time that Iraq had been essentially conquered, and the search-and-destroy for major weaponry could begin) in early April, and it was time for reality, and not messianic dreams, to be emphasized:

"The Sadr family of clerics was identified long ago, by Gertrude Bell in her letters in the 1920s, as a center for hostility. In Najaf, a few weeks ago, a green Islamic flag was unfurled; in Arabic the words read "the Mahdi is coming." That should put a chill down the spine of very educated Infidel.

The "Mahdi" is the Hidden Imam, who when he returns will bring about the complete dominance of Islam, and the destruction of all Infidels. If the Sunni Bin Laden emphasizes the restoration of the Caliphate, the Shi'a tend to emphasize the return of the Mahdi. Pace various American converts to Shi'a Islam, it is not one whit less dangerous for Infidels than the Sunni version. Whatever the sectarian differences, there is not the slightest discernible difference in the hostility toward Infidels. Indeed, the hysterical fear of the "unclean" (najis) in Shi'a Islam may be even more pronounced. Thus Jews in Iran, until the most recent Shah, were forbidden to go out in the rain, lest the rain, first touching their "unclean" bodies, would then touch a Muslim and contaminate him. There are family testimonies of Jews who were killed, precisely because they were out in the rain, and a passing mullah claimed he had been made "wet" by rainwater that had touched a Jew.
The Shi'a explosion was perfectly predictable.

The key to statecraft is not to be surprised. Let me put it clearly: it was right to destroy the Iraqi weapons, to search out for other weaponry, to destroy the Iraqi regime. It might even be said that it is the massive good-hearted and unselfish American effort (and it is precisely its unselfishness, its naive lack of calculation, that makes it so unacceptable), in rebuilding or building 25,000 schools, supplying hundreds of hospitals, and rebuilding electricity grids and roads, that has put Iraq in a state not just ante-bellum, not just pre-Saddam Hussein, but in a condition better than any it has ever known.

But the Light-Unto-the-Muslim-Nations Project will fail. It is based on ignoring Islam, and the deep hostility it engenders toward Infidels. It does not matter how much good we do. We remain Infidels. Sunni and Shi'a alike will hate us. They differ only in the fact that some are willing to wait, to be the beneficiaries of as much Infidel largesse as possible (and please, for god's sake, someone lead the fight to cancel that $18.7 billion in Infidel funds which are to be transferred to Muslim Iraqis -- this is absolute madness).

Silly phrases about not wanting to "cut and run" or that nautical version, "let us stay the course," are unworthy of adults. We must calculate our costs and benefits. We are now squandering men, materiel, political capital, time, and our own best instruments for fighting the counter-Jihad -- which include winning back Occupied Europe (Eurabia) from the corrupt elites who, through the Euro-Arab Dialogue and other means, have been quiet quislings in the slow demographic and intellectual takeover of Western Europe by Muslims and, in the media, by apologists for the Jihad; sending in troops to the southern Sudan -- after a carefully-orchestrated meeting with black American church leaders, and possibly black African diplomats -- to protect the black African survivors of more than two decades of Arab-funded Jihad, and to help an independent, black African state in the south, funded by its own oil wealth, to come into being (a terrific psychological blow to the promoters of the further expansion of dar al-Islam); an attempt to unite all those who are victims of Jihad, whether Buddhists in Thailand, Confucian and Christian Chinese and Hindus in Indonesia, Hindus and Sikhs in Kashmir and Pakistan, Hindus and Christians in Bangladesh, Orthodox Christians in Kosovo, and son on; a declared end to all foreign -- especially military aid -- to all Muslim states -- beginning with Egypt, which pocketed the Sinai, proceeded to violate every one of its solemn commitments under the Camp David Accords, and is now a world center both of antisemitism and anti-Americanism. And the President must announce, and fund, a Manhattan Project for Energy that will help end, not the "oil weapon" (it does not, and never did, exist) but the "money weapon" that funds the Jihad; let it be combined with an announcement that the government will steadily raise taxes on gasoline, in order to appropriate the profits that will otherwise necessarily go to the Saudis, the U.A.E., and other funders of Jihad. Jihad has a doctrine has always existed, and always will. What the U.S. has to do is to heighten and spread awareness of what Jihad is, and to deprive Jihadis of the wherewithal to conduct it -- by ending, or even reversing, Muslim migration to the Lands of the Infidels, by cutting all foreign aid to Muslim countries, by diminishing the revenues of OPEC by all means possible, and by working to exploit the sectarian, and ethnic fissures (above all, the resentment felt by non-Arab Muslims, such as Berbers, Kurds, Persians, and Turks, for Arab Muslims). It can be done. It requires, however, a lot less bustling about in official Washington with endless memos, and endless meetings, and the repetition of platitudes about not repeating the "example of Somalia" (Somalia, incidentally, has virtually collapsed -- which might be just the ticket, as far as Infidels are concerned, for Iraq, as long as airstrikes continue to ensure that Iraq poses no military threat to Infidels).

Indeed, the Somalization of all those parts of the Islamic world that do not engage in applying their own brand of Kemalism, in which Muslims are kept, as best they can be kept, at each others' throats, and the means for conducting the permanent Jihad, both in arms and in money and in propaganda, severely diminished, is much more sensible than this entirely baseless and uproven belief, promoted initially by the naive Bernard Lewis (that promoter of the Oslo Accords), whose acolytes need to distinguish between his work as a scholar and his understanding of the tenets of Islam as they are received, and felt, by Muslims themselves (neither Hilal Inalcik, nor Kanan Makiya, nor that sometime patron, the oily and dangerous "dialogue of civilisations" Prince Hassan bin Talal, are guides to mass Muslim man).
And when William Safire prates, as he did today, that "either we will withdraw prematurely and watch Iraq plunge into civil war and again become a haven for hatred of the West, or we will help build an Islamic democracy that will turn the tide against terror conducted by rogue states using a network of freelance killers" he simply shows how ignorant he is of Islam ("Islamic democracy"? Just how does that work? Tell that to Ibn Warraq or Reza Afshari) and its deep and central hostility to Infidels.

We must judge Iraqi Muslims not on the basis of the handful of smooth-talking, essentially rational creatures -- the current Ambassador[Rend al-Rahim Francke], Kanan Makiya, Ahmad Chalabi -- whom we pay so much attention to. They have all lived for decades in the West, sometimes for their entire adult lives. They have "de-islamized" themselves even if they would not willingly admit it. But Iraq has not been "de-islamized." If we want a hundred Ataturks -- and we do -- for Islam's tenets cannot be changed, but the power of its message can be constantly monitored, and constrained, by "secularist" Muslims themselves -- though constant vigilance is necessary, as the backsliding in Turkey shows -- then we must create the kind of conditions that made Ataturk's reforms possible. Had the British army tried to impose what Ataturk imposed, it would have failed completely. The changes must come from within, and they will come -- but only when the full political, economic, moral, and above all intellectual failures of Islam are seen, and a sufficient number of people within Islam, like Ataturk, work to constrain it themselves in order to save their countries.

But we must stop this nonsense about how leaving Iraq at this point is a failure: it is in fact the beginning of wisdom, if it is combined with, as the old Crest toothpaste logo said, a "conscientiously-applied program" of anti-Jihad measures.

And if Iraq descends, as descend it will, into some kind of chaos and intra-sectarian violence, so what? Would that the Iran-Iraq War had gone on for decades. Have we forgotten the oldest principle of warfare: Divide et impera. Divide and conquer. It was good enough for the Romans, and it is certainly what the Muslims, in cleverly dividing Western Europe from America (appealing to such pre-existing mental conditions as antisemitism and anti-Americanism) have done. Yet we seem oblivious to our own possibilities of dividing the Muslim world. Come on, one wishes to urge Uncle Sam: use your considerable brains. Fais un petit effort!"

[Posted by: Hugh at April 5, 2004 04:14 PM]

In these hearings yesterday, her Thighness HRC (to quote Mark Levin) decided to tax Rumsfeld >over the impeding civil war. So much for the hope that Dems who support an immediate withdrawal were doing so for the right reasons.

From General Pace's statement

Joint Chiefs of Staff Chairman Gen. Peter Pace supported Rumsfeld's assessment, and said the ultimate success of an Iraq transition to democracy fell with the country's leadership and people.
"Shiite and Sunni are going to have to love their children more than they hate each other," Pace said. "The weight of that must be on the Iraqi people and the Iraqi government."

Impending, impeding -- let's call the whole thing (our thing, cosa nostra, our American thing in Iraq) off, and let the Jaish al Mahdi in one corner, ably assisted by a Farsi-speaking trainer in a black turban, take on the Sunnis of Baghdad, ably assisted by other Sunnis from Ramadi, from Tikrit, from Fallujah.

Put yourself in the boots of american troops in Iraq now. He asks himself "Is this going to work?" and "Is this worth my life?".

The answer is No and No.

For all those who say that it will become a haven for the "bad guys" I would say take a look at Saudi Arabia, Pakistan, Syria, Iran, etc.
They are havens for the "bad guy" also. If the Shi'a and Sunnis fight over it it will sap their strength. Iranians will poor in to fight Sunnis. Saudis will poor in to fight the Shias. Shias in Saudia Arabia will start causing troubles for the Sunnis in power. Shias and Persians will dream of taking Mecca back from Sunni domination. It will be great!

News has reported that 'hundreds of thousands' of Shitte Hezbollah supporters marched in the streets shouting death to Israel and death to America. They were wearing white burial shrouds symbolizing their willingness to die for Hezbollah

When you consider that Shittes believe that the 12th Imam will appear in southern iran and gather an army and head into Iraq to battle and then onward towards Syria, we may be actually seeing Iraq forming it's army to assist Iran in it's planned attack. It is very clear that the monkey thinks this 12th Imam will appear on or very near 22 August. Also, August 7 is symbolic of allah numerically in arabic. It all seems to be lining up a little too well in my humble opinion.

I personally think we need to remove our armed forces and drop a mushroom on Iran, Iraq and Syria. That would certainly sort out a lot of this. Instead I fear that our kids over there are in a VERY dangerous situation. If this Imam does materialize and an army DOES gather, how on EARTH are our soldiers going to contend with hundreds of thousands of murdering devils?

This battle for islam is allah's will. Who are we (infidels) to try to intercede?

The Shiites we freed from Saddam, the Shiites we have more or less given Iraq to are marching by the tens of thousands screaming Death to America.

WHAT IN GOD'S NAME ARE WE STILL DOING THERE????

Perhaps our leaders need to start studying history and strategy. Perhaps a strong study in Sun Tzu we can then move on to Liddell Hart and then a real look at the campaigns of Sherman, Patton, Genghis Khan and others. It is not just enough to study Islamic culture or its religion. It is going to be a long war so it might be helpful if our leaders understood what war really is.

All these will work for Iraq and the need to get out. Its not cutting and running but instead it is basic strategy 101.

"There is no instance of a country having benefited from prolonged warfare." Sun Tzu

Commonsense. Iraq is becoming a prolonged battle with no real chance of victory unless they change their religion.

"Thus it is that in war the victorious strategist only seeks battle after the victory has been won, whereas he who is destined to defeat first fights and afterwards looks for victory." Sun Tzu

Bush really did his homework for this one. We are now trying to find that victory.

"He who wishes to fight must first count the cost. When you engage in actual fighting, if victory is long in coming, then men's weapons will grow dull and their ardor will be dampened. If you lay siege to a town, you will exhaust your strength. Again, if the campaign is protracted, the resources of the State will not be equal to the strain. Now, when your weapons are dulled, your ardor dampened, your strength exhausted and your treasure spent, other chieftains will spring up to take advantage of your extremity. Then no man, however wise, will be able to avert the consequences that must ensue... In war, then, let your great object be victory, not lengthy campaigns." Sun Tzu

Other chieftains like Iran, North Korea, Mr. Chavez, China, Muslims within this country etc., our own borders etc etc.

"If you know the enemy and know yourself, you need not fear the result of a hundred battles. If you know yourself but not the enemy, for every victory gained you will also suffer a defeat. If you know neither the enemy nor yourself, you will succumb in every battle." Sun Tzu

If you know Islam and know what it means to be an American we will not fail. Alas our learders are not at this point.

"In all fighting, the direct method may be used for joining battle, but indirect methods will be needed in order to secure victory. In battle, there are not more than two methods of attack - the direct and the indirect; yet these two in combination give rise to an endless series of maneuvers. The direct and the indirect lead on to each other in turn. It is like moving in a circle - you never come to an end. Who can exhaust the possibilities of their combination?"
- Sun Tzu

A great indirect method is leaving Iraq becuase they will fight each other. No need to do hard labor if they will do it for us. That will work for Iraq. Direct methods will be needed at other points like perhaps Iran and muslims within our own country. Another indirect method is getting off the oil economy and into something else. That will take away their monies. Stopping muslim immigration to the US would be a direct approach. Combinations will give the greatest results for long term victory over Islam.

This is only a hint of what must be learned. To fight Islam we need to be warriors not of the biblical (crusading or gun-ho (G.W.) or liberial Psy-war types (current Joint Chiefs of staff) but of the Sun Tzu, Ghengis Khan, Patton, and Sherman type who worked out victory in a rational and intellectual way but were brutal when it was within the framework of the plan. They must know their military history cold.

"24 killed by car bombs in Mosul"

http://www.timesonline.co.uk/article/0,,3-2299300,00.html

"Gunbattles erupt in restive city in N. Iraq"

http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2006/08/04/AR2006080400401.html

"As is often the case in Iraq, accounts of the fighting in Mosul were confused...."

to hell with the sunnis and shiites. we should allow them to kill each other. move all of our troops into the Kurdish area and say FU Turkey, we're gonna allow the Kurds to create their own state. the Kurds are the only hope for a proper democracy in Iraq.

If a civil war is declared, the US should be pulled out asap, no need for us to intervene.We will finish off whoever win at a later date.

As much as I admire the Pentagon as a military institution, the fact is that in this war of ideas, any bureaucratic institution is going to be lagging the curve, while we motivated concerned citizens are going to be the ones spotting the trends first. S you're right -- people concerned about jihad should be reading Jihadwatch first.

Hmm shia muslims believe the Madhi will return to kill the infidels. Evangelical Christians believe Christ will return to . . . what's that . . . oh kill the infidels.

Reading Jihad Watch has nothing to do with understanding that the mission in Iraq was going to fail. We did not have a plan for restoring security in Iraq. With did not have a plan for restoring and improving the infrastructure of Iraq. We have never fully come to grips with how many Iraqis were killed as a result of the US playing Judas after the First Gulf War.

Oh but what, instead of dealing with the real reasons why the mission in Iraq has failed, or the justifiable reasons why Iraqis would hate the United States let's just all write it up to religion. Islam is the Problem! why is it so easy to tell an addict to take responsibility for his or her actions but we do not want to do the same thing when looking at Iraq?