On Rep. Michele Bachmann's Iran/Iraq story
Making it up as she goes along
by Tom Maertens
Rep. Michelle Bachmann is obviously trying to dig her way out of a hole created by statements she made recently regarding Iraq. After fabricating some fictional plot to partition Iraq and turn part of it into a terrorist haven, she is now claiming she really meant something else, and tries -- using George W. Bush's time-tested sleight-of-hand -- to conflate irreconcilables like Iran and al Qaeda by juxtaposing their names in one sentence.
To be begin with, Iran and al Qaeda are not cooperating. (See the story posted below this one.) Iran is in fact arresting al Qaeda members trying to use Iranian territory to fight in Iraq. The most important reason is that al Qaeda is Sunni and Iran is Shiite, reason enough in itself. But Iran doesn't want to get dragged into a war with the US because of al Qaeda's actions, either. In addition, things are going Iran's way in Iraq already, what with the Shiite majority taking over the reins of government. Many Shiite leaders spent time in exile in Iran and are favorably disposed toward Tehran and its Shiite mullahs. Why does Iran need al Qaeda's cooperation?
Many Americans accuse Iran of 'meddling' in Iraq, as if they had no justification for trying to influence events in a neighboring country, while claiming at the same time that our vital interests are engaged from 6,000 miles away. The U.S. has troops on both sides of Iran. Would the U.S. be concerned if Iran had troops stationed in Canada and Mexico?
Second, al Qaeda has very little support inside Iraq. Public opinion polls show that 93-94% of Iraqis, from all ethnic groups, oppose their presence. Some Iraqis are willing to make common cause with al Qaeda in ejecting the US from Iraq, but once US troops leave, it's unlikely Iraqis will tolerate their activities.
As for partitioning Iraq, any number of Americans have suggested the same thing, including Sen. Joe Biden. Iraq was only cobbled together in the 1920s by Britain, and it's been a rough marriage with the minority Sunnis imposing a discriminatory regime over Kurds and Shiites.
Bachmann is concerned about Israel, a common cause among fundamentalist Christians, particularly the Rapture Ready who expect the end times any day now and see Israel as part of that script. According to some accounts, 25-30 million Americans now subscribe to the end-times scenario depicted in the "Left Behind" series ... which has sold sixty million volumes.
The real question is why does Israel's Likud party control American policy in the Middle East? Would U.S. troops be in Iraq were it not for the Neocons' "Israel first" policies, and their concern that the Israelis would not be able to take out an Iranian nuclear program as they did in bombing Iraq's Osirak reactor in 1982. I greatly doubt it.
The evidence, including from the U.S. Government, is overwhelming: the U.S. presence in Iraq is creating more jihadists than we are eliminating. The way to stop that is to remove U.S. troops, after which Iraqis will eventually throw out the five percent or so of insurgents who are foreigners -- including al Qaeda members. Yes, Iran will have a dominant influence over the Shiite government in Iraq, but the day is long past when the U.S. could control that outcome. It was foreordained when we decided to implement democratic elections in a country that is 60% Shiite.
by Tom Maertens
Rep. Michelle Bachmann is obviously trying to dig her way out of a hole created by statements she made recently regarding Iraq. After fabricating some fictional plot to partition Iraq and turn part of it into a terrorist haven, she is now claiming she really meant something else, and tries -- using George W. Bush's time-tested sleight-of-hand -- to conflate irreconcilables like Iran and al Qaeda by juxtaposing their names in one sentence.
To be begin with, Iran and al Qaeda are not cooperating. (See the story posted below this one.) Iran is in fact arresting al Qaeda members trying to use Iranian territory to fight in Iraq. The most important reason is that al Qaeda is Sunni and Iran is Shiite, reason enough in itself. But Iran doesn't want to get dragged into a war with the US because of al Qaeda's actions, either. In addition, things are going Iran's way in Iraq already, what with the Shiite majority taking over the reins of government. Many Shiite leaders spent time in exile in Iran and are favorably disposed toward Tehran and its Shiite mullahs. Why does Iran need al Qaeda's cooperation?
Many Americans accuse Iran of 'meddling' in Iraq, as if they had no justification for trying to influence events in a neighboring country, while claiming at the same time that our vital interests are engaged from 6,000 miles away. The U.S. has troops on both sides of Iran. Would the U.S. be concerned if Iran had troops stationed in Canada and Mexico?
Second, al Qaeda has very little support inside Iraq. Public opinion polls show that 93-94% of Iraqis, from all ethnic groups, oppose their presence. Some Iraqis are willing to make common cause with al Qaeda in ejecting the US from Iraq, but once US troops leave, it's unlikely Iraqis will tolerate their activities.
As for partitioning Iraq, any number of Americans have suggested the same thing, including Sen. Joe Biden. Iraq was only cobbled together in the 1920s by Britain, and it's been a rough marriage with the minority Sunnis imposing a discriminatory regime over Kurds and Shiites.
Bachmann is concerned about Israel, a common cause among fundamentalist Christians, particularly the Rapture Ready who expect the end times any day now and see Israel as part of that script. According to some accounts, 25-30 million Americans now subscribe to the end-times scenario depicted in the "Left Behind" series ... which has sold sixty million volumes.
The real question is why does Israel's Likud party control American policy in the Middle East? Would U.S. troops be in Iraq were it not for the Neocons' "Israel first" policies, and their concern that the Israelis would not be able to take out an Iranian nuclear program as they did in bombing Iraq's Osirak reactor in 1982. I greatly doubt it.
The evidence, including from the U.S. Government, is overwhelming: the U.S. presence in Iraq is creating more jihadists than we are eliminating. The way to stop that is to remove U.S. troops, after which Iraqis will eventually throw out the five percent or so of insurgents who are foreigners -- including al Qaeda members. Yes, Iran will have a dominant influence over the Shiite government in Iraq, but the day is long past when the U.S. could control that outcome. It was foreordained when we decided to implement democratic elections in a country that is 60% Shiite.
Powered by Blogger
0 Comments:
Post a Comment
<< Home