Iraq - War Logs Reflections.3
I have finally managed to write my third in the series. This one is not directly related to the Wikileaks revelations but rather will provide the reader with the background framework without which the Wikileaks documents do not make any sense.
In my two other posts I used metaphors to illustrate certain points, and I mentioned that at times the use of the logical rational mind is also needed to complete a picture and make sense of it.
This post will rely solely, most likely on the use of the rational mind and the logic of deductive thinking.
Remember what I said about Oral History and its transmission ? That too relied on deductive thinking on the part of the receiver - and I hope you shall use yours.
Iraq - a hard nut to crack.
Iraq was a hard nut to crack - granted. Saddam Hussein and his regime held onto it tighthly and at times with an iron fist. In retrospect that proved not such a bad thing after all. As the Koran says - it may be that you detest something but it holds goodness for you.
Much had to be manoeuvered to have that "nut" finally crack open. Imagine a fortress, one cannnot subdue a fortress overnight, it requires long preparations. And a long preparation did take place.
The sanction years were a preparation for 2003, the year of invasion and occupation of Iraq. This is most important to keep in mind as some see the sanction years totally separated from what befell us later. Not so.
The Embargo was an essential instrument for the subsequent invasion and occupation of Iraq. Not only did the sanctions fragilize an already vulnerable society that had just come out of a 8 years long war with a fanatic entity called Iran, but those sanctions years also helped plant the seeds of divide and rule, the seeds of sectarianism in which Iran played a major leading role.
In the aftermath of Gulf War I - Desert Storm, both Iran and Israel capitalized on the fragility of the Iraqi apparatus and started their ground work of Ethno-Sectarian divide that was to be finally completed by the US invasion.
It is fair to say that without Iran's predominant role, the invasion and occupation of Iraq would have not been able to last that long for we are a tenuous resilient people, I know it to be so. Iran with its militias and parties played an incremental role in not only maintaining the US occupation of Iraq but also in furthering the destruction and the tearing apart of the Iraqi societal fabric.
Many Iraqis I know, are still bewildered by the fact that the Outside world, all of it, still does not believe them when they tell people that these sectarian ethnic divides were foreign to us before 2003. I still don't understand why the outside world refuses to believe that fact. We can't all be lying about our own country.
Of course there were two categories of people who for the most part lived either in the West or in Iran mainly the Kurds and the Iraqi Shias bred by Iran's Khomeini's revolution who in cohort with Western and Israeli intelligence worked very hard to prepare the ideological framework for the partition of Iraq along ethnic and sectarian lines. The Left, in general, (and that includes the antiwar movement) both Western and Arab also played an important role in backing the Zionist US agenda for Iraq by parroting the same discourse. This discourse has not died yet and is still used to maintain and perpetuate both the American and Iranian presence in Central and Southern Iraq and the Israeli presence in its North (via the Kurds).
The American plan for Iraq could not have been executed without the ideological and logistic help of the above groups.
And as in any plan, there must be victims. The firs victim of this genocide is of course the Iraqi people, the second victim within that grander genocide are the Arab Sunnis and other minority groups in Iraq like the Christians, the Sabaeans, the Yezidis, the Armenians, etc...
It was impossible for the US plan to take hold in Iraq without the destruction of the Iraqi Mosaic, a multi religious, ethnic mosaic. Hence the ideological splitting of Iraq into three distinct categories Shias, Sunnis and Kurds (who are majority Sunnis) was an absolute must.
The "brains" behind this ethnic sectarian plan of confessional, communal divide were non others than the Zionists who rule the White House during, before and after Bush's reign. Their names have been repeated often and I shall repeat them again tonight. Wolfowitz, Perle (ex adviser for Netanyahu) Feith and the rest...
R.Perle in an interview on al Jazeera English on Riz Khan's program was one of the first advocates for Kurdish and Shia rights in Iraq as separate entities from the rest of Iraqi society. This interview is still available online, google it. This idea was later on advocated by J.Biden current VP for Obama.
Oddly enough or maybe not so odd, Chomsky, the Left Guru was another advocate of the same. Hence one can understand the abysmal stand of the Left on the war on Iraq and its ideological contribution to the American agenda.
Again in the aftermath of Gulf War 1, A.Sharon (who am told has risen from the grave) was hell bent on regime change in Iraq over and above the fact that Israel (and Iran) have been supplying Iraqi Kurds with training and arms and that since the 70's. Israel did attempt to negotiate with Iraq via third parties a Peace deal in the late 80's which Iraq flatly turned down (unlike Syria). The Israelis understood that Iraq and its regime led by Saddam Hussein was not going to give in like Egypt and Jordan did. Iraq had to go.
For it's part Khomeinist Iran, despite a peace truce never ceased its old ambitions to conquer Iraq - an ambition stemming more from a populist ideology made of a mish mash of Persian empire national aspirations and political Shia Revivalism that fitted beautifully well in the American plan for the invasion and partition of Iraq. It is no coincidence that the Iraqi National Opposition in the 90's led by Ahmad Chalabi to the White House (under Clinton) was mainly constituted of "Iraqis" exiled in Iran. And it is most disconcerting that the great majority of people totally fail to understand the crux of this Persian ideology, for it has cost us our lives.
In the above paragraphs I gave you a brief background layout against which the American invasion and occupation took place.
One can see clearly that Iran's and Israel's regional interests found their window of opportunity in the American invasion of Iraq. Israel had already planted its Zionist seeds in so-called Kurdistan and Iran in the South and in the Holy Shiite centers of Iraq. It was a matter of time before they could make their full move and each grab a share of the ancient coveted pie - Iraq.
Historically it made sense for both Israel and Iran, who saw Iraq - Mesopotamia as some mythical center to which they lay claims. Ideologically, it was also imperative for both to destroy the last bastion of Arabism. Israel used the Kurds and enhanced their so called hatred of Arabs in the form of Kurdish chauvinistic nationalism and Iran used Shii'sm and portrayed it as some Persian made cult that is devoid of Arabs and cloaked it in Islamic garb. (note: Persia only became Shiite in the 15th century).
to be continued...
In my two other posts I used metaphors to illustrate certain points, and I mentioned that at times the use of the logical rational mind is also needed to complete a picture and make sense of it.
This post will rely solely, most likely on the use of the rational mind and the logic of deductive thinking.
Remember what I said about Oral History and its transmission ? That too relied on deductive thinking on the part of the receiver - and I hope you shall use yours.
Iraq - a hard nut to crack.
Iraq was a hard nut to crack - granted. Saddam Hussein and his regime held onto it tighthly and at times with an iron fist. In retrospect that proved not such a bad thing after all. As the Koran says - it may be that you detest something but it holds goodness for you.
Much had to be manoeuvered to have that "nut" finally crack open. Imagine a fortress, one cannnot subdue a fortress overnight, it requires long preparations. And a long preparation did take place.
The sanction years were a preparation for 2003, the year of invasion and occupation of Iraq. This is most important to keep in mind as some see the sanction years totally separated from what befell us later. Not so.
The Embargo was an essential instrument for the subsequent invasion and occupation of Iraq. Not only did the sanctions fragilize an already vulnerable society that had just come out of a 8 years long war with a fanatic entity called Iran, but those sanctions years also helped plant the seeds of divide and rule, the seeds of sectarianism in which Iran played a major leading role.
In the aftermath of Gulf War I - Desert Storm, both Iran and Israel capitalized on the fragility of the Iraqi apparatus and started their ground work of Ethno-Sectarian divide that was to be finally completed by the US invasion.
It is fair to say that without Iran's predominant role, the invasion and occupation of Iraq would have not been able to last that long for we are a tenuous resilient people, I know it to be so. Iran with its militias and parties played an incremental role in not only maintaining the US occupation of Iraq but also in furthering the destruction and the tearing apart of the Iraqi societal fabric.
Many Iraqis I know, are still bewildered by the fact that the Outside world, all of it, still does not believe them when they tell people that these sectarian ethnic divides were foreign to us before 2003. I still don't understand why the outside world refuses to believe that fact. We can't all be lying about our own country.
Of course there were two categories of people who for the most part lived either in the West or in Iran mainly the Kurds and the Iraqi Shias bred by Iran's Khomeini's revolution who in cohort with Western and Israeli intelligence worked very hard to prepare the ideological framework for the partition of Iraq along ethnic and sectarian lines. The Left, in general, (and that includes the antiwar movement) both Western and Arab also played an important role in backing the Zionist US agenda for Iraq by parroting the same discourse. This discourse has not died yet and is still used to maintain and perpetuate both the American and Iranian presence in Central and Southern Iraq and the Israeli presence in its North (via the Kurds).
The American plan for Iraq could not have been executed without the ideological and logistic help of the above groups.
And as in any plan, there must be victims. The firs victim of this genocide is of course the Iraqi people, the second victim within that grander genocide are the Arab Sunnis and other minority groups in Iraq like the Christians, the Sabaeans, the Yezidis, the Armenians, etc...
It was impossible for the US plan to take hold in Iraq without the destruction of the Iraqi Mosaic, a multi religious, ethnic mosaic. Hence the ideological splitting of Iraq into three distinct categories Shias, Sunnis and Kurds (who are majority Sunnis) was an absolute must.
The "brains" behind this ethnic sectarian plan of confessional, communal divide were non others than the Zionists who rule the White House during, before and after Bush's reign. Their names have been repeated often and I shall repeat them again tonight. Wolfowitz, Perle (ex adviser for Netanyahu) Feith and the rest...
R.Perle in an interview on al Jazeera English on Riz Khan's program was one of the first advocates for Kurdish and Shia rights in Iraq as separate entities from the rest of Iraqi society. This interview is still available online, google it. This idea was later on advocated by J.Biden current VP for Obama.
Oddly enough or maybe not so odd, Chomsky, the Left Guru was another advocate of the same. Hence one can understand the abysmal stand of the Left on the war on Iraq and its ideological contribution to the American agenda.
Again in the aftermath of Gulf War 1, A.Sharon (who am told has risen from the grave) was hell bent on regime change in Iraq over and above the fact that Israel (and Iran) have been supplying Iraqi Kurds with training and arms and that since the 70's. Israel did attempt to negotiate with Iraq via third parties a Peace deal in the late 80's which Iraq flatly turned down (unlike Syria). The Israelis understood that Iraq and its regime led by Saddam Hussein was not going to give in like Egypt and Jordan did. Iraq had to go.
For it's part Khomeinist Iran, despite a peace truce never ceased its old ambitions to conquer Iraq - an ambition stemming more from a populist ideology made of a mish mash of Persian empire national aspirations and political Shia Revivalism that fitted beautifully well in the American plan for the invasion and partition of Iraq. It is no coincidence that the Iraqi National Opposition in the 90's led by Ahmad Chalabi to the White House (under Clinton) was mainly constituted of "Iraqis" exiled in Iran. And it is most disconcerting that the great majority of people totally fail to understand the crux of this Persian ideology, for it has cost us our lives.
In the above paragraphs I gave you a brief background layout against which the American invasion and occupation took place.
One can see clearly that Iran's and Israel's regional interests found their window of opportunity in the American invasion of Iraq. Israel had already planted its Zionist seeds in so-called Kurdistan and Iran in the South and in the Holy Shiite centers of Iraq. It was a matter of time before they could make their full move and each grab a share of the ancient coveted pie - Iraq.
Historically it made sense for both Israel and Iran, who saw Iraq - Mesopotamia as some mythical center to which they lay claims. Ideologically, it was also imperative for both to destroy the last bastion of Arabism. Israel used the Kurds and enhanced their so called hatred of Arabs in the form of Kurdish chauvinistic nationalism and Iran used Shii'sm and portrayed it as some Persian made cult that is devoid of Arabs and cloaked it in Islamic garb. (note: Persia only became Shiite in the 15th century).
to be continued...
