Freitag, September 01, 2006

Clueless as usual...

I came across this when I arrived this morning.

Guess no one can put two and two together?

For the very first time, Katuysha rockets are being used as a weapon of terror in Iraq. Fired at a Shi'ite community.

Now how difficult is it to connect the dots?

Who delivered literally thousands of such rockets to Hezbollah? Who really, really doesn't like the Shi'ites? Who is providing infrastructure and logistic support to the Sunni terrorists in Iraq?

And I deliberately call them terrorists, not an insurgency. An insurgency would have political goals: all that these people do is kill Shi'ites. Not to intimidate them poltically (you'd do targeted assasination for that), but simply for the joy of killing people they despise. Calling them an insurgency is to put gold plating on goat shit.

Iran continues to massively interfere in Iraq and Lebanon.

Where are the protesters? Where are the lawyers who should be dragging Iran in front of the International Court of Justice?

Oh, they're preparing their case against Israel instead.

Now you know why the ICJ is a mockery and a sham and isn't worth goat shit. Not even gold plated.


Jay Denari hat gesagt…

You're accusing Iran of supplying rockets to kill Shi'ites?!? John, the vast majority of Iranians ARE Shi'ites, so this argument makes no sense.

Yes, Iran supplied rockets to Hezbollah, but there are numerous other suppliers of those weapons -- the Russians are still one of the world's largest arms merchants, and the Sunni groups could have gotten them through several middlemen. How would Iran benefit from killing the people it supports in Iraq?

Are they meddling in Iraq? Probably. But definitely NOT this way.

BOTH sides in Iraq are riddled with terrorists, and our presence only temporarily quells the bloodshed in whatever areas we happen to be in at that moment. Once we concentrate our forces to secure one area, the killing resumes wherever we just left. The feud between Sunni and Shia dates back to the 7th century and looks like it'll be active for a long time to come.

The only way to stop it would be a massive UN or similar peacekeeping force akin to the NATO force that stopped the killing in Bosnia, but this administration won't let that happen, and wouldn't be trusted even if it asked. Even Republicans are beginning to acknowledge this war is a fuck up of monumental proportions and laying the blame where it should go -- at Bush's doorstep.

John F. Opie hat gesagt…

Jay -

The enemy of my enemy is my friend: are you saying that the Iranians are not past killing some of their own in order to further their goal? That makes more sense to me. Given the behavior of the Iranian government, as a matter of fact, it makes even more sense to me. Duplicity and lying to further their goals are trademarks of that government.

Alternatively, the Sunnis are taking a page from the book that Hezbollah has been writing. But I'm discounting that: I really think that the Iranian government's interference in Iraq is designed to increase schisms and enflame emotions, as if that was really necessary.

And while I'll grant you that the feud between Sunni and Shi'a goes way back, there are plenty of places where this doesn't play a role: it's only relevant when the religious leaders make it an issue, and right now that is the case in Iraq, pushed by the Iranians.

And the UN in Iraq? GMAFB. That only guarantees further bloodshed. The NATO force in Bosnia has only cemented the status quo and has *not*, repeat *not* improved the situation. While the killing stopped, the only reason it did so was that the Americans took control.