Baghdad Spinning Out Of Control

Where the hell is Bush? He's had nothing to say about anythiong in days, meanwhile Baghdad is spinning out of control and looking like a full scale civil war.

BAGHDAD, Iraq - Followers of the militant Shiite cleric Muqtada al-Sadr took over state-run television Saturday to denounce the Iraqi government, label Sunnis "terrorists" and issue what appeared to many viewers as a call to arms.

The two-hour broadcast from a community gathering in the heart of the Shiite militia stronghold of Sadr City included three members of al-Sadr's parliamentary bloc, who took questions from outraged residents demanding revenge for a series of car bombings that killed some 200 people Thursday.

With Iraqi Prime Minister Nouri al-Maliki relegated to the sidelines, brazen Sunni-Shiite attacks continue unchecked despite a 24-hour curfew over Baghdad.

Dammit! Bush looks as weak and as incompetent as Maliki. What does he think? That he can just hide out until the Baker Comission comes up with something to bail him out? That isn't going to happen He should at least be issuing a statement.

And obviously Lebanon is on the brink of civil war and no one of any stature in the US government has said much of anything except for the typical BS.

Halting violent sectarian strife in Iraq, especially in Baghdad, will dominate President Bush's summit with Iraqi Prime Minister Nouri al-Maliki next week in the Middle East.

Al-Maliki is facing opposition from both sides as he works to halt his nation's slide into an all-out civil war, but the White House said Saturday that despite threats from Shiite and Sunni-Arab leaders, he is not expected to cancel his trip to Amman, Jordan, to meet Bush on Wednesday and Thursday.

Cancel it? He'll be lucky to have a capitol to go back to, if he's even allowed in. Maliki has done nothing with Sadr's militia.

At this point it looks like there is damn little anyone can do, most of all Maliki and Bush. As far as Baghdad goes, they've been bumbling this thing for so long, I'm not sure either one has any credibility on the issue now.

Comments

[Irritated Prof]

Jason--

The reason the media hasn't been talking about all the WMDs and biological and chemical weapons found in Iraq is simple: there aren't any. If there were, the White House wouldn't be talking about anything else, and we'd be looking forward to two more years of Republicans running Congress.

They found chemical weapons in Iraq: sure, leftover drums of pre-1991 stuff that had probably degraded past the point of usability. They had to take the Iraq Portal down: sure, because some of the documents the White House dopes put up there spelled out the (again, pre-1991) research that Saddam's boys had done towards nuke-building that would have made life a lot easier for Iran. Hundreds of thousands of decalitres of deadly bacillius anthracis biological weapons were siezed in Iraq: sure, and... no, wait, that never happened, not even if you spell "bacillus" correctly. Yeah, we knew there was anthrax bacteria in Iraq. How did we know? We kept the receipts. We sold it to Saddam under Reagan and Bush I, which, I guess, seemed like a good idea at the time. What we somehow never got around to selling them was the technology to weaponize the anthrax, which is a lot tougher than it sounds. It's like selling Iraq cannonballs when they don't have any cannons.

So, anyway, the deal is that Al Quaeda attacked us and we turned around and hit the guy we wanted to hit, even though he (a) had nothing more to do with Osama than a shared affinity for stupid facial hair, and (b) was in no position to do us any damage, regardless of how loud he yelled, and (c) going to war in Iraq was the best possible thing we could do from Osama's point of view, since he's always been more interested in riling up hordes of angry Muslims than killing civilians in New York. He killed the civilians as a means to an end, not as the end itself, which a smarter president than Bush II, or one who didn't already have a hard-on for Saddam, might have known.

I'm open to counter-arguments: find me a reputable reference for the weaponized anthrax you said they found in Iraq and I'll read it. Make an argument about how the Iraq invasion is helping us win the war on terror and I'll consider it. But it looks to me like Bush and his know-nothing pals got us into a hideously expensive, hideously destructive, inevitably unwinnable war that's lost us the good will of the world and made us far weaker in every conceivable respect. I'd love to be wrong about any of that.

[yyy]

The Taliban has nothing on our fundamentalists "Christians".
----------

I agree, it's religious zealot meets religious zealot.

The real tragedy of the neocon/religious right taking over the republican party and the country has been the demise of any actual political discussion or debate...and I don't know that we will recover from that.

Karl Rove and his Fox cronies determined to 'win' at all costs and that meant not admitting that your 'enemy' had any sense, ever had a decent idea or that you could ever or would ever make common bond with such a 'liberal, terrorist loving, moonbat'...it meant that any data or idea that came from "THEM" was immediately discarded, swift boated and discredited, the truth or wisdom of the view or fact meant nothing.

This has led us not only to several new lows in the history of American politics but to a system completely politicized, that runs on faith and loyalty rather than facts...exactly how we managed to get into Iraq, still deny global warming when even the oil companies admit it, appoint a nutjob who believes contraception for MARRIED people is wrong to oversee the federal government's family planning apparatatus and so on and so on.

The far left is not immune to the ideological disease either, since they refused to face reality for 40 years that the welfare state they lovingly created to help the poor was exacerbating the situation as is/was the idea that children and poor people are too fragile to be told the truth, asked to step up to the plate and act responsibly and so on.

The moral of the story is very simple.

Ideology: Bad
Reality: Good.

Discussion and dialogue: Good
Demonizing everyone that doesn't agree with you: Bad

[gil]

Jason.

I would like for you to tell us EXACTLY where did you get the information that there were 1.8 tons of Uranium in Iraq.... And all the Chemical Weapons. You are one of the very, very, very few people stll left in the entire world trying to debate the presence of WMD's in Iraq. It just shows the debt of your ignorance.... And I am sorry but there is just no other more polite way of calling it.

There were three different commissions sent by Bush to investigate WMD's in Iraq. All three came back empty handed. Please consult the following site www.wikipedia.com ask for wmd's in iraq..... And for a change STOP, AND I REPEAT THIS IN NO UNCERTAIN TERMS...... STOP making up things!!! You compare the Shiite to the Caucasians in some strange example you give to a blogger, you tell me that there were TONS!!! of Uranium that no one ever found, you then declare that your 17+ reasons to invade Iraq were in Bush's and Powell speaches to the U.N. (No specifics as usual). Even the author of this Blog, Rhiel has called you on your blatant knack for misinformation.... My friend you need to STOP!!!

There is an entire wealth of information in the net about the commissions sent if you care to read them. Now I will wait for your "1.8 tons of Uranium information" .Say again where were they? And can you please inform Bush because he missed them also!!.... Or maibe they were found but the media never reported them.... Yes!! That's what happened right?

The 10 % of Shiite mentioned by Nikolay's blog are the proportion of Shiite to Sunni in the Muslim Religion. You compare Caucasians in WW II with the entire world and then accuse others of comparing apples and oranges!!! With that kind of mentality now I understand why you can make sense of your ideas.... Problem is that it is only you that can.... Iraq's war = World War 3 or 4 or 5 or 6 take you pick, and the Shiite=Caucasians.... Great logic!!

You know what a war is my friend? because you loosely call World Wars like if it was some kind of a semantics game. Historians called the Soviet Union Vs. America & Allies the Cold War NOT World War III. Funny just when I tought it was called the "Cold War" by just about the entire world precisely because there were not any battles "COLD" AS oposed to "HOT" Get it?????????.... Along comes the likes of you (and some unnamed historians) to call it World War III. In your "Disertation" about the German, Italian, and Japanese militarism of the late 30's you try to make a point that no one was calling it a World War but it was? Because I think is only obvious that no one was calling it World War II because it was not..... Not until.... OH MY GOD!!! It actually became a World War.... Are you semantics challenged by any chance? Because I hope you can see the difference of an invasion to Albania, or the Sudeten Lands and an all out invasion of Europe, The Philipines, North Africa, The Soviet Union etc, etc.... See the difference????? By your standards of calling local advances and invasions "World Wars" we should be in World War 50 by now.

About the U.S. Media can you please tell me specifically where have they been found to be lying about the information in Iraq???? And what do you think that the media is trying to accomplish here?.... You think they want the U.S.A. to loose in Iraq? .... What Iraqi Media are you talking about.... Again the question I asked you.... The Al-Sadr Militia that took over the several stations for days... That Media???? Do you even know who Al-Sadr is? Do you even know who supports Al-Malaki????

So there are no killings, Civil War, mass murders, rampant torturing, sectarian fighting GI's killed every day, etc, etc, etc.... Is just a media conspiracy because they hate America??? Is that it??? ....

So now according to you we are in WW III or IV and I missed them!! , and I tought I was a news junkie!!! .
You are correct on one point tough..... There is no point on arguing over this World War business. ANY ONE that believes this nonsense is not worth my saliva... Or in this case my typing.

Have a good one on the Twilight Zone my friend. I know your kind, I have tried to reason with the like of you before, and it is usless.