i love listening to michael ware talk about the war in iraq

Michael Ware is an interesting subject. Hardcore reporter, but also used as an analyst. At times I haven't agreed with him, but others he seems to be trying to scream the truth into the camera.

He's also one of the only reporters that I can think of who's basically been in Iraq since the initial invasion over 5 years ago.

If you read yesterdays Washington post, you can get a taste of bush's hypocrisy.


He states to the public we are winning, but to his war council... that we are not winning.

Not only that but they ran a story called "Defined by his wars."

*promote

Promoting this video back to the front page; last published Wednesday, September 10th, 2008 6:35pm PDT - promote requested by kulpims.

can somebody explain how this war has strenghtened Iran.

(please speak in layman's terms, I'm an idiot)

First step, don't try to understand the Middle East through western eyes. You won't succeed. Second step. The Muslim religion is quite diverse, very much like Christianity. You'll have some serious trouble trying to identify/count all of the various factions/flavors of each religion around the globe. Thirdly, one's tribe/roots takes priority. The religious faction comes -close- second (i.e. Sunni or Shia). Then comes national loyalty LAST.

It is very difficult to summarize this explanation in a catch phrase or sound byte, as is so common in the US media, and especially the US President. That is one reason why the majority of the US population has been completely clueless regarding Iraq's (lack of) ties to Al Qaeda, and how they falsely believed the US would be welcomed as liberators after charging into Muslim holy lands bearing big guns and bombs. They were using western logic, which doesn't apply there.

Iran has factions (89% Shia, 9% Sunni). Iraq has factions (65% Shia,20% Sunni.. smaller percentages as don't forget the Kurds). Another example is Pakistan in reverse percentages (70% Sunni, 25% Shia).

Iran is a religiously (Shia) dominated state. The Mullahs have power akin to congress (or presidential level) when compared to the United States.

Iraq was a repressive, dictatorial BUT secular state under Saddam Hussein which was put in power through US influence (via assassination of it's former leader). Yes. That statement is factual and is backed up by historical evidence often disregarded by US citizens. Anyway, since Saddam has flown to la la magical religious land after his death, the ongoing civil war has been a result of Sunni/Shia factions trying to gain domination and control over the remnants of Iraq.

Saddam's roots are Sunni. The -minority- group of Iraq and Iran. Lest we not forget Saddam attacked Iran with US support. Remember those chemical weapons? That is right. The West supplied those for Iraq to use against Iran... and as a result vast numbers of people died on both sides in that war. Saddam then had some extra left over to toss onto the Kurds and other dissidents. Supplied by the good old US of A and their buddies.

Put that formula together.

A US endorsed/supplied Sunni dictator (Saddam) turns on the US. The US invades and tosses Iraq into Chaos. Who wants power now? The Shia that is who. Who is in the majority? The Shia. Who supports them? Iran. Who wants to form a religious state in Iraq? Iran AND the vast majority of Shia who live in Iraq.

Now that is why Muqtada Al Sadr, a powerful Iraqi politician, religious leader, and Anti-US, Pro-Iran individual is so powerful. He has a militia that numbers in the many tens of thousands. Easily rivaling the ragtag Iraqi military.

Remember when Talabani invaded southern Iraq to stamp out Al Sadr's militia? What was not covered in the US media was that it was orchestrated, coordinated, planned, and closely supported by the US. It was a propaganda tool to 'supposedly' prove that Iraq was able to handle its own. What really happened? They got their asses handed to them, and Al Sadr's militia stood firm. A cease fire was then brokered, because Talabani knew damn well that if he didn't back off, the poop would hit the fan even worse than they already had. He walked away with egg on his face and was humiliated, but the western media simply omitted the facts. I should mention Cheney secretly (not too successful at remaining secret) met Talabani not long before the operation, and those connected with the incident claim he was directly involved. This event proves that the Iranian influenced Shia had power now. During Saddams reign, such a move would have been impossible.

Now that is why Iran now has power. The Shia and pro-Iran majority now have strong grasp in a part of the world they did not. The US cannot stay in Iraq forever. Iran has patience, and proximity. Al Sadr has the militia and the political/religious influence.

So there you are. The US' crusade for WMD... liberation.. or whatever the story is on a given day.... their crusade for Oil resulted in this situation.

Where will it go in 5-10-15 years time? We'll have to see. I can guarantee in 10 years time, as I predicted multiple wars prior to Bush's first election (talk to my family/friends about that one and they'll validate it), that the US won't be in the position it planned to be in. The trillions the US spent on this stupid war which had NOTHING to do with Usama Bin Laden won't be paid back, the US taxpayer will STILL be paying interest on the massive loans made to us by China/Japan.. and yes, Russia... to finance this dead-end project.. and Bin Laden will die of old age before he is ever found. Why? Because the US government simply doesn't care about Usama. Oil resources is their priority.

Yeah, what honkeytonk73 said. And if you ask MY family, they'll say that I was saying the same things he was saying. It's like that, Yo.

well done honkeytonk. I think I can hang a hat on that one.

I argued on these points with my brother who was in 101st Airborne Spec Ops in the first Gulf War.

My brother was 100% convinced Bin Laden and Saddam were bed buddies (figuratively of course),that WMD were strewn all over the landscape, and that they were a direct and viable threat to security on US soil. Nevermind that Saddam had no capability to attack US soil, had no WMD, was secular (did not give a crap about Bin Laden's religious crusade).

He has since drastically changed his view on the matter. Amazing what can happen when we know the real truth, rather than what the government tells us we should 'believe' the truth to be.

Any talk about "winning the war" can be automatically dismissed as bullshit. Why? Because winning means achieving your goals and we don't have any anymore. We had the goal of capturing Saddam, but we've already executed him and I haven't heard a new goal stated since.

The only way we're winning the war now is if you define winning as killing lots of people.

The police falsified information to obtain a search warrant to raid the house of a suspected drug dealer. The judge never actually gave authorities a search warrant, but said they could raid the house anyways. Officers busted down the door to the suspected drug dealers house house on March 20, 2003, conducting an illegal search for the illegal drugs, but found nothing. They decided to kill the drug dealer anyways. Every since, the officers have been living in the deceased drug dealers house.

The authorities won the war on drugs.

Replace the relevant nouns/verbs with "Bush administration, invade, Iraq, Weapons of Mass Destruction, Saddam Hussein, Congress, congressional approval, Military, bombs, planes, guns, occupation, loss, terror"

imstellar28 - You have inspired a GREAT idea for a George W Bush MadLibs book. Stick in all the documents blacked out by the Pentagon, and we can fill in the blank spaces Hours and hours of fun!