Lessons of Northern Ireland

Mulu · Post by **Mulu** » Fri Apr 27, 2007 6:07 pm

Helios wrote:Bring it on, I challenge you to a jerk-off. lol, get it? Jerk-off?

I decline, but thank you for confirming my earlier masturbation hypothesis.

Helios wrote:We're the ally of the Iraqi government.

What Iraqi government? Right now that government is just a bunch of sectarians in a parliament hiding in the Green Zone accomplishing nothing, while their militias shoot each other. If we're an ally of the Iraqi government, then we must be an ally of its component parts. Does that mean we're an ally of Sadr? Of the Sunni resistance? Of the Iran-allied Revolutionary party? Give me a break.

HATEFACE · Post by **HATEFACE** » Fri Apr 27, 2007 6:34 pm

Mulu wrote:
Helios wrote:Bring it on, I challenge you to a jerk-off. lol, get it? Jerk-off?
I decline, but thank you for confirming my earlier masturbation hypothesis.
Helios wrote:We're the ally of the Iraqi government.
What Iraqi government? Right now that government is just a bunch of sectarians in a parliament hiding in the Green Zone accomplishing nothing, while their militias shoot each other. If we're an ally of the Iraqi government, then we must be an ally of its component parts. Does that mean we're an ally of Sadr? Of the Sunni resistance? Of the Iran-allied Revolutionary party? Give me a break.

I know!

The jerk off part is the thing that makes it so funny but we should never forget you're the one who brought up masturbation, you dirty minded feller you.

There are moderate Iraqis out in Iraq. I wish you could understand this. Maybe when all is said and done, you'll meet them. Would these "ragheads" change your mind? Whose to say really. . .

Me, I prefer to see iraqi as a terrible conflict that can be fixed, provided we have the right president and military commander. It's wishful thinking isn't it? Poo on me for being naively optimistic.

I thought Sadr withdraw from parliament. I guess I'm wrong.
Sunni reisstance party?
The Iran allied revolutionary guard is part of the parliamentary government?

I'm never going to give you a break, not ever.

Mulu · Post by **Mulu** » Fri Apr 27, 2007 6:52 pm

Helios wrote:There are moderate Iraqis out in Iraq.

Of course there are, but they aren't calling the shots. The Iraqis with guns and bombs are calling the shots.

Helios wrote:I thought Sadr withdraw from parliament.

He did very recently withdraw. I suspect he'll be back. Either that or he thinks he has a strong enough military that he no longer needs central political involvement, which is entirely possible. Mehdi Army has heavily infiltrated the Iraqi army and police, to the point where we are basically training and supplying his troops. His party is still involved in local government, which is part of the overall Iraqi governmental structure.

I obviously did not bother to list the party's by their actual names, instead I listed them by who they are allied to. There are Shi'ite Islamists allied with Iran and Sunni Islamists involved in the insurgency whose objectives are quite different from ours. In fact, their forces shoot at and blow up ours fairly regularly. Saying we are their ally is simply false. The closest thing to an ally we have in Iraq is the Kurds, and that's just because they are weak and need us.

Here's a full analysis of the political parties if you're interested.

SCIRI is the group most closely allied with Iran.

mxlm · Post by **mxlm** » Fri Apr 27, 2007 9:55 pm

Actually mxlm, I don't think the comparison is valid. In the British example, the kurds, shia and sunni united to toss out a perceived oppressor. Today, those factions are hardly united. They are instead in a deepening spiral of violence against each other, with us largely as incidental targets. We are no one's natural enemy in Iraq (well, with the exception of Al Qaida), and we are no one's natural ally, we are simply an opportunity for some to exploit, and an obstacle for others to thwart.

Figures that Mulu's the one who actually addresses it. With valid points, no less.

NickD · Post by **NickD** » Fri Apr 27, 2007 9:58 pm

mxlm wrote:Figures that Mulu's the one who actually addresses it. With valid points, no less.

I thought I had addressed it in my post...

mxlm · Post by **mxlm** » Sat Apr 28, 2007 1:41 am

I'm confused. Wasn't your post about the IRA, and how it's hard to compare the situation in NI to the situation in Iraq?

Mulu, now that I think about it, we are the natural allies of the Kurds, and they of we. Probably why we've been working together rather well.

Cassiel · Post by **Cassiel** » Sat Apr 28, 2007 1:55 am

Has anyone yet mentioned how the West fucked the Kurds during/after the last gulf war by inciting them to rebellion and then leaving them to Saddam's tender mercies?

mxlm · Post by **mxlm** » Sat Apr 28, 2007 2:09 am

Ah, but see, they can't hold it against us, because if they do, then no one protects them and Turkey stops their guts out.

Unequal relationships are grand, ain't they?

NickD · Post by **NickD** » Sat Apr 28, 2007 2:19 am

mxlm wrote:I'm confused. Wasn't your post about the IRA, and how it's hard to compare the situation in NI to the situation in Iraq?

Now I'm confused! Aren't you talking about how the comparision between the IRA and Iraq is valid or not?

mxlm · Post by **mxlm** » Sat Apr 28, 2007 7:47 am

No, I was talking about comparing Iraq (brits) with Iraq (Americans/coalition of the willing).

Mulu · Post by **Mulu** » Sun Apr 29, 2007 3:06 am

mxlm wrote:Mulu, now that I think about it, we are the natural allies of the Kurds, and they of we. Probably why we've been working together rather well.

We are an ally of convenience with the Kurds. They are one of the few sects in Iraq not shooting at us. However, the Kurds are currently engaging in terrorist activities in Turkey, using Northern "Kurdistan" Iraq as a safe haven due to US involvement, as you've alluded to. Under other circumstances, we'd put them on the terrorist watch list. Turkey is threatening to invade, even with us present. Turkey is our "ally" too. That could get interesting, but Turkey will probably wait for the End Game to attack, or may even wait and see if the Shia or Sunni do the job for them. We won't protect the Kurds after we leave Iraq. I wouldn't be surprised if we gave Turkey operational intel on them on our way out.

As already mentioned, we hung the Kurds out to dry in 1991 when we encouraged them to depose Saddam promising support, then bailed. We'll hang them out to dry again this time around too, just wait, leaving them to the vastly superior in number Shia, Sunni, and Turks. With friends like us who needs enemies?

The only natural allies we have in Iraq are the few remaining other coalition forces. There were quite a few Iraqis who believed our initial promises and wanted us to Americanize Iraq, but most of them have since fled the country.

mxlm · Post by **mxlm** » Sun Apr 29, 2007 7:20 am

When you say ally of convenience, that's pretty much what I meant by natural ally. I gather you had something else in mind.

I'm not as certain we won't remain in Kurdville when we leave, if for no other reason than it'd be nice to have fairly secure bases somewhere in Iraq.

Mulu · Post by **Mulu** » Sun Apr 29, 2007 2:10 pm

Ah, nomenclature. You may be right. Just based on the way I've seen it used by the military and the press, I've been assuming that natural allies are people you actually like and have many interests in common with and natural enemies are people you hate and are in direct competition with. Maybe the Kurds qualify even under that definition as natural allies, it just seems strange using a strong term of alliance towards a people that we have recently and will likely again totally screw over.

I would have thought we'd leave a US base in Iraqi Kurdistan too, but for the terrorist activities against Turkey, which places us in an awkward position there. Of course, we aren't known for choosing wisely lately, and maybe the desire for a base will overcome the potential problems.