13 Comments

I know the general wisdom is that this is either Zarqawi & Co. or Baathists behind this, trying to ignite a civil war, but the buzz a month or so ago was that Zarqawi had been called on the carpet for antagonizing Sunnis and Shias alike and was to focus on the occupying forces. And it’s not like A-Q is the only “force” in a corner these days. Next door, the Iranian Thug-in-Chief has most of the world harping about his nuclear project and domestic unrest over the very repressive theocratic police state he is operating and the bad economy. The last reason I can think of to point the finger Ahamdinejad’s way is his desire to ensure that when the Mahdi appears, he appears on Ahmadinejad’s home turf, and I gather the shrine at Samara is one of the major contenders for a likely location.

So I don’t think this is a slam-dunk case of Wahabbi/Salafi or Baathist evil doing.

No, it’s not. But it’s a desperation move in any case.

Whether desperate or not, it may well have achieved the intended purpose. Even if the Iraqis calmed down after a few days (maybe a week or weeks), the damage has already been done. How long do Arabs/Iraqis hold grudges? They still hate us (the West) for 1400 year old dispute.

Good thing is after the initial wave of vigilante killing, there is no out-right sectarian battle pitched on the streets. (At least, at this point, Sunnis have not resorted to revenge. They did pull out of the negotiation to form a government, which is understandable.) Hopefully this exposes to the regular Iraqis some factions among them (Sadr and his armed gang) unqualified to participate in the democratic process, no matter how many votes he got.

Is it inevitable Iraq split up? I don’t know, nobody knows. I question some people in the old media jumped right in and claimed it is our fault. Some one tell me how come it is our fault when muslims kill muslims?

I’m in agreement with waterdragon52 and if indeed it is the Iranians fomenting civil war it is more machiavellian than desperate. Civil war in Iraq would be the proverbial ‘hot potato’ for the U.S. keeping us busy and vulnerable in that area of the world and move Iran off of the front pages. Like my old man once said ìJust because your paranoid donít mean them bastards AIN’T plottiní against youî.

One more thing: If the Prophet can’t return via the mosque in Samaraa then it will be more likely that he will have to return via an Iranian site. Serendipity for Prez. Ahmadinejad?

After finishing Bruce Bawer’s book called “While Europe Slept,” one comes away with not only a disgust for the European press but an insight
for the voices of moderate Muslims to be heard denouncing the senseless violence and death from the cartoons incident and the destruction of this exquisitely beautiful and holy dome.

Quick to castigate the West or to call for the destruction of Israel, they do not come forth either out of fear for themselves or a resignation for this type of malevolence. In either case, it is sad and regrettable.

Bad press? If you read a lot of the quotes from the link, it’s the US that’s getting much of the bad press, I’m afraid–because so many in the Arab world seem to favor the US-conspiracy explanation of the bombing.

As for the rest of the press–our press, that is–unlike the Arab press, it doesn’t go so far as to say we did it. But the clamour is that this is a civil war, finally!

Here’s my take on the latter subject.

So much for the “Religion of Peace,” handle. I hope the Immigration and State Department folks are watching this but probably wouldn’t make any difference to them anyway. The State Department kept the Saudi Express open even after the the twin towers were hit and our Immigration Service has let in 11 million illegals of military age. Not to happy that George farmed out our ports to the same “Religion of Peace” folks either, really a wake up call when Senator Schumer has to racially profile the buyers and say hey, what’s going on here? You kind of feel sorry for England, France and the rest of Europe when you see the insanity and murderous intent in the eyes of the adherents of the “Religion of Peace.” Lets hope that our Federal Government wakes up to what is happening, the PC and Diversity is that things that will get us all chopped into little bitty pieces; wake up George.

Only al Qaeda is this nihilistic. The Sunnis of Baghdad will soon have to decide if they want to live in a prosperous Iraq, or an oil-free Sunni Triangle while Kurdistan & the Shiite south split off. At any rate, had Saddam remained in power, civil war was inevitable as the Sunni minority in Baghdad continued to crush the rest of the country.

One question is, Would Turkey or Iran dare to invade an independent Kurdistan? Iran’s hapless, press-ganged army couldn’t even take out Saddam’s rejects in the Iran / Iraq War, & Iran knows the US & Israel would seize the occasion to attack it (& it would be a three-front war, having to defend its Afghan flank & put down its own opposition).

Turkey would kiss its EU chances goodbye, altho that may be overestimating the EU. More impt, with Bolton in the UN, it could face a UN war against it, with the US already on its doorstep. An independent Kurdistan would also be the death rattle for the House of Assad, which has its hands full with its own Kurd minority.

On the other hand, Russia would probably veto any UN war against an invading Turkey, as it doesn’t want any more of its own restive minorities seceding

I have to agree with some of the other posters. This seems likely to be an Iranian move. As such, it is pre-emptive rather than one of desperation.

The message to the US is: “Bomb us and we will get you in really deep trouble in Iraq.” Or perhaps it is simply an attempt to *get* us in deep trouble in Iraq right now.

Note that Al Sadr (an Iranian stooge) has been quiet in all of this. This runs counter to his normal behavior, but is consistent with this situation. Why cause trouble again (and get crushed by the US) when his co-religionists have been incited to do the job for him.

If the Sunnis had done this, does anyone doubt that the “Mahdi army” would be in full roar?

Instapundit linked to a Michael Novak piece -

http://www.michaelnovak.net/Module/Article/ArticleView.aspx?id=162

…Naturally, the West is feeling guilty about the cartoons, and chillingly intimidated by the ìMuslim reactionîómore exactly, by the contrived, heavily stimulated, long-contained, and deliberately timed demonstrations of focused political outrage against themówhile failing to pay serious attention to the truly huge event that started off this week with a great boom.

That event, I have a hunch, might well be followed by another shocker fairly soon.

For the stakes for Iranóits nuclear futureóand for Syriaóits safety from withinóand for the future of Hamas in Palestine, could scarcely be higher than they are just now. The most organized radical forces are poised to act in great concert. The moment is crucial for their future prospects.

It is telling that several of the extracts on the BBC link blame “the occupiers” for the attack on the mosque. The idea is so absurd to anyone who understands the United States or Britain. It is another example of the paranoia of too many in the middle east.

Can someone explain to me that if Zarqawi did it, why the guards were tied up and placed in a safe place?