Iranian-backed militia groups take control of much of southern Iraq

[Harper_is_Bush]

Iranian-backed militia groups take control of much of southern Iraq
By Tom Lasseter
Knight Ridder Newspapers

BASRA, Iraq - Southern Iraq, long touted as a peaceful region that's likely to be among the first areas returned to Iraqi control, is now dominated by Shiite Muslim warlords and militiamen who are laying the groundwork for an Islamic fundamentalist government, say senior British and Iraqi officials in the area.

The militias appear to be supported by Iranian intelligence or military units that are shipping weapons to the militias in Iraq and providing training for them in Iran.
http://www.kansas.com/mld/kansas/news/world/14685601.htm

Play a little game...see if you can find the proof that this is "Iranian backed".

It's stated as fact in the title, so it shouldn't be hard.

[Harper_is_Bush]

1. Hey, this General talks just like Rummy!!

"Do we see weapons technology that has Iranian hallmarks on it? Yes, we do," he said. "Is it freelance work by Iranians or is it official policy? I don't know."

It's that question/answer way of droning on and putting an idea out there for people to chew on.

"is it official policy?" Hmmmmmmm...the listener thinks......hmmmmmmm, could be.

[Postman]

2. Why is not okay if they are "Iranian-backed"?

Iranians don't belong there as opposed to Americans who came from thousands of miles away?

If the US has a problem with the "militias" being supplied from Iran then whose fault is it that THAT is happening or is able to continue?

It all falls back on this administrations a)clusterf*ck planning b)their refusal to listen to the pros who advised them about what to expect c)their inability to admit they screwed up big time

It's all propaganda all the time with these a-holes.

[Harper_is_Bush]

3. Because Iran is part of the axis of evil and

their president said Israel should be wiped off the map and he denies the holocaust and because Iraq is Americans baby so Iran should stay out.

So....anytime now it will be politically popular to attack Iran. That's the idea, I believe.

[Postman]

4. Their President was elected because Bush called them an Axis of Evil...

Bush pushed the moderates of Iran into the arms of the loonies with his asinine rhetoric.

Besides, President Ahmadenijad doesn't control the military in Iran and Iran's government is a shared-power entity.

The Islamic Ayatollahs also hold power and are not as extreme in their rhetoric as this guy.

[cassiepriam]

5. What would we do if someone invaded Canada, and the war was

spilling over into the US? And that invader was also threatening to bomb and kill our people. Iran has no choice but to enter the war.

And it is just what Bush wants. Destabilize the entire mideast. Then grab as much of the oil as possible. He who controls the oil, controls the world.

[PsychoDad]

6. Bingo!

You have it right. It would be in Iran's best interests to keep the Americans bogged down in Iraq. You remember, the Bush Doctrine of "Fight them over there, so we don't have to fight them here" (or "FTOTSWDHTFTOH").

Peace.

[fshrink]

7. Yes. But the strategic goal of

ME destabilization is not just the oil. It is also, mainly I would contend, aimed at Europe. Europe needs a stable ME to grow. Europe is home of a large minority of people of ME origin. Which is why Europe opposed the invasion of Iraq in the first place. The US has not enough infrastructure to compete with Europe and therefore needs to weaken Europe to maintain its profits. Efforts at destabilizing the ME constitutes an act of war. The Idiot is just a mouthpiece, pathetic enough to draw the commiseration, and solidarity, of the "undecided" and stupid enough to give credibility to all the smoke-screens hiding this core reality. Probably stupid enough to not understand it either. The plan was/is the plan of the PNAC. And it is successful.

[cassiepriam]

9. I agree, it is about power and money. Good point about Europe.

[Kagemusha]

8. Southern Iraq is dominated by two sets of militias.

One was trained in Iran for takeover after the fall of Saddam Hussein and is known as the Badr Corps and is the heart of the new Shiite-led government and was the backbone of the previous interim government. This force dominates the police.

The other is the Mahdi Army, the much-expanded forces of Moktada al-Sadr that the US failed to destroy in Karbala a couple of years ago, giving Sadr unparalleled street cred that he's apparently turned into considerable electoral clout and massive street presence. This force is home-grown and is Iraqi nationalist, but any violence in S. Iraq is blamed on them and the Iranians are said by the West to be arming them, too, which is strange because that would arm them against Badr, Iran's close allies.

There is a big goddamned difference.

[acmavm]

10. I hardly think that the 'insurgency' needs any foreign backing. After all

the innocent civilians we've killed, after we've turned the country into a Middle Eastern version of Dresden after saturation bombing, and after we looted the place, I do believe that there are enough home-grown enemies who would love to spill the blood of Americans, not to mention their rivals, which is a total free-for-all. Sunnis and Shi'ites fighting each other, Kurds wanting to secede, whatever.

[heartofthesiskiyou]

11. Custer's last stand anyone

I hate to see what's going to happen to our troupes happen. It's going to be a blood bath once it all unravels. Not even the soviet armored military could stand up to millions in the street. Not sure what they think 135,000 US troupes among 26,000,000 hostile Iraqis are going to do.
If chimpy is hell bent and as stubornly stupid as I fear he is, we could end up surpassing the 58,000 in Nam in a matter of days.

[Harper_is_Bush]

12. I sense there's a c ynical feeling of despair about Iraq now.

As if nothing will change and nothing is true.