My favorite joke about the South:

Did you hear that the dumbest people in the North are moving to the South? Will improve the average IQ of both places.

Cue Al: Freedom! Progress! FU!

I think somebody might need to relearn the distinction between projection of power and deployment of force.

And I thought that moving joke was from the Air Force to the Marines Corps.

Be interesting to hear Rep Linda Smith Baird's take on this latest story - Sure that it will come up tonight over in Vancouver, WA at the Town Hall meeting.

Michael Ware: But Iraqi innocents are still dying in their hundreds and thousands every month. And what we’re failing to address is how we achieving these successes in bringing down the violence is by cutting a deal with the tribes, the Baathists and the Sunni insurgents. It’s by creating Sunni militias to counteract the government’s own militias and the Iranian-backed militias. That’s bound to have long-term consequences.

In many ways, part of what’s being achieved is because America is turning somewhat, despite its rhetoric, against this government, fostering Sunni militias, questioning the role of this government, questioning whether it can actually perform.

Freedom is messy!

Kevin, you seem to be implying that there is a better cause for which thousands of American can die and trillions of dollars be spent. Silly boy.

Don't worry, it'll all be over in ten short years.

Why are pilgrims still glomming into Iraq?? Do they have a death wish? Are they too stupid to read the news? What's with these people???

Ah but the Carlyle Group, KBR etc are really, really having a good time of it

Think of the private yacht industry & their profit increase this year !

"Stop quoting the laws to us. We carry swords." - Pompey

"I don't know about you, but I'm sure glad we're sticking it out in Iraq in order to referee a fight between the country's two leading Shiite political blocs. Pretty shrewd use of American power projection, isn't it?"

silly boy, we aren't refereeing that one, that's a private fight; it is the disagreement between shia, sunni and kurds, so much more likely to be resolved, so much simpler, and so much more recent, that we want to referee...

Zillions spent conducting this war for corporate economic growth.
All that matters is commercial interests.
The poor, the deceased are incidental to the goals of the empire.
Like the Steppenwolf song--it's a monster that will not obey.

Ah, Kevin.

We're not referring the fight between shia groups. That's their private affair and their welcome to it. It was certain that sooner or later something like this would happen in the fits and starts of their democracy.

We are fighting Al Qeada, and making excellent progress.

Kevin, the South is so 2006. aWol says Baghdad is improving such that he is sending more Congress folks over there right after Labor Day to prepare the way for Petraeus.

I don't know about you, but I'm sure glad we're sticking it out in Iraq in order to referee a fight between the country's two leading Shiite political blocs.

Given that the US the plan du jour is to back the Sunnis and undermine Iranian influence in Iraq, I'd guess that "referee" should be replaced with "instigate".

From the LAT article:

"The two Shiite militias have been waging an increasingly deadly battle for control of southern Iraq's most important cities and its abundant oil resources.
::
As the violence escalated despite the government's deployment of 15,000 troops for the annual ritual, Iranian President Mahmoud Ahmadinejad proclaimed the U.S. mission to bring peace to Iraq a failure that has led to a power vacuum. He added that Iran was ready to step in.

"The political power of the occupiers has been destroyed," Ahmadinejad told reporters at a news conference in Tehran. "Rapidly and very soon we will witness a great void in the region, and we and our friends, along with Saudi Arabia and the nation of Iraq, are prepared to fill that void."
----

Damn. I didn't think this shit would start to unravel this quick. Interesting that Ahmadinejad lumps Saudi Arabia in with "his friends". Hmmm.

... the Mahdi Army loyal to anti-American cleric Muqtada Sadr ...

I have a feeling that the good Mr Sadr's ideology encompasses far more than mere anti-Americanism. I also suspect that he is not the only actor in Iraq who harbors anti-American feelings. So why bother with that label at all in our esteemed journalistic reporting?

Anyone want to help bankroll my new film "Birth of a Nation"?

Bubba,

Here here. I'm tired of the press making normative assertions regarding these players in Iraq. "Anti-American" is, I suppose, a matter of perception. What really riles me, though, is when he's described as "Radical cleric Muqtada al-Sadr". Should the reader make the judgement as to whether or not al-Sadr is radical? Radical in what ways? Compared to whom? Along which with spectrum? It's like when Sen. Inhofe goes on and on about the global warming "hoax" people describe him as "radical" even though, by the 100 Senator spectrum, he certainly his on that issue.

but I'm sure glad we're sticking it out in Iraq in order to referee a fight between the country's two leading Shiite political blocs.

They're just embracing an enduring American tradition, as bracketmania sweeps Mesopotamia Winner goes on to meet winner of Kurds v. Sunnis in the final.

I guess Kevin is just not going to be serous about Iraq. He takes a story that reflects no involvement by Amerians and concludes it is why we are staying in Iraq. Silly.

Yes, things are going swimmingly in Iraq, aren't they? Why only a million people are dead, another million are internally placed and a million are refugees in other countries. To paraphrase Everett Dirksen, a million here and a million there and pretty soon, it adds up to real people!

But, we wouldn't want to stop spending $2 billion a week on this shithole, would we? Things might get really bad, then!!!

" Interesting that Ahmadinejad lumps Saudi Arabia in with "his friends". Hmmm."

Doc, I think Ahmadinejad can be described in this instance as being 'diplomatic,' a quality that is sorely missing in the antagonistic rhetoric of GWB towards almost everyone.

"Given that the US the plan du jour is to back the Sunnis and undermine Iranian influence in Iraq, I'd guess that "referee" should be replaced with "instigate".

Disputo, I tend to agree with you but can't remember reading anything specific. Do you have any sources?

Let's see if I can get away with 3 comments in a row... This piece in McKlatchy is very important in understanding the Shiite POV towards the US.

Iraqi Trial Rekindles Shiite Anger Toward US

blog hog

A ten sided civl war? Seems more like uncivil war.

The policy arc under the Cheney Regency is not worried about these little fights within failed states. The major concern is with power that could threaten the perception of American hegemony in the Middle East. He goes for the big picture. All the rest is detail. The destruction of Iraq is his gift as will be the destruction of Iran.

Machiavelli taught us we could value two contradictory moral systems. One is the christian teaching that values forgiveness, humility and a rejection of the corporal world. The other is pagan tradition of glory, domination and empire. Dick Cheney much more a Roman than a follower of Jesus.

OK, here's a pretty good analysis of what's happening in southern Iraq. The Shiite factions are not so much fighting over future control over the oil itself as fighting to have provincial control over the oil now (in the present) in order to smuggle millions of gallons with the money going to whoever's in control...

Shia Parties Battle Over Oil-Rich Basra Region

Sadr going to show up in Iraq any time soon? Or is he still hiding under Ahmadinejad's chair in Iran?

By all means, let's stop interfering in the South and let Iran take over. That'll bring peace to the region.

From the linked article:
http://www.alternet.org/waroniraq/60124/
"Their militias -- the Mahdi Army (Sadr), the Badr Corp (SIIC) and the Fadhila militia -- operate as paramilitaries in the city," Cole said. "They patrol neighborhoods, they fight turf wars for control of neighborhoods, they attack each other's party headquarters, and they are in particular competition for gasoline smuggling."

Well allrighty then. I suppose Disney could make a new "Pirates of the Persian Gulf" with Johnny Depp as Moqtada al Sadr. Gasoline-the New Crack Cocaine.

from the LAT article:
> The latest confrontation came in the midst of the
> annual Shiite Muslim pilgrimage to Karbala that
> was to have culminated in prayers and festivities
> today in commemoration of the birth of Mohammed
> Mahdi, one of Shiite Islam's 12 revered imams.

Sounds like the kind of violence you can put on your calendar years ahead of time. It may be the kind of thing that causes weeks of retaliation. The White House could have had better timing for its Petraeas show. This may turn out to be yet another example of the White house assuming the rest of the world runs on DC time.

> Gasoline-the New Crack Cocaine.
Unlike crack, oil and oil production capacity are finite.

"I don't know about you, but I'm sure glad we're sticking it out in Iraq in order to referee a fight between the country's two leading Shiite political blocs. Pretty shrewd use of American power projection, isn't it?"
_____________________

The NYT says the fighting was between the forces of Muqtada Sadr and al Maliki. Isn't this evidence that the Prime Minister is no longer simply a mouthpiece for Shiite extremists? His willingness to take on a Shiite militia would appear to be necessary if he is trying to stabilize the government and reach out to the Sunnis.

"A Most Civil War"
.
(a day in the life of a Baghdad family - Bashir, a young man, enters his family’s apartment)

Bashir: Greetings Father, Praise be to Allah.
Father: Praise be to Allah.
Bashir: It’s hot in here. Did we have any electricity today?
Father: One hour, tops. May Allah rain perversions on the Imperialist American Pigs!
Bashir: That sucks. A thousand perversions to the Infidels.
Father: What did you do today?
Bashir: Praise be to Allah, I put out one roadside IED and helped prepare a suicider for a Mosque mission at evening prayers.
Father: Praise be to Allah, but did you stop by the Coalition Forces Outreach Center like your Mother asked you to?
Bashir: Yes, Papa I did.
Father: And did you tell them that death squads have been harassing and threatening your Mother, sisters and our neighbors?
Bashir: Yes Papa I did. They said that they already knew and intended to step up patrols. They were very sympathetic and really quite civil.
(Father and son pause, look away, then look back)
Father: A thousand perversions to the Imperialist Occupiers.
Bashir: Praise be to Allah, a thousand perversions.

--cognitorex blogspot--

Trashhauler,

It would have been nice for you to give a link. The LAT article says that 15,000 government troops were sent to the south to 'stabilize' the situation. Unless you're talking about another 'incident,' I think your idea of Maliki 'taking' on a Shiite militia is simply wrong. If you've seen a recent breakdown on the fighters in Iraq you might have noticed that Sunni insurgents far outnumber Shiite militia fighters, with al Qaeda and foreign fighters being just a few percent of the total. Sunni insurgents by far kill more US troops than any other group. I guess you're going along with the administration's new ideology of "Darn, we should have left the Sunnis in control! Now how can we get them back in control?"

egbert,

"We're not referring the fight between shia groups. That's their private affair and their welcome to it. It was certain that sooner or later something like this would happen in the fits and starts of their democracy."

The problem is these Shia factions dominate the government, and they are enemies of the United States. In the war on Islamic terrorism they are definitely on the opposite side. Got that? We are fighting for a government that is dominated by our enemies. Is that would you predicted would happen when Bush decided to attack Iraq?

... Pretty shrewd use of American power projection,...Kevin Drum 6:43 PM

... A Sunni insurgent group we’ve been battling for months, responsible for the death of my friend and numerous attacks, agreed to fight Al Qaeda alongside us. Since then, they’ve grown into a much more organized, lethal force. They use this organization to steal cars and intimidate and torture the local population, or anyone they accuse of being linked to Al Qaeda. The Gestapo of the 21st century, sanctioned by the United States Army.

Arming and training guys that will kill you really isn't smart tactics. On one news report, they showed an American soldier saying how impressed he was with his new Iraqi helper because the man disarmed an IED with his bare hands. To me, that would mean the guy placed it. To the army and Petraeus....?

I'm glad I'm not the Decider.

Once you've gotten into al-Quagmire, the father of all quagmires, there is no clear path out. Every possible course of action is fraught with booby traps for the unwary.

"In the war on Islamic terrorism they (the Shiites) are definitely on the opposite side."

Bobo, Not quite right. Islamic terrorism tends to be a Sunni movement (e.g., al Qaeda). The Iraqi Shiites, although they don't like the US, are more our allies than the Sunni insurgents. One faction of Shiites, SCIRI is considered a US ally in Iraq.

nepeta,

"Bobo, Not quite right. Islamic terrorism tends to be a Sunni movement (e.g., al Qaeda). The Iraqi Shiites, although they don't like the US, are more our allies than the Sunni insurgents. One faction of Shiites, SCIRI is considered a US ally in Iraq."

You are making the mistake of assuming that the enemy of our enemy is our friend. But of course that is often not the case. Take WWII. The Soviet Union fought with us againt Nazi Germany, but it was not at all our friend, and the moment the war was over it went back to attempting to overthrow capitalism and democracy.

Sadr and SCIRI are strongly connected with Iran, which is definitely a terrorism sponsor, and they are sisters to Hesbollah, which is, among other things, responsible for the 1983 Beirut barracks bombing. And both are openly and violently anti-American, and regularly attack American troups.

Beyond that, they have been busy transforming the Shiite areas of Iraq into a theocracy, teaching the sort of radical Islam that is the inspiration for terrorists.

Got that? One of the reasons Bush stated for going to war with Iraq was to fight radical Islam. In particular, he argued that Islamic terrorism is the product of the lack of democracy and free market economics in the Middle East, and overthrowing Saddam would quickly produce an Iraqi democracy that would in turn inspire a democratic movment throughout the region.

Instead result has been that Iraq is now dominated by two radical Islamic parties. Do you really think that is a good outcome?

Bobo...

I disagree with most everything you say here. I never said that the Shiites were 'friends' of the US. I said that indeed they dislike the US. What I see as a fact is that in both Iraq and Lebanon, the Shia are the majority populations. In Lebanon they have not received parliamentary representation that reflects such a majority. In Iraq they were brutalized under the reign of Saddam. Both Shia political groups have had great popular support in southern Lebanon and southern Iraq due to their charitable work and their effort to obtain justice for their respective groups. Hezbollah denies responsibility for the Beirut barracks bombing. But whatever the case, the murder of 300 US marines hardly compares to the civilian death toll in Iraq engendered by the US invasion. Both Hezbollah in Lebanon and Shiites in Iraq have a natural alliance with Iran, and why not? Iran took in Iraqi refugees during Saddam's reign in vast numbers and Saddam himself deported many Shia to Iran.

Finally, and most importantly, it is up to the people of these regions to decide whether they want separation of church and state. It is not the obligation nor the right of the US government to interfere. And Bush's democracy idea was not the reason for the invasion of Iraq. Remember those WMDs? But neither the WMDs nor the gift of democracy to Iraq nor the threat of terrorism had anything to do with the US invasion of Iraq. My best guess for the disastrous invasion is that neocons had a two-pronged motivation: Western control of access to oil resources and to provide additional security for Israel, with the added incentive of being able to use US military power finally and decisively against Saddam.

nepeta,

Oops, I thought you were a Bush defender, but from your reply I see you actually are a Bush attacker. My mistake.

"Finally, and most importantly, it is up to the people of these regions to decide whether they want separation of church and state"

Except that once an Islamist party gains control of a country, it hangs through coercive means even if the public later turns against it, as the case of Iran illustrates. But you know that, so don't pretend that you are interested in the wishes of the peoples of the Middle East.