Ever notice that the 'jihadi' leaders seem to get taken alive at a surprising rate. Cowards.

Moderate Muslims and Christians fought together against Integrism back in 1094, nine hundred years ago. There is a movie by Charlon Heston about that, filmed in 1961. It is a constant, the first to be fed up with Islamic radicals are their own people, especially when they are defeated in the Jihad and the wealth from looting stops flowing.

Nihil novum sub sole What is going on today in Iraq has happened many times before. The solution adopted by Christians (Spanish, Italian States, Austrians...) has always been to stop their armies and keep the pressure. In the end Integrist empires collapse from inside, due to internal unrest. See Iran, the theocracy is unable to justify its power to its own people.

This is a tribal system - and the "red on red" violence in well known in tribal systems. Also, this fighting between home grown Sunnis and foreign jihadists, has been reported before.

See Iraq Evolving Insurgency.

(Warning large PDF file).

There are at least two mentions in this report.

So the fact that there is "red on red" violence, isn't particularly illuminating, in the sense that it encapsulates a trend.

Look, it would be good to agree on some particulars here. Again, reading the Iraq Evolving Insurgency document above, it seems that there are at least 35 groups (of differing sizes - usually very small) that are committed to forcing US troops out - most likely of which a bare majority (hopefully more) do not engage in suicide attacks, or agree with the jihadists.

Iraqi nationalists
Baathist hanger-on
Radicalized religious Sunnis
Foreign jihadists

This will of course mean that these groups break out into fighting with each other. This does not mean that either side is willing to join the political process.

While there is large percentage of the Iraqi population that is resentful of the US presence, it also seems clear that the areas of population that are in active opposition (or passive opposition - ie willing to spy for the insurgents, provide resources, etc), come to somewhere around 6 to 8 percent - then reinforced by foreign jihadists.

The question is how much infiltration and damage can this small percentage of the population do, and for how long, and at what cost of Iraqi and US life.

Great post, thanks for sharing.

JC, good points all.

It took one nearly interminable post to make the single salient point: Iraq has descended into Civil War, one of the three or four planned, desired outcomes of the USer invasion/conquest/occupation.

Under US pressure, Iraq will resolve (and dissolve) into three semi-autonomous regions: Kurds in the north, Sunnis in the middle, and Shi'ia in the South (just as the Imperial Toad, Heinrich Kissinger designed it).

Not coincidentally, this serves the interests of Israel, at whose behest the war was at least in part initiated, because it removes from their concern (and from their northern frontier) one of the major State-actors advocating for the Palestinian State--by fracturing it, and turning the constituent parties against each other (think Israel as Little Black Sambo, and the Kurds, Sunni, and Shiia as the contesting tigers).

You just knew it had to be the Joooooos, folks. Didn't you?

Just ask Sen. Conyers.

JC,

I did read Anthony Cordesman's analysis on Iraq, and do not disagree with the varying makeup of the insurgency.

However, the fact that tribal groups hostile to the occupation have reached out the the government to figth al Qaeda (follow the links in the 1st paragraph to see this) is significant and cannot be looked at as intertribal fighting. This is where I feel Mr. Coresman and other analysts have missed the mark in judging the popularity or the insurgency (particularly the foreign elements) and opportunity for the Coalition to capitalize.

Rather than Sambo's tigers... The situation is more that of the Kilkenny Cats:

There once were two cats of Kilkenny
Who each thought there was one cat too many
So they fought, and the fit,
And they scratched, and they bit,
Til, instead of two cats, there weren't any.

konopelli,

How you make out a civil war from this "interminable post" is beyond me. Just be honest, admit you didn't read it and posted to place responsibility for the imagined civil war on the dreaded Jooooos. Oh, and if you are going to tout a conspiracy, please come up with one more entertaining that that.

Does Juan Cole cite anybody? Anybody who is actually in Iraq? Anybody who meets 'his' criteria of being an expert? Does he mention any leaders of this insurgency? I'm sure he is critcal of anybody stateside who would interpret, what appear to be good signs

Right now he has predicted failure and doom, but hasn't really delivered a 'hero of the people's movement'.

He began his Lebanon piece with "The victory in Sunday's polling of the anti-Syrian faction in Lebanese politics has not led to social peace."

By the fact that he has set about dismissing an event without knowing the outcome and projecting its value spontaneously, gives me hope about his doomday scenarios being his wishful thinking. I'm no expert, like Cole, but I never thought the election outcome would mean instant 'social peace'. Heck, if he knows the recipe for social peace, he should share it.

I sincerely doubt the return of violence on the scale of civil war, after the departure of Syria, which served as a reminder of the civil war.

He'll have a harder time as history goes by explaining any progress in the Middle East, without crediting Bush. He could blame Bush for the unrest, which forced them to establish a better style of governing(independent of the Bush Admin), as an undesired consequence. I'm sure he'll find a way, and a party, to amplify his message.

If it has taken, what, 2 months to complete 80% of the constitution (the easiest parts), then by the 80:20 rule, it should take about 8 more months to complete the remaining 20% (the thorniest parts).

The split between the Nationalist elements of the Sunni and the Islamist elements, is a fundamental and ideological split.

Although this split will take a while to manifest itself and produce results - and depending on how the US plays and encourages and supports the nationalist elements - this could mean the end to the so far effective campaign against the democratization of Iraq.

I would guess that the reason US chose Karabila to pacify is probably because the nationalist-tribal elements requested the US to come in and clear the place out of the Islamist (both Iraqi and foreign) elements who had congregated there after Operation Matador.

It would be a mistake for the US to leave the place in ruins, as one of the articles suggest. It would also be a grand mistake for US to shoot and kill indiscriminately, causing death and injury among the non-combatant population and the nationalist-tribal elements.

The US could create a sympathetic militia from these nationalist-tribal elements, and use them to identify and focus its fire on the Islamists, when embarking on such operations. With positive incentives, such as monetary payments, US could appear less of an occupier and more of a protector of the nationalist Sunni elements.

MNF Briefing

"it's 75 or 150 a month, coming principally, we believe, across the Syrian border"

"Q: General, Tom Bowman with the Baltimore Sun. General Casey said back in March that he expected fairly significant reductions in U.S. forces by early next year, around March time frame. And I'm wondering: Is that still the working assumption? Is that no longer the case because of conditions on the ground? Or is it uncertain at this time?

GEN. VINES: No, I think General Casey's assumption probably is still valid. "

You worried about how long it will take them to write a constitution?

How about the fact that they are EVEN working on one!

Who cares how long it takes? It took US long enough. I can see the &%$*^ idiots now. "What you don't have the new constitution - YET!!! We can't have this. We must rejoin England. We have failed!! Nothing GOOD will come of this!! It is taking to long!!"

Only fools would complain about the time it is taking. Especially after only a few months.

Great analysis Paul.

Juan Cole is an idiot. He describes himself as an expert on Islam and Shiism. Being a Muslim myself, I can say that he knows very little about political Islam - almost next to none. His analysis on Iran is pathetic and consistently in error.

He is an ex-Bahai who has now gravitated to Sufism. Sufism is one of those reactionary off-shoots of Islam - you know, the 'good Islam bad Islam' theory. Out of one cult into another cult.

JC

Iraqi nationals are NOT suicide bombers. Unless someone else detonates them, they aren't into that kind of thing. IED's and ambushes, yes. Suicide attacks, no.

I link to this article and discuss what it might mean in terms of the recent upsurge in defeatist rhetoric in America.

Strictly tin foil hat musings.

Wasn't there a report last week of a tribal sheik meeting in Mosul where they said they were angry because they WANTED us to conduct a Fallujah style assault to evict these terrorists?

Kofi is jumping on the bandwagon; what does that tell you? Pretty soon the Democratic Presidential wanna-be's will be tripping over each other trying to claim how they supported this all along.

armynurseboy,

Yes, that is the NY Times article covered in this post, and that was cited:

"To the surprise of Iraqi and American commanders who organized the gathering, many sheiks demanded a Falluja-style military assault to rid Tal Afar of insurgents and complained that American forces do not treat terror suspects roughly enough."

I loved this part: Apparently, we aren't treating "terror suspects roughly enough"? But I thought we were Nazi-Pol-Pot-Gulag-fans? I'm confused...

Which side will International ANSWER and the other anti-war groups join ? You can be sure it will be the wrong side.

Syl - I would agree completely - with the caveat to "never say never".

Dan,
Don't blow a gasket. I'm not complaining how long it takes anyone to write a constitution. I was just trying to calculate how long it might be until that positive milestone might be reached and therefore reported widely. March 2006? I wonder if that factors into General Casey's projection.

To be honest, the disintegration of Iraq into three areas might have been better in the long run.

How well do you think US forces would be doing occupying ALL of Yugolslavia and forcing them to live under one central government?

Do you think it would be as comparatively calm as it is now, after the civil war and split up? I suspect we'd have multiple ethnic insurgencies in Yugo but for the civil war which settled things first.

Also, is it just me or do I notice less and less "bombings of wedding parties / innocent homes" lately? Even though we are using bombs.

Maybe the journalists have less access, or the hospital people in Iraq are under less pressure to propagandize?

Or maybe our journalists having been there long enough now have started to figure things out.

(Finally, maybe it is just me.)

There are a lot of differences between Iraq and Yugoslavia, Aaron. To name a few: in Iraq separatism is being pushed by a minority, Iraq doesn't have its neighbors pushing for separatism (quite the contrary), and the United States guaranteed Iraqi unity before invading.

Also, is it just me or do I notice less and less "bombings of wedding parties / innocent homes" lately? Even though we are using bombs.

Outstanding blog! (Not sure I should refer it to my Iraqi friends ...or not....)

Dave Schuler - Iran has been pushing for the separation of the southern oil producing regions for a while now. One reason the central government is not turning into an outright Iranian style theocratic dictatorship is because of the presence of 6 million Sunnis, who will never agree to a Shiite dictatorship. But if Iraq separates, you bet there will be an Islamic dictatorship in the south, which will be absorbed by Iran.

I have been reading Iraqi bloggers and do not see any wedding bombings. Looks like you are just making this up. A link is appreciated. If you mean that "Riverbend" blog, please note that she continues to lament the demise of Saddam's dictatorship, and the loss of a cushy position by her father.

Iran? Isn't that the country with Blair as prime minister?

This with similar accidents of explosions in areas where it is almost impossible for the resistance to reach and plant their roadside bombs, make one believe in the assumption that there are other hands which did those terrorism for other purposes than to resist the occupation.

Note that I'm not claiming that these reports are true or, if true, that they're anything other than accidents. Many are crackpot rumors. But reports are there and they're easy enough to find. Now weddings specifically, no. But lots and lots of reports of targeting of innocent civilians. Now since you were rude enough to call me a liar you need to retract.

"A Citizen of Mosul", should i assume that he is a kurd. Looking at his head i think he is.

That's his grandfather's head, a, from an old portrait (in traditional costume). I'm not really certain of his ethnicity but I suspect he's an Arab. He's the eldest member of a family of bloggers that includes A Flower from Mosul, hnk, An Average Iraqi, Diary from Baghdad and a few others.

Dave Schuler - you seem to have really goofed. The blog Citizen of Mosul is just repeating rumours started by the Baathist Riverbend. So now that you have condemned Riverbend, then by extension you have condemned your own source, namely 'Citizen of Mosul'. Furthermmore, this blog belongs to a deeply Islamist family. Since your knowledge of Islam is deficient, let me remind you that in Islam, the principle of taqqieh makes it a duty for a Muslim to lie, if that is beneficial to Islam. So even though you are not sourcing such nonsense, you seem to have fallen for it. Even the commentators are making fun of this Baathist's rumour mongering. BTW "a" - the picture is of an Arab and not of a Kurd.

You have yet to substantiate your claim about "US targetting civilians". The bus that was attacked by US forces (Jarrar) probably ignored their warning and came too close to a convoy or patrol and appeared as a suicider bus. Probably same issue with the family travelling in a car that was shot upon.

The 2nd evidence you produce is obviously a tragic case of the vehicle being mistaken to a car bomb. If they were targetting this family, how come the kids were spared? What an id... .

Finally, your 3rd link (Khadduri) is a dud and does not point to US deliberately shooting civilians.

If the US is targetting civilians and deliberately shooting them, then on what basis do they shoot people? Obviously only a few are being shot. So tell me - oh dear purveyour of unfounded rightwing conspiracy rumours and hate - on what basis are they being shot and what is your solution to vehicles that appear as suicide bombers coming too close to patrols or ignore warning shots? No solution? I thought you didnt have one. I dont think you would even care. Because if there were no such accidents, then how could you blame the US?

Yeah, so you are not saying that these claims are true or false. Fair enough. But that does not stop you from rumour mongering some Baathist nonsense and spreading it around. Neither does it stop you from claiming "lots of reports of US targetting innocent civilians", while none of these links make such a claim.

I suppose the US soldiers spend their evenings planting IEDs and mines so that in the morning they have the pleasure to drive over them. What an id....

I read somewhere that a taxi driver was telling a Baghdadi that right before the elections, somebody saw a US soldier in a checkpoint while inspecting the trunk of a cab, hide something under a load of watermelons. The cab then blew up further down the road. When the Baghdadi protested that there are no watermelons in January, the driver conceded that he had made it up - but then Dave Schuler is here to spread this and make it look "credible".

moradali
How can you tell a leftist is lieing ?
Mouth is Moving

Yeah the watermellon bit came from Free Iraqi if im not mistaken.

Success and freedom for 50 Million people is a big defeat for the left, who denounce the USA standing on mass graves of kids like McDermot and Moore.

What words properly describe these creatures.?

Is there a relation between 'Dave Schuler' and 'Elizabeth Parsons'?

They both have been spreading the ex-Baathist fascistic right-wing conspiracy blog of Riverbend (riverbendblog) along several forums.

Raymond - well said.

Dave Schuler may think he is a leftist. But from where I come in the middle east, he will be classified as a fascist right-wing anti-American. That is why he is pushing Baathist propaganda. In 3rd world countries, the leftists and communists are actually quite libertarian (true to their Enlightenment roots) and they generally support the US action in Iraq.

Raymond, I think you might consider toning down your rhetoric. Name-calling and attributions do little to improve your arguments and make the good points that you occasionally make less forceful.

Characterizing me as a leftist is absurd. Making the charge only makes you look foolish.

moradali, you've called me a liar and you've called me a fascist. Both are patently absurd. I attempted to engage you constructively and instead of reciprocating you offered nothing but ad hominem attacks, slurs, and slanders. If it were my blog, you'd have already been banned. You might want to exercise some caution.

Dave, moradali gave more than enough supporting information in post #35 for his arguments. Not to be a nagging bitch, but learn to take it on the chin. On some other forums I visit, I often get called stuff twice as bad as you do.

Dave Schuler - Ad hominem is not excusable under any circumstance and that is not what I engage in. Whatever I say that you may consider as being ad hominem, I will take back.

When you say ... lots and lots of reports of targeting of innocent civilians., which means it is the US Military's policy to target and deliberately shoot non-combatants - but the 3 or 4 links you provide NONE even make such an unfactual assertion, then I have no choice but to express what is obvious - that this is an unsavory remark against the United States and its citizens.

Instead, if you have good evidence of such behaviour by the military, then lay it out in an honest fashion instead of reposting rumours and innuendos.

BTW - not that I wish to heap any more - but your comment that being called both a "leftist" and a "fascist" makes one a centrist - I have a major problem with. The political spectrum is not linear. It is not that in between the left and the right is the centrist. It is not that the truth lies somewhere in between two poles - often the truth lies outside. In between the left (socialist) and the right (nationalist) often lies the National-Socialist. Post-1989, it appears that the left and the extreme right have made their marriage in heaven.

JG22 - :-)

moradali

Now weddings specifically, no

Now, you do know what the "wedding" reference is all about right ?, two references, first is the "wedding" to the 72 doe eye virgins. The ceramony for a jihadi before he goes to meet his doom.

What riled the Iraqis the most was that [the bomber's] family honored his act by holding a festive ceremony known as "the wedding of the martyr" [ 'irs al-shahid ] to symbolize his wedding in paradise with 72 virgins.

At these events, the bereaved family receives guests who offer it condolences and congratulations for their son's martyrdom.

A truck was seen on television bringing food to a special tent erected to receive the guests. In justifying the celebration, the family argued that the victims were Americans. In fact, there was no American casualty in this operation.

The second reference The Wedding That Wasn't

The so-called “wedding party” near the Syrian border that was attacked by US forces on Wednesday appears to have been something else entirely

Also special meaning becaise the left jumped up and down about it.

And while lefty history started yesterday, our memory is longer . to Wit, the recent comment by JT is on target.

However, I think this whole discussion is giving liberals much more credit than they deserve. How many liberals made public statements of concern about collateral damage in the bombing of Serbia?

How about the caravan of refugees on the bridge that were mistaken for a military column?

How about bombing the Chinese Embassy?

I did a Lexis search on those events and there wasn't a single Democrat/Liberal who publicly criticized any of those "mistakes" and, at least in regard to the Chinese Embassy, they were culpable mistakes.

If the President were a Democrat liberals would be defending the low mortality rate in our military prisons.

I don't believe there is an ounce of sincerity in the public statements made by Democrats.

They want to harm George Bush anyway they can and if the interests of the country are also harmed as a result, so be it.

This applies even to moonbats like Susan Sontag before she passed away. She wrote an article for the New Yorker explaining why Kosovo was a just war and that the harm to civilians was a necessary evil in pursuit of the greater good of stopping ethnic cleansing.

Then she was an outspoken opponent of the Iraq war even though the number of people killed by Saddam was ten times larger than the number of people killed in ethnic cleansing in Kosovo.

Susan Sarandan and Tim Robbins didn't say boo about civilian casualties in Serbia.

Course, we remember the Clinton can do no wrong days when everything from Rape to Treason for Chinese Military money for Nuke tech was beyond consideration. bombing in an effort to control whats on the front page of the newspaper.

Ahh yes, the double standard is breathtaking, and damning for the left to the extent ,,,, well they are not done yet are they.

Of course this isnt .1% of the proof how offensive they are, but they do deserve to be called some names, quite a few of then strung together.

Im not certain you could capture the full essence of them. You could perhaps provide lots of additional filler for a definitive word sandwich beginning with ingrate, Leftist in the middle,,, on a bottom bun of scumbag.

Then comes Joe K's Victory post that says what I want to say, if my wordsmith skills didnt suck, and makes a slam dunk case for it using a small amount of their recent additions to their sorry legacy of infamy.

And doesnt call any names, but that not because some of his subjects dont deserve them, perhaps the names are not enough, you would need to soak the paper in that rotten egg stink concentrate you buy at the joke shop to properly communicate the loathing and contempt the creatures deserve.