They are still in the left-right paradigm.
“The events that are taking place in Iraq are an illustration of a
complete failure of the venture started by the US and the UK that
allowed it to spiral out of control completely” Russian Foreign Minister
Sergey Lavrov recently told journalists.
Mr. Lavrov, I’m sure, knows better and is merely speaking for the
press regarding the stated goals of the Iraq war. For the
Anglo-Americans and their Israeli cohorts knew full well even before the
2003 invasion what they were doing and what the outcome would be. Very
possibly, Mr. Lavrov never read my Oct. 2nd, 2005 predictions of Iraq’s
fate in a Media Monitors article entitled “The End”
(http://usa.mediamonitors.net/Headlines/The-End):
“What has been the end of the Neocon's Iraq strategy from the
start?...For some two years prior to the Iraq war, in Council of Foreign
Relations and other elite circles, stories were circulated about the
benefits of partitioning Iraq into Shiite, Sunni and Kurdish regions for
the benefit of the "Greater Mid East" (read instead: "Eretz
Israel")...This could lead to a bloody civil war--easily anticipated
prior to the U.S. invasion--and probably leave the Israelis in control
of the majority of Iraq's oil through proxies in a future Kurdistan…A
depopulated, destroyed Iraq will be in no position to prevent the
diversion of its oil supplies and water from the Tigris and Euphrates to
Eretz Israel. Further, the conflict could spill over into Syria and
Iran and other regional states, possibly drawing them into a conflict
reminiscent of the Iran-Iraq war.”
This is coming to pass as you read this. With the Kurdish seizure
of Kirkuk—effectively asserting control of much of the country’s oil
wealth (much oil already being sold outside the aegis of the Iraqi
central government anyway) for their Israeli patrons—and conquest of
Sunni areas by ISIL/ISIS/Takfiri elements (enriched by a curious
$450-million bank heist and much “captured” American-supplied military
equipment) I contend that the real goal of the Iraq invasion and
Israeli/Anglo-American policy is about to be realized—the partition of
Iraq.
The entry of the Iranian elite Revolutionary Guard into the fray
at this late date is a good indication of this—the pretext of keeping
Iraq in one piece under Shiia control kept Iran on the sidelines during
the Purim 2003 invasion of Iraq (which would have turned it into a
regional conflict not wanted by U.S. allies at the time—the so-called
“Coalition of the Willing.”) In 2003, Iran could probably not believe
their good fortune as the U.S. destruction of Saddam virtually handed
control of Iraq to the Shiia—turning Iraq from a dangerous foe into an
ally!
From Israel’s standpoint, the latest Iranian move comes at a good
time. They really want to control the oil and the Iranians and
Anglo-Americans can slug it out with each other and with ISIS/ISIL
(Islamic State of Iraq and the Levant and Syria) and the Takfiris to
prevent them trying to retake the oil fields. Cut off from oil revenues,
the Sunni and, to a lesser extent, the Shiia areas will become
depopulated and “wither on the vine.” The Iranian involvement can also
serve Israel’s interests by giving it a pretext to strike Iranian
military and nuclear targets.
The Israeli public stance, then, is predictable. Rov Tov, in his
latest piece, quotes a lengthy analysis in the Israeli publication
Yediot Ahronot, by its “connected” military analyst Ron ben Yishai, a
former IDF lieutenant colonel. Tov comments that ben Yishai is saying,
in effect, that "If America does nothing, Israel will fall, and
afterwards Europe."
We are seeing the false dominoes of the Vietnam War laid out for
the U.S. once again—this time by their Israeli “ally”. If the U.S. fails
to intervene to protect Israel’s interests at this juncture, we are to
believe, the states of Europe could fall, one by one, becoming part of
the greater Takfriri “Caliphate.”
CFR, OTHERS LONG PUSHED FOR SEPARATION
Echoing a long-held position of the influential Council on
Foreign Relations (CFR) prior to the Iraq war, Leslie Gelb, PhD,
President Emeritus of the CFR, stated in a Nov. 25, 2003 New York Times
article titled "The Three-State Solution":
"President Bush's new strategy of transferring power quickly to
Iraqis, and his critics' alternatives, share a fundamental flaw: all
commit the United States to a unified Iraq, artificially and fatefully
made whole from three distinct ethnic and sectarian communities. That
has been possible in the past only by the application of overwhelming
and brutal force...
The only viable strategy, then, may be to correct the historical
defect and move in stages toward a three-state solution: Kurds in the
north, Sunnis in the center and Shiite in the South…Allowing all three
communities within that false state to emerge at least as self-governing
regions would be both difficult and dangerous. Washington would have to
be very hard-headed, and hard-hearted, to engineer this breakup. But
such a course is manageable, even necessary, because it would allow us
to find Iraq's future in its denied but natural past."
As a U.S. Senator, Joe Biden carried the CFR’s (and Israel’s)
water on this issue. According to a CFR backgrounder authored by Greg
Bruno on Oct. 27th, 2007:
“A non-binding resolution that sailed through the U.S. Senate in
September 2007 reignited debate over Iraq’s political future. Introduced
by Senators Joseph R. Biden Jr. (D-DE) and Sam Brownback, (R-KS), the
measure calls for a decentralized Iraqi government “based upon the
principles of federalism” and advocates for a relatively weak central
government with strong Sunni, Shiite, and Kurdish regional
administrations. The bill, based on a proposal first introduced by Biden
and CFR President Emeritus Leslie H. Gelb, passed the Senate by a 75 to
23 margin. Hillary Rodham Clinton (D-NY) and Chris Dodd (D-CT), rivals
in a crowded presidential field that includes Sen. Biden, both supported
the amendment.”
The Biden-Brownback plan was borne of a broader five-point
strategy Biden and Gelb introduced in May 2006. But this so-called
“federalism” scheme was seen by many Mid East experts as doomed to
failure and merely a back door to partition of Iraq. According to the
CFR, Anthony H. Cordesman, a Middle East expert at the Center for
Strategic and International Studies, doubted security forces could
function under federalism—and ridiculed the idea of a “soft” partition
in Iraq—he saw any partition as being “hard” and bloody, filled with
human suffering.
The 500,000 new refugees and the 1700 soldiers and civilians just
brutally executed by the Takfiris in Iraq can now confirm this estimate
to Joe Biden, now U.S. Vice President.
|
No comments:
Post a Comment