You're wrong though. Bush denies it. I bet you feel safer already. http://makeashorterlink.com/?A2D0219BC
>"We must co-operate and work together against this danger...of civil >war,'' said Iraq's President Jalal Talabani, but others think that the >civil war has already arrived. At least 130 people, almost all of them >Sunnis, were murdered in reprisal killings, and over a hundred Sunni >mosques attacked, in the 24 hours after the destruction of the >al-Askariya shrine in Samarra, sacred to the Shias, on February 22. >But it is not yet time to say that Iraq has slid irrevocably into >civil war. > >The casualties of the sectarian violence in Iraq are already >comparable to those in the Lebanese civil war - a couple of dozen >killed on slow days, a hundred or so on the worst days-but Iraq has >about eight times as many people as Lebanon, so there is still some >distance to go. And Iraq may never go the full distance, because it is >hard to hold a proper civil war unless the different ethnic or >religious groups hold separate territories. > >The Kurds do, of course, and it is unlikely that the fighting will >ever spread to the north of what now is Iraq, for Kurdistan is already >effectively a separate country with its own army. The Kurds are >currently allied with the Shia Arab religious parties of southern Iraq >who control politics in the Arabic-speaking eighty percent of Iraq, >but even if that alliance broke the Shias could not take back the >north. The worst that might happen is ethnic cleansing around Kirkuk >and its oilfields, where Saddam Hussein encouraged Arab settlement to >erode Kurdish dominance of the area. > >Southern Iraq is already controlled by the militias of the Shia >religious parties, and has only a small minority of Sunnis. Baghdad >and the "Sunni Triangle'' in central Iraq are the only potential >battlegrounds of an Iraqi civil war, but even there it is hard to have >a real civil war, because only one side has an army. > >The old, predominantly Sunni Arab army of Iraq was disbanded by >proconsul Paul Bremer soon after the American occupation of Iraq. The >new army and police force being trained by the US forces are almost >entirely Shia (except in Kurdistan, where they are entirely Kurdish). >Indeed, many of Iraq's soldiers are members of existing Shia and >Kurdish militias who have been shifted onto the payroll of the state. > >So how can you have a civil war? All the Sunnis are capable of at the >moment is guerilla attacks and terrorism. Unless really substantial >aid and reinforcements come in from other Arab countries, they are >unlikely to be able to move beyond that. They can kill some American >soldiers (they are currently accounting for about a thousand a year), >and they can play a tit-for-tat game of kidnapping and murder with the >Shia militias and the Interior Ministry's death squads, but they >cannot really challenge Shia control of Arab Iraq. > >Three years after the American invasion of Iraq, it's possible to >discern many of the final results of this "war of choice to install >some democracy in the heart of the Arab world,'' as New York Times >columnist Tom Friedman called it just before the invasion began. It is >a study in unintended consequences, and a good argument for the rule >that ideological crusaders must listen to the experts even though they >know that their hearts are pure. Those consequences will include: > >The emergence of an independent Kurdish state in what used to be northern Iraq. > >The destruction of the old, secular Iraq, and the installation of a >thinly disguised Shia theocracy in the Arabic-speaking parts of the >country. > >A perpetual, low-grade insurgency by the Sunni Arab minority against >the Shia state, but no change in their current desperate circumstances >unless neighbouring Arab states become involved. > >The destruction of the secular middle class in Arab Iraq. Most of >these people are abandoning the country as fast as they can, for they >know that all the future holds is Iranian-style social rules plus an >unending Sunni insurgency.. > >The extension of Iran's power and influence to the borders of Saudi >Arabia and Jordan. The United States has handed Iraq to Iran on a >plate. > >American troops will remain in Iraq for several years, probably right >down to the November, 2008 election, because it is impossible for the >Bush administration to pull out without admitting a ghastly blunder. >Too many people have died for "sorry'' to suffice. > >US troops stayed in Vietnam for five years after Richard Nixon was >first elected in 1968 on a promise to find an "honourable'' way out, >while Henry Kissinger searched for a formula that would separate US >withdrawal from total defeat for its Vietnamese clients by a "decent >interval'' of a couple of years. Two-thirds of all US casualties in >Vietnam occurred during that period. We are probably going to go >through that charade again, but it won't change any of the outcomes. ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~| Message: http://www.houseoffusion.com/lists.cfm/link=i:5:198387 Archives: http://www.houseoffusion.com/cf_lists/threads.cfm/5 Subscription: http://www.houseoffusion.com/lists.cfm/link=s:5 Unsubscribe: http://www.houseoffusion.com/cf_lists/unsubscribe.cfm?user=11502.10531.5 Donations & Support: http://www.houseoffusion.com/tiny.cfm/54
