You have commented 339 times on Rantburg.

Your Name
Your e-mail (optional)
Website (optional)
My Original Nic        Pic-a-Nic        Sorry. Comments have been closed on this article.
Bold Italic Underline Strike Bullet Blockquote Small Big Link Squish Foto Photo
Submit your comments on this article
Syria-Lebanon-Iran
Is an Iranian general pulling the strings in Iraq?
2008-04-29
By Hannah Allam, Jonathan S. Landay and Warren P. Strobel, McClatchy Newspapers

Leila Fadel contributed. Allam reported from Baghdad ; Landay and Strobel reported from Washington

Do the Arab-sounding names give this article any credibility? :-)

One of the most powerful men in Iraq isn't an Iraqi government official, a militia leader, a senior cleric or a top U.S. military commander or diplomat,

He's an Iranian general, and at times he's more influential than all of them.

Brig. Gen. Qassem Suleimani commands the Iranian Islamic Revolutionary Guard Corps' Quds Force, an elite paramilitary and espionage organization whose mission is to expand Iran's influence in the Middle East .

As Tehran's point man on Iraq , he funnels military and financial support to various Iraqi factions, frustrating U.S. attempts to build a pro-Western democracy on the rubble of Saddam Hussein's dictatorship.

According to Iraqi and American officials, Suleimani has ensured the elections of pro-Iranian politicians, met frequently with senior Iraqi leaders and backed Shiite elements in the Iraqi security forces that are accused of torturing and killing minority Sunni Muslims.
Posted by:gorb

#4  That's kind of reassuring. Since the propaganda line is "Quds Force stopped the fighting", that means that they aren't claiming to have started the fighting, which was what I had begun to suspect. That means that the sudden onset of the Basra operation was an indigenous Shia brainstorm, not a Persian plot. It also suggests that Sadr wasn't thrown under the bus by the Iranians, which has been the recent line of analysis. That is, assuming McClatchy aren't asking a bunch of ignorant fucknuts with flan for brains.

But either way, if the Iranians are claiming to have saved Sadr, that still tends to eliminate the possibility that they deliberately knifed him in favor of Dawa and SIIC. More like Dawa and SIIC started picking on the weak, fat kid & the recess teacher came storming over to break it up.

But I'll note that the late March truce didn't exactly hold from the Mahdi point of view. If the mean kids want to make the geek's life miserable, he's gonna be miserable. They know where to get extra lunch-money now.
Posted by: Mitch H.   2008-04-29 13:55  

#3  Yes, it does seem as though the glaring light of reality is finally being shone upon the swine in Iran. The rhetoric is being ratcheted up, but not in a threatening way, more in a evidence-presenting manner. The more it is made clear that Iran is directly responsible for obstructing peace in Iraq and killing our soldiers (I'm putting those in the order the dem's prioritize them) then the more likely (hopefully) we will hit some military targets in Iran.
Posted by: remoteman   2008-04-29 13:21  

#2  Even McClatchy now admits Iran is in Iraq. Planets are coming into alignment for the great conjunction.
Posted by: doc   2008-04-29 11:13  

#1  In hindsight did we invade the wrong country as we have strengthened Irans influence?????

Would removing Irans Regime been the better option before Iraq.

Just a thourgt before peple moan at me!!!!
Posted by: Paul   2008-04-29 09:09  

00:00