Archived material Access restricted Article
Rantburg

Today's Front Page   View All of Tue 01/30/2007 View Mon 01/29/2007 View Sun 01/28/2007 View Sat 01/27/2007 View Fri 01/26/2007 View Thu 01/25/2007 View Wed 01/24/2007
1
2007-01-30 Iraq
Bolton says US has no strategic interest in united Iraq
Archived material is restricted to Rantburg regulars and members. If you need access email fred.pruitt=at=gmail.com with your nick to be added to the members list. There is no charge to join Rantburg as a member.
Posted by phil_b 2007-01-30 01:20|| || Front Page|| [11132 views since 2007-05-07]  Top

#1 Hmmm. Hand over more quickly to the Iraqis? This is right up there with the assertion by Rummy that the inability of the 4ID to come down from Turkey in '03 accounted for the Sunni trouble-making in Anbar and Nineveh.

That is, I don't buy it. Rumsfeld and Bolton are two of my favorite players, overall, but I can't see the basis for either assertion.

Also think Bolton's wrong about the united Iraq bit. But that whole thing is way over-blown anyway. Kurds have the autonomy they want, and in general Iraqis favor a united country - so long as they each get their share of goodies and/or get left alone by the "others". The place has been divided along various lines for years now, but not in the way Bolton's referring to here. There are more outsiders musing about Iraq breaking up than there are Iraqis.
Posted by Verlaine 2007-01-30 01:47||   2007-01-30 01:47|| Front Page Top

#2 Hakim of SCIRI just said he favors 3 part regional autonomy. The way I see it, Iran will end up with defacto control of Southern Iraq.
Posted by ed 2007-01-30 01:54||   2007-01-30 01:54|| Front Page Top

#3 The way I see it, Iran will end up with defacto control of Southern Iraq.

That's assuming the mullahs remain in de jure control of Iran.
Posted by trailing wife 2007-01-30 02:29||   2007-01-30 02:29|| Front Page Top

#4 ed, Iran would certainly try, but I am not sure that the result you imply is the certainity.

If the southern shia region gains independence after break up of Iraq (if that happens), some factors would take more prominence. Namely the animosity between Arabs and Persians. The ages long rivalry between Najaf and Qom. And possibly, the suppression of Arabs in Khuzestan may pop to a forefront, they are mostly shia, too.



Posted by twobyfour 2007-01-30 02:47||   2007-01-30 02:47|| Front Page Top

#5 Bolton said that decision was "the best of a series of bad options", adding that he believed the decision to invade Iraq and topple Saddam Hussein was the right one, while admitting that mistakes had been CONTINUE TO BE made.

Until the military is permitted to WHACK these vermin in the sancuaries, nothing will change. They pop out of their lairs (neighborhoods), perform their deadly mischief, returning return home in time to see it a few hours later on satellite CNN. These 19 year old soldiers and Marines out on patrol are little more than moving targets. The butchers bill being paid by these kids makes me sick to my stomach. Washington, Patraeus, scum-sucking bickering politicians, somebody do some phueching thing and do it fast.
Posted by Besoeker 2007-01-30 02:51||   2007-01-30 02:51|| Front Page Top

#6 In my view Iranian control of Shiia southern Iraq is unlikely. The Shiias look to Iran cos they see the Sunnis aided by the Arab Sunni states - plus Iran is more than happy to meddle. With the Iraqi Shiias in an independant state or quasi-state with secure borders, the next flashpoint becomes Shiia Arab Khuzestan (and of course Eastern Kurdistan).
Posted by phil_b 2007-01-30 04:03||   2007-01-30 04:03|| Front Page Top

#7 These 19 year old soldiers and Marines out on patrol are little more than moving targets

Well thank God you there are people like you out there to stand up for the poor little hapless 19 year olds who accomplish more in 5 minutes than you have done in a lifetime.

You know what I think? I think you are just jealous because they are brave men fighting for freedom and you are just a tranparent troll who is going to die without ever having been a part of something selfless or bigger than yourself.
I feel quite sure they don't need or care for support from the likes of you.
Posted by Thotle Hupavitch5406 2007-01-30 04:39||   2007-01-30 04:39|| Front Page Top

#8 You're certainly welcome to your opinion Thotle. Have a lovely, VBIED-free day.
Posted by Besoeker 2007-01-30 06:30||   2007-01-30 06:30|| Front Page Top

#9 Mind your manners, Thotle Hupavitch5406 dear. Besoeker is speaking from personal and daily experience, as it happens. One has to be careful here at Rantburg -- the most interesting people, doing the most interesting things, are regulars here. Not me, of course -- I'm just a little civilian housewife in an outer suburb of the Midwest -- but some of the others don't tell most of their exciting stories.
Posted by trailing wife 2007-01-30 06:52||   2007-01-30 06:52|| Front Page Top

#10 You tell 'em, TW!

IIRC, Rumsfeld wanted to hand over Iraq to Iraquis in the same time frame used for Afghanistan. Personally don't know if that would have worked.
Posted by Ptah">Ptah  2007-01-30 06:58|| http://www.crusaderwarcollege.org]">[http://www.crusaderwarcollege.org]  2007-01-30 06:58|| Front Page Top

#11 Whahahahaa, I'm hardly "interesing," but a hat tip to you kind lady. My passion for these events gets me carried away at times. Please forgive my..... Ranting.
Posted by Besoeker 2007-01-30 06:58||   2007-01-30 06:58|| Front Page Top

#12 There are things one can't know about the people here until one has been around for a while, and I remember when Besoeker had to be told to mind his manners, too. I'm sure Thotle Hupavitch5406 had the best of intentions when he clicked submit. For all we know, he's actually one of those non-hapless 19 year olds taking a break from patrolling. A 4:30 a.m. posting suggests either sleeplessness or a very different time zone. I don't recognize the name Fred's anonymizer gave him -- although admittedly I have a hard time keeping track of those.
Posted by trailing wife 2007-01-30 07:14||   2007-01-30 07:14|| Front Page Top

#13 Unfortunately, most of the Iraq oil fields are in Kurd-Sunni and Arab-Shiite sectors. The US has a strategic interest in being there. US Field troops point to relative stability in Iraq. The flash points are all in mixed ethnic areas, which are being cleansed.

Posted by Sneaze Shaiting3550 2007-01-30 07:34||   2007-01-30 07:34|| Front Page Top

#14 Sistani certainly has issues with Qom, hence the multiple attempts on Sistani's life. Should Sistani either die or be killed, watch for Iranian proxies to move in.
Posted by doc 2007-01-30 08:05||   2007-01-30 08:05|| Front Page Top

#15 Eh, this is just a reminder that Bolton was never a neocon, but rather a human bludgeon. The UN was a good place for him.
Posted by Mitch H.">Mitch H.  2007-01-30 08:52|| http://blogfonte.blogspot.com/]">[http://blogfonte.blogspot.com/]  2007-01-30 08:52|| Front Page Top

#16 3 Iraqs, one Iraq, the real elephant in the room is that al Q vs. USA is being played out there instead of here. Staying means finding ways to continue the fighting while reducing the number of casualties, and pulling out means losing round two to them. Not a smart option. Maybe that's why donks favor pulling out.
Posted by wxjames 2007-01-30 09:25||   2007-01-30 09:25|| Front Page Top

#17 #1 -- I doubt many Iraqis muse about Iraq breaking up. The ones who aren't working hard every day to ensure that break-up happens are probably hiding from the others. Musing is a luxury for those with adequate leisure time and personal safety.
#16-- I think the elephant is more accurately described as jihad vs. the rest of the world. The US is serving as the point man for civilization. Al Qaeda and Iran are the largest entities pushing the jihad, but there are so many others.
Posted by Anguper Hupomosing9418 2007-01-30 09:42||   2007-01-30 09:42|| Front Page Top

#18 whether a Shiite South Iraq republic would fall under Iranian instance depends on circumstances. I agree they wouldnt want to, but if they were stuck in a border war with Sunnis, and the US was gone, or neutral, they would probably accept Iranian help, and the strings that came with it. Given the geography, with overlapping pops in many places (Baghdad, Hilla, Basra, Diyala, etc) it seems quite a possible a Bosnia style war over disputed regions would continue.
Posted by liberalhawk 2007-01-30 09:58||   2007-01-30 09:58|| Front Page Top

#19 "Mind your manners, Thotle Hupavitch5406 dear. Besoeker is speaking from personal and daily experience, as it happens. "

Oh, come off it TW. If Besoeker had said identical things about the troops, and then called for withdrawl, hed have gotten the same rough treatment, but supported by 90% of the folks here, and few would give a damn what real life experiences hed had. Because he called for harsher ROE, that exempted him. You can criticize Bush from the right (well you can as long as you dont support limits on campaign contributions) and youre fine, but use identical words from the left and youre a traitor who dishonors the troops.
Posted by liberalhawk 2007-01-30 10:02||   2007-01-30 10:02|| Front Page Top

#20 The ethnic enclave theory seems very problematic. Seems to me it would insure a never-ending sectarian brawl. It’s very simplistic to assume that all Iraqi’s are more loyal to one affiliation over the others. In reality, there are millions that come from mixed heritages that would be forced to choose identities. Which means the affluent but less connected would most likely bug out and leave the spoils for the greedy thugs and their savage hoards.
Posted by DepotGuy 2007-01-30 10:53||   2007-01-30 10:53|| Front Page Top

#21 Oh, come off it TW. ...

Hawk, take it easy there. TW was (very) kindly pointing out to a troll that his personal insult might have been off the mark. That's all.

I'm as guilty as anyone when it comes to getting my undies in a bunch. Sometimes I even have to iron the krinkles out of my boxers all by myself. Other times, I have to take a nap. You might have to break out the iron or condsider some pillow time. Drop'em boy and check yo draws!
Posted by Mike N. 2007-01-30 11:06||   2007-01-30 11:06|| Front Page Top

#22 The butchers bill being paid by these kids makes me sick to my stomach

Clearly he's not one of "these kids". Ok - so I was an uncivil troll.... but they aren't "kids", they are soldiers fighting for freedom and it ticks me off when they are referred to that way.
Posted by Thotle Hupavitch5406 2007-01-30 12:08||   2007-01-30 12:08|| Front Page Top

#23 Again, my apologies...young men and women then. At my advanced age, nearly everyone appears youthful.
Posted by Besoeker 2007-01-30 12:35||   2007-01-30 12:35|| Front Page Top

#24 Thotle Hupavitch5406, civilize yourself and picking a name, then we can discuss a few things.
Posted by RD 2007-01-30 12:44||   2007-01-30 12:44|| Front Page Top

#25 Thotle Hupavitch5406, civilize yourself and pick a name, then we can discuss a few things.
Posted by RD 2007-01-30 12:45||   2007-01-30 12:45|| Front Page Top

#26 Hear, hear.
Posted by gromgoru 2007-01-30 12:52||   2007-01-30 12:52|| Front Page Top

#27 Mike

heres what besoeker said


"Until the military is permitted to WHACK these vermin in the sancuaries, nothing will change. They pop out of their lairs (neighborhoods), perform their deadly mischief, returning return home in time to see it a few hours later on satellite CNN. These 19 year old soldiers and Marines out on patrol are little more than moving targets. The butchers bill being paid by these kids makes me sick to my stomach. Washington, Patraeus, scum-sucking bickering politicians, somebody do some phueching thing and do it fast. "

and somebody called him on it.

Now supposing instead hed posted

"Until the military is permitted to withdraw from this quagmire, where no one but neocons ever thought anything but disaster was possible nothing will change. Its a hopeless mistake, and always was, and a waste of the lives of our men and women. These 19 year old soldiers and Marines out on patrol are little more than moving targets. The butchers bill being paid by these kids makes me sick to my stomach. Washington, Patraeus,Bush, Cheney, scum-sucking bickering politicians, somebody get our troops out and do it fast. "

IMO there would have been about a dozen posts here like Thotles, and IF TW had attacked one of them (would she have?) shed have been shouted down.

Now Im not pro-withdrawl, but if this is about politeness, then it needs to go both ways.
Posted by liberalhawk 2007-01-30 14:40||   2007-01-30 14:40|| Front Page Top

#28 Bolton must have a split personality.

He says that he supports the 'surge', yet most of what he says argues against it.
Posted by FeralCat 2007-01-30 14:45||   2007-01-30 14:45|| Front Page Top

#29 Liberalhawk et al, Besoeker said a bunch of things early on, when he didn't understand who he was dealing with, that got him slapped down hard by people a good deal blunter than I. He deserved it, and he learned from the experience... eventually. Thotle Hupavitch5406 attacked Besoeker as an armchair chickenhawk troll, when actually he's a fobbit (or hobbit or rabbit or something -- I'm not good with these technical terms) over there right now, taking care of his troops as they come and go beyond the wire (is that how it's said? Sorry). As for the rest of each of their comments, there is enough of both kinds of verbiage that I don't feel any need to use gasoline to put out those particular fires.
Posted by trailing wife 2007-01-30 15:17||   2007-01-30 15:17|| Front Page Top

#30 Personally, I think the entire 4th ID thing was ill-concieved in the first place. They should have attacked Iraq through Syria, but that's another beef. I agree that the main issue here is that we fight al-Qaida in the middle east, rather than the midwest. In that perspective, whether there is one Iraq or three makes no difference, except it does confuse the political spectrum. I served my time and fought my wars, but would go back on active duty if requested/ordered without a moment's hesitation. This is a young man's war, however, and old fogies like me would indeed be targets.
Posted by Old Patriot">Old Patriot  2007-01-30 15:36|| http://oldpatriot.blogspot.com/]">[http://oldpatriot.blogspot.com/]  2007-01-30 15:36|| Front Page Top

#31 Hawk, I have no beef with Thotle taking issue with Besoeker calling the soldiers kids. I think it's a non-issue, but if someone wants to raise a stink over a non-issue that's their silly choice, and I do understand your point about the same ends derived from different means getting different respones from this board. The personal insult was a bit much and that's what TW called him on.

My issue was that you called out TW when she was very lady like in her refutation of Thotles insult. That's completely different than attacking Thotles position. It was nothing major, I just figured you have seen that kind of hypocrisy on this board enough times in the past and ended up calling out the wrong person for it. She exibited zero hypocrisy in that post.

Maybe we both need a nap.
Posted by Mike N. 2007-01-30 17:37||   2007-01-30 17:37|| Front Page Top

#32 probably.
Posted by liberalhawk 2007-01-30 17:41||   2007-01-30 17:41|| Front Page Top

#33 I agree that the main issue here is that we fight al-Qaida in the middle east, rather than the midwest.

I agree, but we're going to fight them here sooner or later, whether we like it or not. I believe that when the time comes to fight them here, it will be the death of them permanently.

It will also be the end of the Democrats, Liberals, Multi-Culturalism and bunch of other crap. So, maybe, speeding up the eventuality might be the best thing. Lock and load!
Posted by Cholung Gleang2812 2007-01-30 18:24||   2007-01-30 18:24|| Front Page Top

#34 We're already fighting them here, in my opinion, and have been since 9/12. Think of all the Muslim men who simply left the country rather than register; admittedly most were here illegally -- mostly overstayed student and tourist visas for the economic opportunity -- but some of them must have been here for the easy jihad. Think of the increasing pace of imam arrests, that Nation of Islam-ist and the Jamaican kid he brought over to assassinate pedestrians in DC and the surrounding states, the trial of the "paint ball" cell in Virginia that planned to use their skills for jihad. We just haven't got to a full blown shooting war on this side of the pond yet.

Mike N, you are gallant gentleman, and I thank you for your eloquent defence. I hope liberalhawk and I are friends, even if we sometimes misread one another's posts. That's the problem with not discussing face to face over a slowly emptying teapot. ;-)
Posted by trailing wife 2007-01-30 18:47||   2007-01-30 18:47|| Front Page Top

#35 Somehow I suspect the intended audience for this comment is not CONUS but Tehran and Baghdad. Nobody here listens to Bolton anyway, thanks to the MSM. Disinformation.

"In retrospect, we should have transferred authority to the Iraqis more quickly"

Also a threat to go into Iran the next time, kill people, break things and leave pronto.

You can never say just one thing.
Posted by Nimble Spemble 2007-01-30 18:57||   2007-01-30 18:57|| Front Page Top

#36 We're already fighting them here...

True TW, but I was referring to Armed, open conflict! Bang, Bang! Shoot, Shoot!

Posted by Cholung Gleang2812 2007-01-30 19:31||   2007-01-30 19:31|| Front Page Top

#37 Nimble, I suspect you are onto something there. It seems out of character for Bolton to comment in this fashion without some ulterior motive. He does not operate in a vacuum, perticularly given his close association with the CIC.

We seem to be sending a lot of signals to Tehran lately, be it with carrier groups, arrests of their agents, display of supplied weapons or the musings or a former UN diplomat (who, IMO, earned his fab lunches/dinners).
Posted by remoteman 2007-01-30 19:51||   2007-01-30 19:51|| Front Page Top

#38 I'm willing to wait a bit longer to hear the bang bangs, Cholung Gleang2812. I've sensitive ears. ;-)
Posted by trailing wife 2007-01-30 20:16||   2007-01-30 20:16|| Front Page Top

#39 Could it be that Darth Bolton is wrong? Well, yes.

We do have a strategic interest in Iran not taking over southern Iraq and acquiring its oil fields. We also have a strategic interest in preventing full-scale war between Saudi and Iran. And, we do have an interest in Iran not obtaining a choke-hold in the gulf.
Posted by Captain America 2007-01-30 21:05||   2007-01-30 21:05|| Front Page Top

#40 Again, my apologies...young men and women then. At my advanced age, nearly everyone appears youthful.

I'm 49, and my active-duty time is over. But I deal with young Marines and sailors every day. They have and will step up just like my generation did - and better.

But they are kids. You teach them, you give 'em advice when they ask for it, you correct them when they screw up. And you visit 'em when they get wounded and you mourn when they die.

Us old warhorses do get protective of them.
Posted by Pappy 2007-01-30 21:20||   2007-01-30 21:20|| Front Page Top

23:24 SteveS
23:19 Gloque Elmang4914
23:15 Gloque Elmang4914
23:14 Eric Jablow
23:06 DMFD
23:06 Gloque Elmang4914
22:46 CrazyFool
22:45 Keystone
22:33 CrazyFool
22:29 CrazyFool
22:24 Mike N.
22:14 Shieldwolf
22:11 Shieldwolf
22:07 Anonymoose
22:05 PlanetDan
22:05 Shieldwolf
22:05 Anonymoose
22:04 Shieldwolf
21:55 Shieldwolf
21:44 DMFD
21:43 Asymmetrical T
21:42 DMFD
21:38 Pappy
21:37 DMFD









Paypal:
Google
Search WWW Search rantburg.com