To say the least, it’s been an interesting weekend for anyone following political developments involving the United States and Iraq. As if Barack Obama’s post-primaries trip to Kuwait, Afghanistan, and Iraq wasn’t enough, we had Iraqi prime minister Nouri al-Maliki issuing a surprisingly explicit endorsement of Obama’s proposed timetable for withdrawing American combat troops:
Maliki: . . . U.S. presidential candidate Barack Obama talks about 16 months. That, we think, would be the right timeframe for a withdrawal, with the possibility of slight changes.
SPIEGEL: Is this an endorsement for the US presidential election in November? Does Obama, who has no military background, ultimately have a better understanding of Iraq than war hero John McCain?
Maliki: Those who operate on the premise of short time periods in Iraq today are being more realistic.
This was followed by pressure from the Bushites to issue an unconvincing denial, but Robert Reid of the Associated Press thinks he knows what’s really going on:
The Iraqi prime minister’s seeming endorsement of Barack Obama’s troop withdrawal plan is part of Baghdad’s strategy to play U.S. politics for the best deal possible over America’s military mission.
. . . Already, the Iraqi strategy has succeeded in persuading the White House to agree to a "general time horizon" for removing U.S. troops — long a goal of the Shiite-dominated Iraqi government.
. . . In the past, the Iraqis would have bowed to American pressure. This time, they saw an option in Obama, a longtime critic of the war. They could press for a short-term agreement with the administration and take their chances with a new president — Obama or McCain.
. . . "Let’s squeeze them," al-Maliki told his advisers, who related the conversation to The Associated Press on condition of anonymity because of the sensitivity of the issue.
Wow. It’s hard to imagine the words "Let’s squeeze them" coming from a weak puppet like Maliki — or, at least, the Maliki that’s frequently been portrayed not just in the media but on progressive blogs. As Abu Aardvark wrote today, "I know that I’m not the only one who has generally assumed that Maliki and most of the ruling elite preferred McCain’s vision of endless, unconditional American military support."
Fortunately, the denizens of this humble ‘Lake have been occasionally exposed to a different point of view — namely (*ahem*) mine, as I accurately picked up signs several weeks ago that the Iraqi government would "prefer to deal with someone sane Barack Obama rather than another Republican president reading from the neocon playbook," and suggested that readers "consider what more Iraqis might do to make their preferences known between now and November."
I think that the key mistake many observers (perhaps including Abu Aardvark et al.) make is to assume that there are only two sides to the Iraqi situation: the U.S. occupation and those who ally with it, and the "resistance" (Sunni, Sadrist, or whatever) that takes up arms against it. They forget that the government Maliki represents wasn’t created by the Americans — it came about following popular elections demanded by Grand Ayatollah Ali Sistani, who also established the coalition to which Maliki belongs and lent his considerable prestige to ensure its victory. And Sistani probably didn’t go through all that trouble just to be known as the guy who rubber-stamped a permanent U.S. occupation.
Back in Febuary 2004, Anthony Shadid of the Washington Post wrote a profile of Sistani that has long influenced my writings on Iraq; it describes the grand ayatollah as primarily motivated by memories of 1920 — when Shiites rebelled directly against the British, and were rewarded with 80 years of Sunni/secular domination — and determined not to let his followers miss this opportunity.
It’s always seemed to me that his solution was to cooperate initially with the U.S. invasion, use the American military as a contractor of sorts to help cement a Shiite-led government’s power, then nudge us aside when the task was more or less complete. Maliki’s newfound spine, if anything, just means that they think that time is drawing closer.
Related posts:
- Changing of the Guard: US Troops Withdraw from Iraqi Cities; Maliki Declares “Sovereignty Day”
- FDL Book Salon Welcomes Jurgen Todenhofer, Why Do You Kill?: The Untold Story of the Iraqi Resistance
- The End of the Delusion in Iraq
- Torture: Obama Heeded Maliki on Abuse Photos, Says McClatchy; What That Says for Our Occupation
- US Contractors Held in Iraqi Jail for Green Zone Murder





Spotlight








Support this site!
Subscribe to the newsletter
Advertise on Firedoglake
Send
us your tips
Make us your homepage
About Firedoglake
Advanced search

Wow 2 in a row
swopa on a sunday!
I have always felt that al-Sistani was the real power behind the throne so to speak. My understanding of his role was that while he was never out in the public – he was really the one pulling the strings in the new government. Our big mistake (that is Bushco’s mistake) is completely and totally misunderstanding his role, and a complete and total dismissal of that role.
I felt that when the ‘oil law’ never even got a full hearing in the Parliament that no matter what the Bush Admin spin on it was – we told Maliki and the others they were a sovereign government – and now they are acting like one and not taking orders from us.
Yay!
I completely agree about the oil law; it got stalled because the Shiite parties in the government didn’t want it.
I’m w/you, Teddy. Great to actually be here for a change to read Swopa’s excellent post.
wow Swopa – Bingo !
thank you
off to read the Shadid link
I was gunna say sum smart ass thang but that graphic made me STUF!
, lol.
I’ll buy that. I wonder if Sistani has been whispering into the ears of the leaders of other factions.
Good evening, Swopa. I Dugg your post
I am tabula rasa about pretty much anything about politics in the Middle East, but there were 2 figures in Iraq who always struck me as profoundly significant — Ayatollah al-Sistani and Moqtada al Sadr (forgive any mis-spelling). Nothing in the last 5 years has changed my opinion about their importance.
The “United States and Iraq” USI? Or USO, United States Oil, ?
Even this morning I heard an Obama “policy advisor” bow down to the all mighty oil law.
Please, USO means something entirely different. When the Red Cross couldn’t help my first husband with compassionate leave when his father died the USO was there.
Click the image for the full-size graphic — it’s my maiden effort with Photoshop (the budget-version Photoshop Elements, to be precise), and I’m very proud of it. :)
Interesting how little Sistani has been in the news in the last year or so. Yet the few comments from his spokesmen have been that he the US has to leave in the near future.
The WSJ in a recent op-ed argued that the “surge worked” and has not only reduced the activities of that mysterious “Al Qaida in Iraq” (mainly because the US finally turned over local defence to Iraqi militias…and that al Qaida recruits were heading toward Pakistan instead) but also ended the civil war. Al-Maliki needed US support to break the Sadrist momentum (whether this actually worked will be imminent in the next few months).
But as Clausewitz once said, politics is “war is politics by a different means” and Sadr’s principal position was that the US had to withdraw…under an established schedule or timeframe. It appears that al-Maliki has now openly embraced that theme, despite the pressure from the Bush Administration. The failure to reach agreement on the “Retention” of Forces Agreement after members of al-Maliki’s own coalition (backed by Sistani) threatened to bring the government down if the Bush demands were met, indicate just how successful Sadr’s positions have become.
Al-Maliki, and those in his government, realize that they need to at least espouse the near-term withdrawal of US Forces. If they don’t the Sadrists will sweep the Shiite vote in the elections. But at the same time Maliki needed the backing of the US military to temporarily weaken Sadrist enclaves.
I don’t think al-Maliki “wants” to be the US puppet, but he’s caught estimating how soon his own control of the military and regional governments will occur without US assistance to eliminate his political rival in the Shiite voting bloc.
I don’t mean to be a cold SOB, I am, I can not help a faith based operation.
use the gimp :D
Well, if you have been following information about al-Sistani – he’s kind of like the Pope. Although he is the nominal ‘ayatolla’ for the Shia in Iraq, when he speaks – everyone listens. Early on in the Iraq war, someone did a profile of him – he was ill and had gone to England for some surgery. Every citizen of Iraq, Sunni, Shia, Kurd, Jew, Christian, all of them were praying for his recovery. His is considered a moderate conservative, and advocates a spiritual population governed by a secular government – in other words – the best of both worlds.
While he does not get directly involved in politics, he is very powerful. Al Sadr is a prime example of that. Sadr controls the largest faction of militias in Iraq, the Mehdi Army. And in Arab culture, if you pick up a weapon for a revenge killing you don’t put it down until the deed is done. When al-Sadr went on that rampage after OUR soldiers desecrated and destroyed the Golden Mosque, al-Sistani is the one who got him to stop shooting and leave. That was totally dismissed in the US press – but it was obvious who was really in charge.
When al-Sistani voiced his objections to the oil law (and this is the oil revenue sharing law – not the deal that was just signed with our big-oil robberbarons) it didn’t get anywhere. Similarly, the SOFA agreement Bush wanted went down in flames when al-Sistani said no.
He refused to talk to us – and with good reason. It would compromise his credibility and authority. But even though he doesn’t talk directly to us – when he speaks, we should listen.
I think the graphic is swell!
USO is NOT a faith-based organization. It is an organization originally developed by families of servicemembers overseas to help their families, provide support and materials to the troops and a lot of other stuff. The USO is primarily known for its ‘celebrity tours’ wherein namebrand entertainers would go to the war zones to entertain the troops, bring mail, and news from home and to lighten the moment. (Remember Bob Hope) It is not and never has been aligned with any religious institution.
What elections?
For the sake of keeping the post below thesis length, I didn’t get into this, but the argument that Maliki is merely engaging in pre-election rhetoric doesn’t wash with me. By the time elections are finally held, the actual agreement (whatever replaces the UN mandate) will be in place, rendering whatever politicians said months earlier irrelevant.
While I do not doubt that Al Sadr would be a glorious enemy to combat on the battlefield, I too have serious doubts about about the “Oil Law” and the “Global War on Terror.” The Religious Christians here in the the US that want to suppress free thought and science are an enemy felt the world over.
Nice job on the full size version. A couple lines of dialog from the film came to mind when I saw it:
A Hood: Doyle, I KNOW I gave him four THREES. He had to make a SWITCH. We can’t let him get away with that.
The Mark: What was I supposed to do – call him for cheating better than me, in front of the others?
Which oil law would that be? There are two. The first one (the mostly moribund one) is the oil revenue sharing law between the various factions of the Iraqi population. It entailed small shares for the Sunni, Shia, Kurds, etc. and a huge share for us.
al Sistani objected to the US getting such a big cut – and the thing died for all intents and purposes.
The second one is this ‘consulting and operations’ agreement – which is not a law, it is a contract. A deplorable one to be sure, but a contract, nonetheless. I think it’s disgusting but the two things are not the same.
This one was not objected to by al-Sistanim and I have to believe he has some ulteriour motive. Since it is merely a consulting and operations contract, I’m guessing/predicting that as soon as we are substantially out of there, the Iraqi government will nationalize the oil (again) and that contract will run its course and it will be all over
Right now, Bushco thinks it has won something. Thinks.
When it comes to exposing US lies about Iraq, and the US corporate media bias, you just don’t get much more transparent than this.
To summarize: al-Maliki agrees with Obama’s timeframe for withdrawal, then the US media tries to ignore that, then US officials in Iraq lean on al-Maliki, then an al-Maliki spokesman issues a denial, which curiously comes via Centcom, and then the US media use that as the headline… and bury it anyway.
I suggest al-Maliki might want to step up his personal security until November. There are a lot of crazy, dangerous, heavily-armed people in Baghdad these days!
Thank you….. I was looking for the info…. WHEN I was stationed in Greece 30 years ago, the USO helped and supported us in various areas, provided entertainment and when I was in nursing school it was where I volunteered my extra time for the Vietnam Vets….
I simply do not trust the current US government. It lies with every breath. I cannot propagate propaganda to our soldiers abroad.
That’s perfect.
Everyone seems to think that al-Sadr is this wild-eyed radical. I have to question that in view of the fact that when al-Sistani told him to quit shooting at US Troops and go home, he did.
Then Maliki decided to grandstand and attack al-Sadr and his militia in Sadr City. And who do we get to help stop that? Why the Iranian General in charge of the KUDS forces (we just declared them a terrorist organization) The General came, al-Sadr put his guns down and went back home – even though he was winning.
He has spent a great deal of time in Iran lately – studying the Q’uran under some of the really high ayatollahs there. Studying his Holy Book.
Sure he wants us out of there. He has every right to want us out of there.
I think that the elections (if they really are free and fair) may result in al-Sadr or someone very close to him taking al-Maliki’s seat from him. Just a thought. And it probably wouldn’t be all that bad. Iraq really needs a strong leader because of all the factions. They could do a whole lot worse.
haHA! f00ker, i dunno. bin sleep’n! u tell me. :)
linky n docs, plz.
The USO? I don’t know what you are talking about. They don’t do political stuff. ENTERTAINMENT, Moral building, family assistance.
Their money comes from donations. They are a 501(c)(3) non-profit. Yes, they have a Congressional mandate. But they are NOT funded by the government. The USO works with the Pentagon on logistics – obviously. They are forbidden by their non-profit status to engage in politics.
And that is NOT what they do.
na man, uso ain’t my gig.
Oil “Law” (my number one)
http://www.time.com/time/world…..88,00.html
Oil “Contract” (my number two)
http://www.bnet.com/2407-14049_23-207124.html
I know i will sound Ameri-centric by saying this, but it sure seems like they don’t want to have their elections in large part before we do.
USO Fact Sheet
How many hours have you volunteered?
USO Volunteers
I can understand that. They won’t have Shrub touting the results as an endorsement for McSFB. I can see them stalling them until after 20 Jan.
I was lucky enough to see one of Hope’s shows at Danang.
Thanks for volunteering. That is what the USO is all about. And it really means a lot to the troops too. Servicemembers all around the world have good memories of USO Tours and the music, jokes and general light-heartedness in the middle of hell. Plus the mail from home of course. And they help a lot with the families back home.
So, on behalf of veterans (I am one), thank you for your ’service’.
i’ll read bnet tomorrow, g’night.
From France to Greece, from professionals to shop keepers lots of comments on our up coming elections….. with hopeful phases such as …. “Do you think that Obama can win? (voice goes up with expectation)….
implying can America return to sanity?
They forget that the government Maliki represents wasn’t created by the Americans — it came about following popular elections demanded by Grand Ayatollah Ali Sistani, who also established the coalition to which Maliki belongs
I’ve been waiting for someone to point this out. The plan was for a complex series of committee meetings leading to a puppet. Sistani threatened to take to the streets if there were not a real election. It was still rigged, but it was an actual election. And the next one will be more so.
I wouldn’t want to – but that is really smart. The people of Iraq need to know what/whom they are going to be dealing with. And unfortunately, the people being elected are going to be massively affected by the outcome of OUR elections. So, yeah – and I don’t think it’s American-centric – it’s a very smart move on their part.
I don’t know if Maliki thinks Obama or McCain would be better for his chances but he certainly will campaign differently based on the results.
I thank you too…
The USO means a lot to my family of Vets, parents served in WWII, sister & husband Vietnam Vets, and without the USO our tour of Crete would of been harder….. 30 years ago living on the economy…. no car, TV, radio or phone…. with only snail mail…. USO helped a lot of dependent wives adjust….
u no wat.
I’m all for “support the troops.”
I do love each and every one.
BUT!
At which point does “support the troops” become “supply indefinately the fodder for empire?”
IT PISSES ME THE FUCK OFF!!!
SUPPORT THE TROPS!~!!!!!
]
FEED THEM TILL THEY DIE? WHAT U WANT!!!!
I agree! al-Maliki is one of those wolf in sheeps clothing. I think he has been playing puppet for Bushco for a while, but has been consolidating power, and he has been standing up for his country more and more by refusing to do certain things, and trying to take matters into his own hands. He miscalculated with the attack on al-Sadr, but whether the true strength is his or al-Sistani’s doesn’t really matter in the long haul.
Boy does this sound familiar! We got the bushbot run by Darth Cheney. They have the Maliki-bot run by al-Sistani. Only difference is I think al-Sistani’s motives are purer than Cheney’s. HA!
Aloha,Swopa! Excellent post! I noticed your comment over at Abu Muqawama’s yesterday… Excellent smackdown…! ;-)
Wouldn’t it be nice of a majority of Americans paid as much attention to our country as the rest of the world does? There aren’t many countries that haven’t been under some sort of lash in the last hundred years. Now that the lash is gone they take this stuff seriously.
Unfortunately, the neo-cons and their lackey Shrub didn’t turn out to be enough of a lash for the comfortable Americans. I’d like to be surprised at the total turnout in November.
Heh, you should’ve seen HoJo’s pathetic performance on Faux Spew this morn… I covered it in my post today…!
It’s called support the troops – because they are individuals. Sons, daughters, mothers, fathers, brothers, sisters, of someone here.
You can support the troops and AT THE SAME TIME fight like hell against the administration that sent them there. Supporting the troops DOES NOT equal supporting this miserable f**king excuse for a government we have right now.
Maliki first scuttles Bush’s ideas about a long term SOFA and in so doing publicly introduces talk of timetables for withdrawal for the first time. Now the der Speigel interview reinforces it. I don’t think there’s any bluff about this. I think the effects of the next POTUS not committing to an intent to withdraw along a short timeline would be a serious resurgence of violence by the Sadr militia.
I still look back at the unexpected ceasefire Sadr announced at the end of 8/07 as the principle reason for the drop in violence – not a success of the surge reducing violence. Sadr’s ability to maintain the relative ceasefire while keeping its armed status despite the assaults by Maliki this spring was pivotal, imo. In May, they let the Iraqi Army advance into Sadr City unopposed, but I have little doubt they could turn it on again in a blink.
The other big event that got virtually no press here was the large Shia protests in June in response to revelations about the nature of Bush’s SOFA demands with a long term presence.
I look at Sadr’s voluntary cease fire, Maliki’s inability to disarm them, combined with the large scale peaceful Shia protest against long term US presence as the confluence of events that have tilted the fulcrum away from Bush and to Sadr’s people. I would love to know what kind of agreements and support exist right now between Maliki and Sadr, since it sure appears Maliki is acting in defiance of Bush from a position of strength with Iraqis.
Paradoxically, for all the hails of success of the surge by BushCo, I get the feeling their long term personal interests enacted by Maliki would be better served if Sadr were still being ultra-violent.
Now that is supporting the Troops. Not all this bullshit the Reich wingnuts give lip service to. The USO has been ther FOR our troops who serve our country and do their duty, not be because of politics but they serve for all of us…. And what do they actually get from the Reich Wing Rethuglians.. discarded after they have given everything for our country… Rethuglians have consistently cut funding/benefits for the Veterans Administration and they have reneged on the benefits promised our older Veterans… Rethuglians in no way support our troops is is nothing but a lie… Smoke and Mirrows as has been said if you say it enough it becomes what is believed by the people who are lied to by the Rehtuglians…
Miscalculating on Mosul too.
I’m such an old-school Iraq blogger that I not only wrote about the U.S. plan when it was announced, I accurately predicted the same day that Sistani would derail it through nonviolent protests (even in the face of an NYT article claiming Sistani supported the scheme):
http://www.needlenose.com/pMac…..hp?id=P589
HoJo in fine form…
“I know that I’m not the only one who has generally assumed that Maliki and most of the ruling elite preferred McCain’s vision of endless, unconditional American military support.”
The Iraqi people have long grown weary of the United States. IMO it would be to Makili’s advantage to get the US the hell out of dodge.
Or perhaps Mr. Maliki learned a thing or two from Al Queda and has decided to allow ourselves to occupy their land until we completely bankrupt our treasury and become a third world country.
so which way will al-Sistani go
with al-Sadr or with al-Hakim ?
I agree, but, ya left out our $300 a month payments to the Sahwa/Awakening members, too! That was just as critical, too bad Maliki refuses to integrate them into the
BadrIAF…!I’m not good at the sharp and witty retorts but you don’t know WHAT the F*ck you are talking about…
GO volunteer and find out…. THE USO has been there FOR millions of service men and women around the world since WWII. GO read their website….
IF you don’t want the military around the world, run for congress and shut down all the overseas bases.
Hi Swopa… great post btw… :)
You do know that the Provincial elections scheduled for Oct. 1st have been postponed til Dec. 22nd, right…?
Well, you need to change your post:
reason why violence is creeping upward again?
checks have not yet arrived…hmmm
Amen, Katy! I’ve enjoyed their selfless service and provisions at numerous airports and way stations around the world… They’re awesome! (((USO))) *g*
Great post Swopa . . . I had mistakenly thought that Al Maliki was more aligned with IRAN’S mullah’s, not Al Sistani, thanks for clearing THAT up.
Can I suggest the minute we are OUT of Iraq (in large numbers) that the Shia/Sunni divide will explode into open flames in a most VIOLENT way (and never mind what the Kurds might do, or get done TO them by Turkey)?
Or will the need to develop oil and sell it to prosper supercede religious, tribal and regional factions?
Musings . . . just musings . . .
Heh, that wasn’t a part of today’s posting, but, you are right, they’re growing anxious from nonpayment of services rendered since we’ve handed it over to the GZG…
I wonder if the 13 servicemen electrocuted in the showers installed by KBR since 2004 ‘died in vain’. Or the 2 dead ones and the 57 other burned ones in the building fires caused by the faulty wiring installed by KBR since 2004 ‘died in vain’.
Or the female service members who have been assaulted and raped, some repeatedly, by other service personnel, contractors from KBR and Halliburton and the like who will never be prosecuted served “in vain”.
Or all the soldiers who are going to develop cancer, have kids with birth defects and all manner of other ‘mysterious’ ailments due to our use of depleted uranium ordnance are ’sick in vain’.
Explain that HoJo. You spineless piece of slimy crap you.
boy, it took forever to find this article…i ended up googling quotes from the part of the one i had..the first time it was posted in the fdl box it was the short version, mods fixed it to the long version, then i went to get it just now from my bookmarks, both versions were the wrong ones……
here it is-from june 30th—about not signing the latest oil contracts deal, there is some very interesting language used in this article, that’s why i made sure to save it….lots in there.
http://afp.google.com/article/…..JymNTt4IkQ
I’ll second that opinion…! ;-)
This on CNN.com
Joseph Dwyer
Boy – that really was interesting. I really like the part about consultancy fees and NO SHARE OF THE OIL!
loky at 67–yeah, there was a lot in that little article, lots. notice the dates……april 2009, sign in june. that’s only one minor detail though……like i said, lots in there.
Yeah. He and all the suicides of soldiers coming back from this war after seeing ‘crispy fried babies’, and ‘look ma, no hands/feet/face’ from the aftermath of bombs and any number of other atrocities.
They will not have their names etched on any memorial. They will not be counted as a war death – even though this war surely killed them as much as if they had been shot. Their families will carry that extra element of guilt that a suicide always leaves behind, even though it is in no way their fault. And no one will call them heroes any more.
and swopa–really nice job on the poster!!! on photoshop i so affects on the entire photo…..haven’t played with making collage images too much…….how many DAYS/WEEKS did it take? lol…….
I did notice that date. I thought all the big hoopla about that was that it was going to be signed this past June? What happened?
Oil Ministry playing a little cat and mouse too until after the elections (both of them)? Smart move on their part I think. If Obama is elected – the entire dynamics of all the negotiations,agreements, laws and contracts does definitely change. I’m not sure about how much, or in which direction – but I do believe it will be different than if McCain is the winner here. And of course the winner here will affect the outcome of the elections there – a line of dominoes waiting to fall…
Here’s an awesome article from Naomi Klein on the Iraqi Oil fiasco…!
Hmmm . . . circumstantial, or, strategy?
Good posit . . . . hmmmmm . . .
Yeah, I saw her the other day on something, can’t remember and she was doing an excellent job smacking down the host who was being really an a** with the comments about her personally and her book but she really handled it well and got her points across very well. And it was the oil thingy that got them all nasty – they were doing fine until the hosts brought that up. Like she said…
That last was for CT.
Did you listen to Ian’s description of a scenario like this on the earlier thread? Really good discussion and they kind of got into what it’s going to take to get us out of this mess (a disaster of some sort).
Ahh, I missed Ian’s thread, I was too busy watching my Bosox lose to the Angels… 8-(
teddy is upstairs
Sorry. I think you might still be able to hear it – it’s on Second Life. Go to the post and click on the link – it was from Netroots Nation.
drinkies on the house, i guess?
6uoq.jp
darn it, forgot this article too, lots in it, too, this one i saved for the same reasons as the other….thanks for the article ctuttle…i had a link to your main and central from june 9th to submit, but i crashed, after i enter this will try to get it again..if i don’t link it, browser being a brat again and i gave up…….(epu’d again, having serious browser issues, i gotta do something with it, throw it down the ravine, maybe….nite.).
http://www.nytimes.com/2008/06…..ref=slogin
Yep, in fact I linked it higher up in the thread (”What elections?”).
But that’s not the same problem — Sistani cared about having an elected, Shiite-majority government running the country and writing the constitution. Which Shiite party controls particular provinces is not nearly as important.
pc
and swopa–really nice job on the poster!!! …….how many DAYS/WEEKS did it take? lol…….
Actually, it was just a few hours (and my first time in years using a Photoshop program, first time ever for this purpose). I was really impressed at how easy it was — the auto-select tools were really good at clipping the parts I wanted (e.g., Maliki/Redford’s hat).
Finding a big picture of Hakim with his head at the right angle was the stroke of luck that made it come together (I had to flip a photo of Maliki).
looks like cheech & chong to me
;~P
Late and it may have been said by someone else but Maliki probably has already made the calculation that Obama is going to be the next President, and rather than behind the curve he has decided to get out in front of it and pretend that a withdrawal on a Obama timeline was his idea all along.
This has been one of the more fascinating elements of Sistani-watching the past five years. Sistani leans toward Hakim, but values Shiite unity more highly — he has stepped in several times over the years to keep Sadr in the game when Hakim/Dawa tried to cut him out.
At the same time, he’s stood by during various crackdowns on the Sadrists. The moral seems to be that he wants Sadr contained, but not destroyed.
ctuttle’s post–the first three+ minutes of the video…the stuff about iraq…..sistani has 4 stipulations-one is military status i mention later-and two of them can never bet met i bet, no, three, so it’s chinese riddle….and they gave pretty words for the ’twin agreements’ –one of four referendum agreements-status of us military forces in irak after 2008 and ’framework for diplomatic relations’-bet that means oil agreement.
http://www.mainandcentral.org/…..ran_s.html
keep in mind the un mandate expiration is approaching
(and yes browser is cornfused so i’m heading to bed, nite)
wow, swopa, would have taken me longer….
bonger–
no, i don’t want a stinkin’ pc
they’re copycat ’puters
and just not for me.
they used to have lists
and drives a.b.c
till they stole all the icons
from apple for free.
so, no, mr. smartass : )
i don’t want the ’puter
that needs a real tech
cuz it always dumps the printer.
: P
i must be fried, i can’t rhyme.
nite
forgot, the ’poem’ was to bong’s 83-the pc quip-harassing me about my browser problem, it’s ok, sibling rivalry, we were siblings in another life.
: P
and yes, trying to post this crashed it again, HAPPY???????? lol…….
outta here.
Apparently going to Maliki’s home town & killing his nephew wasn’t such a hot idea.
Hi Swopa. Your last three paragraphs are among the very few sage paragraphs I read about this terrible war. Great stuff. Thanks.
Thanks for drawing me back to read.
Ah! But didn’t ya know: Holy Joe is a deeply religious Orthodox man and that assuredly informs his opinions and actions!