Is this a parody of an angry Lefter denouncing BusHitler-Halliburton, or something? Iran's Foreign Ministry spokesman, Hamid Reza Asefi, called the bombing "barbaric terrorist act" and blamed U.S.-led forces in Iraq for failing to provide security in Iraq.
"The wrong approach of occupying Americans and their failure to be accountable in Iraq has spread violence and terrorism in this country. Terrorists, relying on America's wrong approach, continue their crimes," state-run television quoted Asefi as saying.
He certainly has a point: there was no terror in iraq untill the invasion - i do not see how the US can avoid taking responsibility for the currernt state of affairs: It is W's idiotic crusade and partly Rummy who decided to go in with not enough forces to secure the peace that is allowing the wackos to flourish. Abu Ghraib and the other HR violations perpetrated by the "coalition" also serve as a fine recruiting tool and ensure that there is a constant supply of osama wannabes. All this is american made. The fact that this is not intentional is irrelevant - ineptitude is a poor excuse.
To the contrary, I think the Iranians are getting to taste some of their own medicine. After all, it is they who have fomented a substantial amount of the current mayhem in Iraq. So complaining now that some of their own have been blown up by the kind of land mines they have been supplying tosundry insurgents and terrorists (how's that for interfernce in the internal affairs of a sovereign country? or do rules apply only to the US, in the Left's textbook?) is the height of chutzpah.
I am not arguing that the responsibility isn't shared. But I don't think that taking credit for the sporadic positive developments in Iraq (capture of saddam, offing zarky,etc...) while finger pointing for the major failures (eg check out this article on corruption), the state of virtual civil war, is convincing.
More specifically, the US invaded a country in which there was already considerable pre-existing sectarian tensions. But in the process, they failed to predict how removing the baathists who terrified their population into good behavior would allow for the sectarian violence that we see today to flourish. Naturally, because they didn't predict it, they failed to prepare for it.
This is a major american fuck up that results largely from the short-sightedness of the DOD which exclusively focused on defeating the (already diminished) iraqi army and not give any thought to the day after.
6 comments:
Touchy situation. Don't know what to say -- sure hope the officers there read the riot act to the troops, make sure no shit happens.
Is this a parody of an angry Lefter denouncing BusHitler-Halliburton, or something?
Iran's Foreign Ministry spokesman, Hamid Reza
Asefi, called the bombing "barbaric terrorist act" and blamed U.S.-led forces in Iraq for failing to provide security in Iraq.
"The wrong approach of occupying Americans and their failure to be accountable in Iraq has spread violence and terrorism in this country. Terrorists, relying on America's wrong approach, continue their crimes," state-run television quoted Asefi as saying.
He certainly has a point: there was no terror in iraq untill the invasion - i do not see how the US can avoid taking responsibility for the currernt state of affairs:
It is W's idiotic crusade and partly Rummy who decided to go in with not enough forces to secure the peace that is allowing the wackos to flourish.
Abu Ghraib and the other HR violations perpetrated by the "coalition" also serve as a fine recruiting tool and ensure that there is a constant supply of osama wannabes.
All this is american made. The fact that this is not intentional is irrelevant - ineptitude is a poor excuse.
To the contrary, I think the Iranians are getting to taste some of their own medicine. After all, it is they who have fomented a substantial amount of the current mayhem in Iraq. So complaining now that some of their own have been blown up by the kind of land mines they have been supplying tosundry insurgents and terrorists (how's that for interfernce in the internal affairs of a sovereign country? or do rules apply only to the US, in the Left's textbook?) is the height of chutzpah.
oh, cut the Left boogeyman crap.
I am not arguing that the responsibility isn't shared. But I don't think that taking credit for the sporadic positive developments in Iraq
(capture of saddam, offing zarky,etc...) while finger pointing for the major failures (eg check out this article on corruption), the state of virtual civil war, is convincing.
More specifically, the US invaded a country in which there was already considerable pre-existing sectarian tensions. But in the process, they failed to predict how removing the baathists who terrified their population into good behavior would allow for the sectarian violence that we see today to flourish. Naturally, because they didn't predict it, they failed to prepare for it.
This is a major american fuck up that results largely from the short-sightedness of the DOD which exclusively focused on defeating the (already diminished) iraqi army and not give any thought to the day after.
Post a Comment