This is an effort to spread some real knowledge about Iran and it's influence in Iraq.
Yes, knowledge gained by one who knows the area like few commentators do.
Knowledge, not propaganda, which is all we hear from The Washington Post, and most media types and "experts."
What we used to simply call "truth" has gone by the wayside.
Politicians such as McSame, Bush/Cheney, Rice, and sadly, Hilliary "obliterate"-Iran Clinton all seem to have the same goal and it is not protecting our freedoms. It is trying to controll oil-rich countries. McCain just accidentally admitted it. What they are good at is in obfuscating the truth. They have taken on the nefarious practice of confusing a lot of propaganda with a snippet of truth, and then blurring it all together with the hope that The People will not understand and see through their shameful tactics.
What does a true expert know? Can you stand the truth, America?
Below you will find truths, reported by the man I believe to be the most objective and knowledgeable source on Iraq and the Mideast today.Nir Rosen's article.
:::
The great thing about Nir Rosen's insights is that they emanate not from supposed knowledge but from real, on-the-ground observation and information gathered from five years in Iraq as an Arab speaker who is able to blend into the society. I've written about his observations in a couple of earlier diaries. Rosen testified recently before the Senate Foreign Relations Committee. It must be very very frustrating to him to observe all the comfortable ignorance and arrogance close at hand although I applaud the Democrats for having him there.
Now a regular contributor to Washington Note, Rosen's fascinating piece "Selling the War in Iran," argues that Washington is all wrong about Iran and its influence. The whole dynamic of what is going on in Iraq is completely misunderstood by most "experts" who do not really know the people, culture and religion of Iraq and Iran.
Here are the some unfiltered truths from Nir Rosen:*
:::
1. Iran is allied with Maliki, not Sadr.
The leadership of the Iraqi government regularly consults Iranian officials and is closer to Iran than any other element in Iraq today.
2. Iran helped end the Basra fighting--at the request of Members of Iraqi's Parliament who support Maliki.
The truth is, most allegations about Iran's role in Iraq and the region are unfounded or dishonest. Iran was responsible for ending the recent fighting in Basra and calming the situation....
...Iran has no global ambitions and no interest in attacking the U.S. and in fact has never invaded another country (Iraq started the Iran-Iraq war).
3. Iran is "annoyed" with Muqtada al Sadr, had him under house arrest during his recent six month stay and "reportedly ordered him out of Iran." Iran supports Maliki and his government. Iraq's government welcomed Ahmadinejad with open arms in Baghdad recently.
Why assume that the Bush administration's interests are more legitimate than (Iran's)? What is wrong with Iraqi resistance groups that oppose a foreign military occupation that has killed and imprisoned thousands of innocent civilians while bringing only ruin an already tortured country?
It's quite clear that Bush/Cheney are going to bomb insurgent sites in Iraq unless somehow stopped. Clinton supports this as well as McSame but Obama supports talking before acting.
4. Some say go ahead and talk "first" --but that's just in order to get more traction on the bomb-a-thon motion.
"By trying to talk," [O'Hanlon] writes, "we better position ourselves to get tough and have others join the effort." Remarkably, he hopes the talks would fail. "Only by patiently trying to work with Iran, and consistently failing to make progress, will we gradually convince Bush-haters and U.S. doubters...."
5. Stupid "experts" such as Kagen and Pollock make repeated errors, lack true knowledge, yet are still listened to.
...the Americans have shown no improvement in their understanding of the Muslim world with which they are so deeply engaged militarily and as an imperial power.
6. Iraq's Ministry of Interior is quite openly dominated by Badr (Iranian) militia, and creating more militias is not a long-term solution.
the Badr militia was a branch of the Iranian Revolutionary Guard that is so demonized today, and Badr dominates the ministry of interior, if not most of Iraq at the higher echelons.
If militias are the main problem in Iraq, then the U.S. policy of creating new Sunni militias and empowering them to rule walled off fiefdoms does not bode well for the weak Iraqi government, especially when these Sunni militias view the Iraqi government as their main enemy.
7. WaPo and other media and government officials wrongly simplify everything that happens in the mideast as being of Iranian or AQI origin.
... social and political movements in the Middle East (are) the collective action of poor and oppressed people. People in the region were anti-American before Islamism became the dominant trend, and they were battling American imperialism as secularists and nationalists.
8. Condi Rice has no understanding of the what her administration has done, doesn't realize the US is more reviled by Arabs as a threat than is Iran.
The idea that the Sunni dominated states around Iraq, which dislike Shiites, and which warned Bush not to invade Iraq because they feared a Shiite dominated states, would now persuade Iraq's Shiite leaders not to have a strong relationship with their Iranian friends shows some lack of understanding.
9. Iran is pragmatic, and Adm. Mullen was wrong about Iran wanting Iraq to be weak.
....Iran is a positive influence in Iraq, that it has a close relationship with the Kurds and the Shiites and ...unlike its Sunni neighbors, is not sectarian and is very pragmatic. If Iraq's Sunnis dislike Iran it is because Saddam Hussein initiated a war of aggression against Iran and succeeded in demonizing Shiites.
Rosen ends with this:
10. The worst is yet to come. Yikes:
Beware, the worst is yet to come.
*I believe I have complied with fair use requirements since this was a lengthy article.