Bush's reasons for the war have all gone by the wayside.
Iraqi connections to 911? Nope.
Iraqi WMDs? Nope.
Flypaper strategy? Not working, lookit London.
The final excuse has been "Bring Democracy to Iraq and make the world a safer place".
That one's now gone, too, but few people know about it.
If http://www.needlenose.com/ isn't one of your daily stops, it oughta be, because Swopa has been all over this for months.
I'll cut-n-paste excerpts, but you should go here http://www.needlenose.com/node/view/1815?PHPSESSID=5071d93637c4bb70218b14b03716f8d0 to check it out.
More below the fold. This is long, but worth the trouble.
If Bush's rationale for invading Iraq had been, "Depose Saddam to make Iraq into another Iran", nobody but nobody would've backed the war.
Turning Iraq into another Iran is EXACTLY what is happening, in a slow motion train wreck kind of way.
Swopa quotes AP:
"The United States is pressuring Kurds to accept demands of majority Shiites and Sunnis on the role of Islam in government in order to reach agreement on a draft constitution, a Kurdish official taking part in the negotiations said early Saturday.Those demands would give the Muslim religion a bigger role in Iraqi society at the expense of women's rights and civil liberties, said the official, who refused to allow his name to be used because of the sensitivity of the issue.He told The Associated Press that Kurdish leaders who support more secular policies are bowing to American pressure -- dropping among other things their demand for self-determination, or the right to secede. A U.S. Embassy spokesman said he was not aware of results of the latest round of talks, which started Friday and were continuing into Saturday morning. If the Kurdish claims are true, it would appear the United States wants to please the Shiite majority in order to get a draft charter finished by the Monday night deadline."
Next, this from deep in an article in today's NYT:
"Friday's attack in Mosul came as Iraqi leaders in Baghdad reached tentative agreement on the role of Islam in the state, Iraqi leaders said. Under the deal, the constitution would designate Islam as "a main source of legislation," and would prohibit the passing of any legislation that contradicted Islam's "fixed principles." Iraqi leaders said they had also reached a tentative agreement to relegate marriage and family matters to adjudication by clerics, an arrangement opposed by secular leaders and women's groups here, Iraqi leaders said. The tentative agreements on Islam were brokered by the American ambassador, Zalmay Khalilzad, according to a Kurdish negotiator who spoke on the condition of anonymity, citing the delicacy of the talks. The Kurdish leader said that in both cases, Mr. Khalilzad had sided with Shiite leaders in backing a more expansive role for Islam. That, the Kurd said, angered many of the secular-minded Iraqis who have been fighting for a stricter separation between Islam and the state. According to the Kurdish leader, the secular Iraqis had pushed for language that would have narrowed the circumstances under which legislation would be deemed to be in conflict with Islam. And, according to the Kurd, the secular Iraqis had wanted marriage and family disputes to be adjudicated by civil courts, not by clerics. "Your American ambassador is giving an Islamic character to the state," the Kurdish leader said. "You spent all this money and all this blood to bring an Islamic republic here." "We are very worried," he said.
I'll bet the Kurds are pissed off. We should be, too. Just think - 1800+ dead, tens of thousands wounded, hundreds of billions spent, and what we've done is create another Iran. Another state that we'd be afraid to see become a nuclear power.
You got that? Islamic clerics will settle civil disputes, women's rights and civil liberties will be according to Islamic (sharia) law, NOT according to secular constitutional law.
How far are we from Fatwas in Najaf being more powerful than legislative rule?
Not far at all - Swopa quotes Juan Cole, quoting al Hayat:
"The third is amendments to the law of personal status, which guarantee a bigger role for clerics, as well as the inviolability of the Shiite religious authority in Najaf such that the state formally willl abide by the fatwas of the grand ayatollah. Likewise, there would be a council for the protection of the constitution.
"
Get that? The state FORMALLY WILL ABIDE BY THE FATWAS OF THE GRAND AYATOLLAH.
How is that different than what exists in Iran? Answer: it's not different.
Finally, Swopa foound this nugget in an Italian paper:
"IRAQ: SISTANI AGAINST KIRKUK'S INCLUSION IN KURDISTAN Arbil, 19 August (AKI) - Iraq's most influential Shiite cleric, Ali al Sistani, has come out against the incorporation of the northern city of Kirkuk, one of Iraq's riches oil producing centres, into an autonomous Kuridsh state. "His Excellency [al Sistani] will not allow Kirkuk to be included in Kurdistan since it belongs to all Iraqis regardless of their national, religious and confessional background", said the Iraq news agency, quoting a press release from Sistani's office."
You get that? Sistani will NOT ALLOW Kirkuk to become part of a Kurdish state.
I bet the Kurds are thinking, "who the fuck does Sistani think he is?"
As Swopa notes, Sistani has the power to call 100s of thousands of Shia into the streets. I'd go one further - Sistani has the power to urge 100s of thousands of Shia to WAR. And that's what the Kurds fear.
Congratulations wingnuts. Your shit for brains president and his team have created another Iran, and we're all screwed. Even worse, we are powerless to turn it around.
Great work, Swopa.