# Contact info submission url: exile-blog.blogspot.com site_owner: address1: address2: city: state: country: postal_code: phone_number: display_email: site_name: site_description: The Exile

E-Mail Me

My Twitter

Top Blogs


Campaign 4 Public Ownership



Mothers For Justice

Ian Josephs

UKSecretCourt's Videos


Chris Paul

David Lindsay

Heresy Corner


Martin Meenagh

Neil Clark

Organised Rage

Renegade Eye

Serb Blog

Splintered Sunrise

Star of Vergina

Unrepentant Communist


British Politics

Censorship 01






New Britain 01

New Britain 02


Social Work Industry


Working Class

Atom Feed

XML Feed

10 January 2008
Iraq is now a three-sided conflict
There is probably not a better time for the Americans to up sticks and leave Iraq than right now. Luckily for anti-imperialists everywhere they seem unlikely to take the opportunity to proclaim victory and clear out. Thus the war will go on until finally they are forced out without the face saver that is available to them right at this minute.

What has happened over the past few months is not difficult to understand. The Sunni were waging a highly decentralised form of guerrilla warfare against the occupation forces. The strategy worked very well until about June of last year when the Askariya bombings brought them into open conflict with the Shia militias.

The Shia had built these militias up not to fight the Americans - although some conflicts had taken place - but to prepare for the post occupation civil war that everyone knew was on the horizon. Askariya just brought that forward and the Sunni guerrilla groups found that they were no match for the Shia militias. So the Sunni did what any tribal group will do at a time like that: they cut a deal with the other armed group that was around, which just happened to be the Americans. Under American sponsorship, the Sunnis have built up a militia formation of their own, and during the last few month of 2007 American casualties began to fall dramatically.

However this is unlikely to last because now that both sides have their militias, they can each start to look for advantages against each other. If the Americans side with one militia in one area, then the faction that feels left out will attack American forces. The Americans will find that they are fighting the Shia is one district and the Sunni in another. The interesting thing about all this is that because the Iraqi forces are tribally based, these alliances can shift in the blinking of an eye. So with luck we can sit back and watch as bewildered Americans get shot at tomorrow by their allies of yesterday.

The important thing here is that whoever wins these bloody conflicts, at the end of the day America loses.

The important thing here is that whoever wins these bloody conflicts, at the end of the day America loses.

So, really, the Arabs are just cannon fodder for your fantasies about world socialism. Your great merit, Exile, is your candour. As is mine :)

Your analysis is off, anyhow. The USA can play divide and rule. Indeed, it should do so across the Muslim world, so we have a good, long period of Muslim fanatics slaughtering each other (cf. my recent post on Pakistan). Bad blood needs to be spilt. I'm hoping for a new period of real politik where the West clearly understands who it's enemies are, forgets all the nonsense about trying to civilise them, and aids them in their exit from the world stage once and for all.

10 January 2008 at 15:49  

They are trying it and it isn't working. That is why I called it a three-sided conflict. Any local agreement with one faction will lead to the other resisting.

War goes on: fuckers continue to bleed.

10 January 2008 at 18:15  

Post a Comment

Links to this post:

Create a Link

<< Home