E-mail updates
Follow on Twitter
Subscribe to RSSBy Richard Engel, NBC chief foreign correspondent
BAGHDAD - Every conversation I have in Iraq these days reaches back in history. When I ask policemen, government officials or Iraqi journalists what they think will happen after U.S. combat troops leave at the end of this month, our discussions inevitably become two-hour examinations of Islamic and Middle Eastern history. This is not simply an American pullout. Here August 2010 is seen as a turning point for Iraq.
The biggest concern many Iraqis seem to have is that the U.S. combat withdrawal will leave a power vacuum that will be filled by Iraq’s traditional rival and longtime enemy, Persian Iran. For seven years the United States has exerted its influence in Iraq bluntly, sending in troops, tanks and contractors. Iran’s strategy to influence its neighbor has been slower, cheaper, but also effective.
In the early 16th century, just a few decades after Christopher Columbus landed on America’s shores, the last great Islamic empire was fighting to rule the Middle East, the Mediterranean and the rest of the world. From his capital on the Bosporus, Istanbul, the hero of the Ottoman Empire Sultan Suliman “The Magnificent” seemed undefeatable. Suliman’s mission was to impose Ottoman domination around the globe. His call to war was jihad. Suliman believed he was a Muslim successor to the Roman Caesars. He liked to be called Caesar. Suliman’s dream was to unite the world under one ruler and one God. Suliman’s ability to raise soldiers, build warships and transport armies was unmatched by his Christian adversaries in Europe. Suliman skillfully used North African corsairs, Christian mercenaries and slaves and an elite corps of riflemen armed with arquebuses to spread the Ottoman superpower.
While European armies fought Suliman with stone-ball cannons, swords and “Greek Fire” - a medieval flamethrower - one city-state tried a different approach to confront the Ottomans. The Venetians were the great shippers of the age. It was a lucrative trade that made the people of St. Mark so wealthy they built their almost magical capital on water. Despite their riches, the Venetians knew they could never confront Suliman in a direct flight. So the Venetians played coy and used politics. The Venetian strategy was to undermine the Ottoman Empire from within. They spied relentlessly on the Ottoman court, the “Sublime Porte” in Istanbul’s opulent Topkapi palace. They bribed Ottoman officials handsomely. They bought Suilman’s advisers summarily. It allowed the Venetians to confront a superpower, at least for a while.
Five centuries years later, many Iraqis believe Iran has played a similar game with the United States in Iraq. Iran knew it could never take on American army divisions and Air Force wings in a direct confrontation in Iraq. So Iran infiltrated the Iraqi government. For seven years Iran has spied relentlessly on Iraqi governments in the Topkapi of today, Baghdad’s grim, prison-like Green Zone. Iran has bribed Iraqi officials handsomely. Iran has bought Iraqi advisers summarily. It has allowed Iran to confront a superpower, at least for a while.
Iran could well be the biggest benefactor of the American withdrawal.
Richard Engel will be providing special coverage throughout the U.S. drawdown. Check back here at worldblog.msnbc.com and at nightly.msnbc.com to follow his reports.
Leave a Comment:
It will happen,when we pull out Iraq becomes an Irian state pure and simple,they have nothing to fight it with and I don't think anyone will help them.then Iraq will have all of Iraq's oil reserves and an embargo will take place which our allies will ignore and world prices of crude will skyrocket and everyone will wring their hands and say what do we do.when they get Iraq saudi arabia will be next with help from syria their butt buddy in terrorism and then they will control all mid east oil.might take a few years but I think sooner rather than later.Israel better sharpen their knives because they'll be on their own then.
Our president is making yet another stupid mistake, or is it on purpose? I don't know, but everthing he does seems to be counter-productive to us United States citizens. While our forces are strong in that region, we need to bring the Iranian scum down a few notches where the threat from them is significantly reduced. If they're busy rebuilding Iran, they won't worry so much about Iraq.
You do realize that sunnis and shia muslims hate each other over there, right boba?
The Bush years of foreign policy have, and will continue to make the world a more dangerous place for America. Nation building abroad using American style democracy as a template does not, and will not serve our best interests. He pushed for "free elections" in Palestine and what did he get---Hamas. He pushed for democracy in Iraq and what did he get----a Shiite government controlled by proxy in Iran. He pushed for democracy in Saudi Arabia and thankfully they turned a blind eye or we might have Al Qaida controlling huge oil reserves. We have suppressed the Sunni minority so much in Iraq that there is little chance of Iraq becoming a moderate Arab country. The Iran, Syria, Lebanon, and Iraq block for the future will be the dominant force in the Middle East in less than 2 years time. Israel will be in their cross hairs which will ultimately result in a regional war that we will be a part of due to our alliances. My fear is a collapse of our economy due to a major disruption of oil supplies, or sabotaging the oil fields of Saudi Arabia and the UAE nations friendly with the West. I hope the petroleum reserve is brimming to the top because we will need it---don't count on the Venezuelans for support when this conflict comes. Perhaps Bush and Cheney should appear before Congress when this happens and stripped of their generous government pensions and perks.
i find the shiya and sunni muslims hating eachother absolutely dumb. We are all Muslim's, shouldnt we love each and every brother and sister despite his personal opinion.
Despite Iraq's Shia majority,don't discount their hate for Iran. Any politicans who are found to be Iranian plants would be wise to break camp or they very likely won't live to collect a pension!
This is a typical cynical piece of anti-U.S. military trash journalism. Nothing positive can ever be written about Iraq because a) it might reveal that removing Saddam wasn't all bad and b) the surge worked in preventing a civil war and bringing stability to Iraq.
We relieved them from tyranny.........and gave them anarchy..........Mission Accomplished!
"then Iraq will have all of Iraq's oil reserves"
perhaps you should proof read your ranting before you post. shows your are either an emotional liberal or in too much of a hurry to appear educated. perhaps you were trying to text at the same time you type?
windsong - i see some liberal wackos can equate Bush to just about anything. you do realize sunnis and shiites have been fighting for centuries, right? these types of posts only show how uneducated and brainwashed far left wackos can be.
stop the maddening
It is Bush's fault that we put the Shiites in power. They do think very much like Iran in that religion should be the law.
There are many Iraqi women who now fear they will lose all the rights they had under Saddam who actually did believe in "separation" of law and religion.
He may have been a real bastard, there is no denying that but at least he prevented the religious crazies from taking over.
Politically we really did not do them any favors.
Thanks Georgie W and Dickie C for giving our arch enemy Iran this opportunity. But, Saddam was a "bad man", so I guess that equalizes everything. Again, where's bin Laden? Thanks Bush / Cheney for all of those fun (fruitless) years!
Iran would continue to influence Iraqi Shi'ite Muslims loyal to Iranian Ayotellah Khomeni, but not the rest of the country, or they might start a civil war.
Here is the problem with this simplistic formula, American withdrawal = Iran takes over. Iran is a Shi'ite Muslim nation loyal to their religious leader, Ayotellah Khomeni. Their most direct connection is Iraqi Shi'ite Muslims. However, there are Iraqi Shi'ite Muslims loyal to their own religious leader, Ayotellah Sistani. Shi'ite militias from both groups have on occasion fought each other. I do not think the Sistani Shi'ite Muslims would necessarily align themselves with Iran. This is mainly the reality in Southern Iraq.
Then you have the Sunnis Muslims in Eastern Iraq and the Kurds in Northern Iraq. The Kurds are ethnically and culturally different than other Sunnis Muslims and are very independent. They would never start a coalition with Sunnis Muslims due to Saddam's genocide against them.
Iran could certainly try to expand their influence, but the ruling party has problems in their own country. Iran's president just survived an assassination attempt. Trying to expand influence in Iraq might put the current Iranian regime at greater risk.
Stop the madening, Stop your rantings! I think everyone knew what boba meant (Iran and Iraq.) We all read the same article. Its just that the rest of us are not total azz's like you and feel the need to correct someone for their mistakes in grammar. You look like a real jerk or do you not realize that? LOL, I don't even know why I bother to explain common courtesy to a person like you.
I TOLD ALL OF YOU THIS WOULD HAPPEN.
Iran uses the Al Quada, Taliban, Hamas Foreign Fighters, Chechen Foreign Fighters, Libyan Foreign Fighters, Kurdistanis (as Foreign Fighters), etc. as Proxy Fighters.
China and the Russian Federation use Iran as Proxy Fighters. China and Russia provide Weapons and Technology to Iran in exchange for Iranian (soon Iraqis Oil also) Oil.
To all the Bush Bashers. Bush was obeying the Law to Overthrow the Iraqis President and Iraqis Parliamentary (Democratic) Government. This turned into a US Military Action after the Oil Lobbyists to US Congress demanded this to stop Iraqis Oil Nationalization (Iraqis take control of Iraqis Oil away from US and Foreign Oil Corporations). US Congress's response was to fully fund, pre 9/11 2001 US Military Actions and the Law (Overthrow) then political posturing (jumping up and down like the Gorillas in The Planet of the Apes). The original Law that demanded the overthrow of the Iraqis President and the Iraqis Parliamentary (Democratic) Government was from President Clinton's State of the Union Address (First use of the term WMD). Many "believe" (as in make believe) that this did not include US Military Actions, like Operation Desert Fox, December 1998. This is the original Declaration of the Current War at Iraq, with Congress amendments to include US Military Actions (War).
The use of Iran as a Proxy Fighter goes all the way back to the Iran Iraq Wars, with Iran being backed by the USSR.
My US Military Officer Involvement with the "Middle East" since the 1980s.
Fred G., you're really wrong. Muqtada al-Sadr is in Iran right now. He's been there for three years. He controls the Mahdi army. They have been waiting - biding their time - because they have always known the ultimate outcome. This is what Iraqi's know. They need a strongman. It has always been so, and it is not likely to change soon. It's the Kurds that are the X-Factor. They want their own country.
stop the maddening's disdain for "liberals" or assumed "liberals" is... maddening! How many centuries have the Protestents & Caholics been fighting?
Stop the Madening:
It is always easy for some to paint others who differ with them to be a liberal. It might surprise you to know I voted for Bush and almost always vote for conservative candidates. I consider my vote for George W to be the worst vote I have cast in my lifetime. The Iraq War is the only war in history where the cost of war has, and is being fought with borrowed money, while at the same time he cut taxes (primarily for the richest Americans). Stragegists for the Bush Administration believed that if Americans don't feel the financial pain of war they will either support the war or be indifferent---this plan, regardless of how harmful it might be to the country, would at least get them through a couple of election cycles (2 terms). Little wonder the national debt balooned out of proportion during his tenure. Any war we fight should be given the litmus test of worthiness by paying for it as we fight, and yes that means raising taxes. Being the fiscal conservative that I am, I think it is a tragedy we have mortgaged our childrens future, and increased our dependence on China to finance our debt. We have to ask ourselves if the treasure and blood we have spent in Iraq is worth the end product in Iraq once we leave. The jury is still out, but I feel the nation will experience great heartache when the next chapter in Iraq unfolds. The threat that is more real comes from Iran, however, given our shaky past rationale for war in the eyes of the world and our meager balance sheet to afford another conflict, we now find ourselves being reactionists after the world starts spinning out of control.
you Bush bashers sure are a hoot!!! lol...
Let's start with this. Iraq, least you all forgot has its own elections, and YES Iran has it's little grubby paws in the works, has for years, unless you forgot the the previous meda report, as tohow people in Iraq sisnt want to vote due to the Iran influence i'd have to say.... 2yrs ago, shortly after the Clown was elected.
Let's not also forget, the majority of the Iraqies do not like Iran, or it's policies, yet still this is what i think will happen, and yet i be proved wrong, lol...( i been on a streak for a while, and it scares me).
After we finish our "pull out", i give it....say 1-3 months, ans sectarian violence will be as rampant as it was after Saddam was captured... When the people of Iraq, came to terms, Saddam was never going to see the light of day alive, was when all hell broke loose. So when Iraq see's we are gone, and may never darken a doorstep there again, it will happen. It will be even worse than it was when we were there, as far as sectarian violence goes, and we will do jack sh!t to help, that's the US and our "we care for the world" for ya.... After that, perhaps Iran will have a good lil' buddy in power in Iran, who says "screw the US, Iraq, and Iran are going to pull peters and be a union of our own, what ya gonna do?"
if gas and oil go sky high, it's our own people's fault for letting bs get in the way of what we went there to do in the first place... get rid of sh!t head leaders, and get some kind of democracy going. You as well as i know when we go, so does the new life many Iraqies looked forward to. freedom being the biggest one, as well the new constitution. Some will shrug their shoulders....put it off as "oh well, there's America for ya". and will be right. Personally, i would have had our boys there, or at least a firm presence for about another 2-5 yrs. That's what ypu do to make something work, and have something to show for your efforts outside of little crybabies making a bunch of noise because it takes a few extra bucks. Some people are so so sad, and Some of the Americans (as i am) should hang your heads in shame putting the almighty $ over the cost of freedom.....
Its going to happen whether we like it or not. Iran is waiting in the wings for their entry into Iraq and the take over of its oil rich holdings. Iran will then have its own source of refined gas and other oil products that they currently do not have.
This is old news. The Shiite belt will be complete Syria Iraq Iran. This was why bush was a moron for removing Saddam who was keeping Iraq Sunni controlled and against his neighbors. This has been a known fact for 40+ years. Welcome to reality not even some yellow cake covered this up but being ignorant of how the arab world works thanks bush.
If Iran is determine to do this, so be it. Just so they understand that in no uncertain terms, Tehran will be a smoldering ash heap if they do.
Only time will tell if Bush was right for removing Saddam from power in Iraq. I don't believe we, the public, will ever know the truth about the WMD's or Saddam's support for terrism against the west. But you are correct, in my opinion, that Saddam was very instrumental in holding back Iran. As you should recall, the U.S. supported Saddam in his war against Iran. Now with Iraq having a weak government at best, the country will be easy prey for Iran. Honestly, we should have attacked Iran instead of Iraq. Iran is behind all of the instability in the Middle East. But realistically, it doesn't matter what we or anyother country does in the Middle East. That entire area has been living by hate and death for 2,000 years. It is engrained in their lives. It takes about twice as long to break a habit as it took to develop it. So maybe in 4,000 years democracy will finally take hold.
Yeah! Obama is much better at foreign relations! Especially when talking about the Middle east!
Kiss their ass, bow to them, apologize.......
We're lucky to have such a wizard at the helm!
Hell, we even allow Imademonjob to come on over and tell us what he's going to do with us infidels after he's through with Israel!
I feel so much more secure now that Obama is our....ahem...."leader"!
Bush obeyed the fully funded Overthrow of the Iraqis President and Iraqis Parliamentary Government US Law passed by President Clinton. Even US Presidents must obey the Law(s) or be Impeached (like Clinton).
I'm not so sure about Syria. Syria has a Sunni majority - the opposite of Iraq. It is a highly secular government - mullahs do not run things, the Baath Party runs things. This was the same formula Sadaam used to keep control of the population.
There is no doubt that Iran will inflict it's influence in Iraq once we leave. What moron didn't know that right from the very beginning, oh sorry it was W and his band of thieves.
We handed Iraq to the Shiites, which is what Iran is and have totally upset the balance of power in the entire middle east. This was a for gone conclusion right from the beginning.
We need to elect polititions that will stop "nation building" and policing the world and sending our tax dollars overseas, it's not working for the people of America and it's cripple our own country.
Too bad we are not able to hold those responsible for the lies that got us into Iraq in the first place, accountable.
Anyway, whats done is done, it's time to get out of Iraq and Afganistan, let those folks worry about their own problems and focus more on America, there is plenty that needs doing right here at home.
saddam may hav done some horrible things to his people but he knew then what we no now?? it was the only way to keep the religious fanatics from taking over?? i say that we cant saved the world!! we need to start taking care of our own!! people living in the streets, stealing because they cant get a job, the frustration of not being able to support yourself or family pushes people over edge into crime, sometimes assault and murder... but we just give pakistan 10million?? how much money did we give to indonesia?? Iraq?? bosnia?? afganistan?? who knows who else or how much?? I live on $100k per yr. can probably get by with less.. would 10 mil. help a few homeless people?? it would cover unemployment for a while?? what about the mexican border problem?? racism?? homophobia?? I dont give a @!$%# bout iraq , iran, russia, afganistan, etc. etc.... make me president for one day and everyone wud be riding bikes to work... we are spoiled beyond repair...afraid to make neccasarry sacrifices for the better good..@!$%# the oil!! pull all troops back to american soil to protect our borders, airports, ports of entry... deport all illegals, feed the homeless,declare a moratorium on immigration from all countries accused of terrorism... WE ARE DOOMED IF WE DONT!!
The Kurdistanis were NEVER Iraqis. Since the 1980s they (men, women, teenagers, children) have been the ARMED allies of Iran. Research PKK, HPG, etc..
Again the LACK OF KNOWLEDGE, especially President Clinton claiming the Kurdistanis were Iraqis that Chemical Weapons were used against. And not what they actually were, the Armed Allies of Iran, killing Iraqis during the Iran Iraq Wars.
And what would the US do under the revised Insurrection Act. Same thing President Saddam Hussein did, Summary Executions of those committing Treason (attempted assassination of Iraqis President and overthrow of Iraqis Government, funded by US under H.R.4655.).
I absolutely agree with you, fishydigit. We need to take care of our home before we get evicted.
Iran is the biggest benefactor of the US invasion of Iraq. Infuriating, but true. Bush and Blair should be punished for their stupidity and arrogance.
Absolutely true. Huge mistake taking out the Iraq regime that basically had Iran neutralized militarily. Iraq was harmless to every nation but Iran and we should not have bothered with Saddam. We cut off our nose to spite our face.
blame the right people, US would be US Congress, no appropriations equals no War. UK, Parliament, no appropriations equals no War.
Bush, Blair AND Obama for his continuance of and escalation of the war
Uinted States has long had the ambition to take over the Persion Empire. Jews and the Zionists have also strongly advocated, groomed and promoted this dream. US has tried invasion and faced heavy resistance, and most likely has to change its strategy. The after WWII US/Israeli deceit policies are being revieled and people around the world are finding the tools to such powers. One can not advocate peace and democracy on one hand and invade and support Israel on the other hand.
The God of Abraham, Isaac, and Jacob Will put an end to evil on this earth, Soon!
This is so true. Everything is falling into place just like the Bible said it would.
Akhzo - you are so transparent spewing your tired old rhetoric, blame the US and Israel for all the worlds woes. How uttterly pathetic you are. Obviously adhering to Ahmedinijad's (sp?) hatespeech, I would hazard a guess that you are either Iranian, a supporter of Iran, or some such other hate-filled fear mongering fool who believes all the latest conspiracy theories posted in the Egyptian tabloids. Why the F**K would the US want to invade a backward dump like Iran??? Oil, I don't think so, If we wanted to "invade " countries for their oil do you think Iraq would be gettinig ready to fumble around on it's own, and yes, most likely become an adhoc puppet of Iran??? We could have stayed in Saudi Arabia and made Aramco an American company again if we were so hell bent on that nonsense.
I predict that Iraq will either become simply a puppent of Iran, or if Iran tries to press their influence on Iraq openly you will see a splintering of Iraq into 3 seperate ethnic entities, Shiite, Sunni and Kurd, but only after a full blown bloody civil war, which Akhzo will most likely blame on the US and Israel as well...
Actually , the U.S. has put itself in a position where they need to invade Iran. Without Saddam in power and a weak Iraqi military , Iran would quickly consume Iraq and destabilize the region even more. Israel would not last the decade in such a situation.
Here's a new idea: instead of blaming EVERYTHING on the U.S. and Israel, get the Muslim world to totally renounce terrorism! If the Muslims would leave the rest of the world alone, i.e. no suicide bombings, no planted bombs, kidnappings, high-jackings, other acts of terror, do you think then that maybe, just maybe, America and Israel would stop shooting back?
We bombed Tripoli in direct response to terrorism sponsored by Qaddafi. We sank a large portion of the Iranian Navy because of their unprovoked attacks on shipping. We invaded Iraq because of their invasion of Kuwait. We invaded Afghanistan because of the Taliban and Bin Laden. We invaded Iraq a second time because they violated UN sanctions.
Israel generally attacks when Hamas attacks them first. They did the world a favor when they destroyed Iraq's nuclear reactor. Read your history books - how many times has Israel attacked anyone without provocation? While you're at it, research how many wars have been at least in part due to UN sanctions?
Prior to the formation of the UN we were very good at getting the mission done and over with, with the exception of spending of billions of dollars to rebuild the countries that STARTED the hostilities with us. Post UN: Korea, Vietnam, Iraq, Afghanistan, Lebanon, Bosnia, Somalia. All have become military failures in the long run. Only Grenada was truly successful - in and out - students rescued, mission accomplished.
We did NOT retaliate when Iraq hit the USS Stark with two Exocet missiles. We did NOT retaliate against Yemen when the USS Cole was bombed. We will eventually invade Pakistan if they continue to allow terrorist camps within their borders.
Weapons of Mass Destruction WERE found in Iraq. Saddam was ordered to destroy all missiles capable of carrying biological and chemical warheads. As well as all facilities for producing such weapons. The liberal press didn't dwell on these discoveries for long: 70+ Scud missiles were found, with empty chemical warheads. Three mobile chemical labs were found. Multiple violations of UN mandates.
Sarin gas - very little is needed to arm a warhead and possibly wipe out an entire city. Consider the size of Iraq - roughly equal to Texas. Give me a container the same size as that used in the Scuds, then give me 24 hours to hide it somewhere in Texas. I guarantee you won't find it without sheer dumb luck! And consider this: Saddam had nearly a decade to hide anything he didn't want found.
If he didn't have any chemical weapons, then why keep the manufacturing labs and the Scuds? He may have avoided war if he had simply complied.
So, I say again: What would the world be like if the Muslims stayed at home and left the rest of the world alone???
Ummm... if the US wanted to be in Tehran right now there's not a damn thing the entire Muslim world could do about it. We're just not willing to accept the losses, but the outcome would be pre-determined. Believe it, Akhzo.
Akhzo,
Is it that time of the month to pay Islamic Believer Tithes. Your post indicates as such.
As the Holy Koran (Quran), Calls to War Against the "Unbelievers" (specifically the Jews and Christians, Sura9.30). Either Kill or Subjugate, Suras 2.190 to Sura 48.16 (there are many more but vague about who to kill or subjugate).
Also do not even attempt to deceive (lie to) the "Kaffir" in accordance with the Koran (Quran), Hadith Laws, Fiqh Laws, Sharia Laws, etc..
You guys don't see what the big O and his people are up to? Of course Iran going to try something as soon as the US pulls out. Then Iraq will scream and that will give the big O his go ahead to invade Iran and not look bad in front of the rest of the world or the American people. Dang I can almost hear his "we must protect our friends" speech right now.
Turkey invades Iraq & brings peace & stability to the region. 500:1? Any takers?
And the conspiracy theories abound. Bush was the greatest Wartime President we have ever had and the newest President will go down as the biggest dove. What Bush did was rally a nation to get behind a common goal. To be a patriotic American. That used to be par for the course until the Liberal Elitists of this country started listening to dirty Middle Eastern rag-a bouts spewing Anti-American vitriol because that's what the mullahs tell them to say. America is not the criminal state that the far left make us out to be. And i hope and pray that Iran is next on the bombing list. If the weak citizens of these countries will not rise up in huge numbers against the relative few in power who hold them down, Then you deserve whatever bombs fall upon you, kinda like 911 for us. Revolt and take your country back from the thugs, stop being cowards and then call America names for protecting you.
Larry996- RIGHT ON! Wow- I'd like to buy the next round and wait for his answer....
If that was true Moron we would have already done it!!!! and could still do it.... where do these JACK a@@es come from?
Duh...9+ years ago this scenario was a no-brainer. Man, we have a bunch of geniuses in Washington don't we? That goes for this administration and the one before. These lawyers in D.C. not only know nothing about economics, they know even less about world history! Vote em all out!
This scenario was being forcastprior to Bush's war with Iraq. Its too bad the neocons wouldn't listen to the naysayers about the possible consequences of the war. They were too busy trying to please Sharon and his dreams of an oil pipeline from Iraq to Israel, which would never materialize, as long as Saddam Hussein was in power.
Now after 4500 American soldiers have been killed, hundreds of thousands suffering from various war related injuries and the US saddled with trillions of dollars of debt, we lose again. But our loss isn't quite enough to please the zionists in the crowd. They are now trying to justify attacks and a possible war with Iran, over the possibility that Iran might one day develop a nuclear weapons program, something our intelligence agencies have agreed they do not have today.
You should tell Obama that then. Apparently he doesn't know. http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=cCsfWYmkFTs
And using "they think" to lie about what I really think in public is a pretty weak argumentative method. Did you not have hard facts to use for your debate and had to resort to incorrectly reading my mind? In the video above it's Obama threatening war, not "zionists" as you put it.
Well the brief history lesson was nice. But I would have expected a more in depth analysis with some factual information to back it up in talking about the situation today. Especially from NBC's Chief Foreign Correspondent. And of course Iran benefits from the withdrawal. They no longer have to worry about our troops coming into Iran from Iraq, in the event that military action becomes a reality in response to Iran"s refusal to stop it's nuclear weapons program or in the event Iran, or one of it's proxies, decides to stop ships from passing through the Persian Gulf . Perhaps in response to sanctions or the break out of conflict between Israel and Lebanon or Hamas in Gaza.
BTW,the article does not even begin to discuss what knowledge the Obama administration has of Iran's spies and bribery and to what extent their efforts have/will undermined US policy in the region. Or does the Obama administration simply not care and is willing to turn a blind eye to it all for the sake of being able to say back home that he ended our involvement in Iraq (albeit on the terms and schedule established by Bush)? How will this come back to bite US in the long run if we leave it unchecked? What is Iran's goal in Iraq? Take over or just the establishment of a more friendly neighbor? Or is Iran trying to put itself in position to be able to have access to or control over Iraqi military hardware and man power or oil?
And when can we expect the"journalist" over at NBC/MSNBC (or the other media outletsfor that matter) to start asking Obama and his cabinet members some real foreign policy questions, and not the puff ball questions we all know the answer to already. Here are a couple you can ask: Mr President, Sec Gates and Sec Clinton have both stated that the sanctions being imposed upon Iran will not stop Iran from building nuclear weapons. At best, they say, the sanctions will only slow the progression, which Mr.Netanyahu has stated is moving forward daily, if sanctions and/or further talks do not result in Iran voluntarily giving up it's program, what is the next step(s) you will be taking to gain their compliance? What is the time table that you envision before those next steps will be taken? If Iran does not cease pursuing it's program and they are allowed to build nuclear weapons, estimated to be in the next several years, how will the US be able to prevent Iran from taking over Iraq or from supplying it's terrorsit proxies w ith nuclear weapons or dirty bomb materials, that you said you have no doubt they will use if they get their hands on them, to be used against Israel or the US? As it stands right now, what is there to stop terrorist from mounting an attack on US soil by entering the country via our porous borders?
There is no doubt oth the Iranians and the Iraqies look at this situation from their own historical perspectives. This is the biggest error in policy surrounding the Iraq war. There is no doubt Iran is deeply involved in manouvering the Shiite government in Iraq right now.
We must remember that all of the countries in the Middle East were created, almost arbitrarily, by the British when they were the controlling power from India to Egypt. The persians have always thought of themselves as the dominant culture in the region and, since the fall of the Shah, have been planning the expansion of their power and influance for the establishment of a new Persian Empire. I believe the goal is to control the Tigres and Euphrates valley and the oil wealth that goes with it, and to dominate Afganistan to control the mineral riches in that country. Having said that, I also believe the generally well educated Iranian people would, in the end, like to be an ally of the US and not an enemy.
Iran is very different than the other countries in the Middle East. They have a very old culture that is much less tribal based than thier neighbors. Dispite their recent move toward a strong theocracy, and the secular resistance to this, they are still all Persians and are more, or less, unified on the principal that they should be a strong political player from Afganistan to the Egyptian border.
The Iranians can play a long game here. They are already 30 years into it and have established power centers in the Mediteranian Middle East and with the Iraq war have done the same thing in Iraq, the big prize.
In the long run, I don't see how the US is going to stop them. They understand what is necessary much bette than we do and military confrontation will not be sucessful against the type of influence thay are able to bring. Our best bet is to engage Iran diplomaticaly and give them a presence on the world stage. Dispite the recent election, the Iranian people have a much deeper belief in democracy than any of the other countries in the region. Iranian infuence in Afganistan would not necessarily be a bad thing, they have no love for the Taliban or Al Quida. Iran is a power in the Middle East and we are not going to change that - we must accept it and act accordingly.
This was a foregone conclusion and part of the reason Bush Sr. wisely decided against toppling Saddam. He's bad, but he keeps Iran in check. We broke the balance of power, and we're worse off for it.
Told you so
Normally, anyone that uses the term "Zionist" is almost certainly a bigoted jerk. As for Iran infiltrating Iraq's government...wow, there is some news for you. Hey, did you know the desert is relatively dry? Come on, I expect better reporting from the "chief foreign correspondent". Now, if you really want to impress me, tell me HOW you know this information and, more importantly, if there are any steps being taken to remedy this. If not, then there is your real story. Lives are being bartered away and yet this marvelous reporter can't seem to address the main issue of the very story he writes. Iran is not evil, but the leadership is, and we as a nation either need to back off and let the (contiunal) war rage between all these nations or we need to plan for another massive war. I agree, we aren't the international police, but either get in it to "win" or get out. I'm tired of my fellow countrymen paying the price for being half-assed in our committments.
Hi, Richard.
Thanks for another great blog posting. I so enjoy learning from you. All I can say in this is, I had a feeling. Iran benefiting from the US withdrawal. It's unfortunate, but I don't see how we possibly could have avoided it.
Thanks for all your reporting! You and your crew take good care in Baghdad.
-Cary
Hi Richard: I've known about this since before the U.S. invaded Iraq. It doesn't bode well for the U.S.
dumb article with absolutely no proof to back up his baseless allegations. This is like other baseless allegations from the past like "Iraq behind 911", "Iraq has WMD", etc.
Unfortunately it seems like many people posting comments actually buy into these theories. Perhaps they could share some real intelligence/proof on this matter....
Ask the kurds in karbala if Sadaam had sarin gas back in '86. Ask Iran if Sadaam used biological weapons in the Iran-Iraq war. Is that enough proof for ya?
Yeah. Saddam had a huge network of refineries & factories to produce the stuff too. The only reason why America didn't find the WMD is because they(Americans) blew it up in the invasion. Now the wacko libs are using the effects of superior American firepower to score political points! Just like in Vietnam.
jr-700062, where did Iraq aquire the technology and supplies for chemical weapons? the USA under Reagan as they backed the Iraqis during their war with Iran. You give a monkey a gun and he shoots someone, do you blame the monkey? When Reagan took office, his administration along with Western Allies gave technology to Iraq to build WMD but Israel took them out in 1981. Reagan was upset 1st but then realized it. Matter of fact, before the technology was handed over, the US took Iraq off its terrorists list. Ah then came the Iran-Contra and you can't tell me that Reagan didn't know what was going on as Ollie played the scapegoat to protect Reagan from impeachment and Bush Sr. from a political career. Getting back to the topic, FREEDMAN1 is correct as Al-Sadre is getting an education in Iran. Al-Sadre was a Shiite stronghold until the SURGE and he is waiting it out just like Iran. Sure Saddam was somewhat ruthless but the country was stable. OF ALL THE CIVILIANS SADDAM USED IN A GENOCIDE, THE SECTARIAN VIOLENCE IN IRAQ RIGHT NOW IS COSTING MORE LIVES AND THIS IS JUST THE BEGINNING. Al-Maliki lost the power in Parliament by a couplke of seats. Recentle the Shiites were trying to align but without Al-Maliki, what does that tell you. What's the saying "Don't add gas to a fire" and Bush Jr and his cronie, Cheney did that. Bush left a hell of a mess, economicalyy and foreign policy wise and you right-wing nuts expect the annointed one as the exaggerated commentator HANNITY would put it, to wave his magic wand and everything would be fine. Saddam had nothing to do with 9/11. Unless there is a base built in Iraq, Iraq will be very vulnerable. DAVID475776, yes Clinton was in office in 1998 but the Congress was controlled by the Republicans.
Hi Richard! Thank You for the Excellent posting!
Iran is really benefitting from the American withdrawal from the region. One always hopes for peace for the civilians.
Please Stay Extra,Extra Safe Always!
Take Extra Good Care You anc Your Crew!
Lisa
If the Iran dictatorship ... er ... I mean theocracy, attempts to control Iraq, it's at great risk of spreading itself too thin. With all of the problems it's having controlling its own citizens, I'd like to see what happens if they try to control Iraq's as well. Good luck!
We are not going anywhere...50,000 troops will remain to 'advise' and look at the embassy we built there...you think we built it to turn it over to Iraqi troops? No, we're staying...
This was my problem with Iraq war from the start. Iran's greatest enemy was Saddam Hussein's army. Bush and his various brains decided at some point to change the focus from Afganistan, where the people who planed the 9/11 attack lived, to a war with Iraq for some reason, that might never be known, unless it was really all about the oil. Now billions of dollars, almost 5000 dead Americans, and millions of dead Iraqis later we give Iran a strategic advantage in middle east. This is what happens when the reason we elect a president is based on that maybe you can sit and have a beer with him.
Was not Bush was President Clinton and US Congress that passed the Overthrow Law (Declaration of Current War At Iraq, 1998).
And what was the effect of that resolution? Was it acted upon? Just wondering, if the (Republican majority) Congress passes a reslution during a democratic administration, would it be the same as the administration having promoted that idea even if it didn't act on it? Regardless, have you ever wondered why that resolution was passed, who the people behind it were, and if any of them rose to power within the Bush administration?
No worries, the Mayan calendar ends in 2012.
True enough, but the folks in the Middle East don't use that calendar.
Thank you, Cheney/Bush. Could not have done it without you.
Exactly right. Iraq (under Hussein) was the only entity that kept Iran in check in the past. Now that the U.S. has removed Iraq as an obstacle, there's no telling how far Iran might go.
Iran's not "going anywhere." There's no such thing as "Iran" in their minds. It's Persia. And in their minds, their not Iranians, their Persians and Shiites (1a and 1b). Iraq's Shiites share the same identity. Shiites will unite under their "Supreme Leader" regardless of artificial boundaries on a map. But they won't expand beyond their current local dominance. And it's not the US that will keep them in check- it's Russia.
Typical uninformed post.
Abdul,
What right do you think you have to bad-mouth a past US president?. You shouldn't even be in this country. You should be home making your own backward azz country a little better. And on that subject, Don't come here for our Advanced Schooling, Doesn't Cairo have a University. For all of you smart azzed middle eastern transplants, you should be praising America as the Sanctuary you know it to be when compared with the grotesque sharia laws you would be dealing with back home. Consider this, would you ever have posted this anti Bush message about your home countries leader and do you really think that you would still be alive 24 hours later. I think not. Know your place and be gracious to your hosts who won't unilaterally chop off your hands for stealing some bread. Honestly, people have no respect for those who have saved them from a worthless life at home. Ingrates.
Hosni Mubarak of Egypt begged W. not to invade Iraq, since he knew perfectly well that it would only spread Iranian Shiite fundamentalism. But W. and Cheney thought they knew better.
Now the Republicans are trying to blame Obama for their stupidity.
Did I mention that the French were against it for much the same reason? All the Neocons could offer was American Fries, which is the extent of their geopolitical abilities, then or now.
The French, against war, what a surprise, since they suck at it. I do like crepes, and thanks for the Statue of Liberty and berets.
Total baloney. If you believe this article you are a fool. To extrapolate from the Ottoman history to today's Iran is ludicrous at best. Sure Iran has interests in Iraq. And it has interests in Afghanistan. But, to think it will take over either is foolish at best. Just more propaganda to justify the paranoia about Iran. Iran hasn't attacked anybody for over 300 years, longer than the US has been around(which is constantly attacking other countries and is continuely at war). As far as the Shia/Sunni conflict goes. It was basically a forgotten subject between the people of Iraq until the Bush gang changed that with their fake war(based on lies) against Saddam. Iran today supports the Islamic Emirate of Afghanistan and their militia the Taliban, which is basically made up of Sunni Muslims. This article is disinformation, as is most of what you read about that part of the world.