What if we have the Iraqi Shi ites motives all wrong?

[Dhalgren]

What if the Shiites are wanting to make sure Saddam is dead not because they want to support the U.S. and are affraid of retaliation, but because they want to wait and rise up against the U.S. only after they know Saddam cannot come back? They may prefer to take their chances with U.S. occupation rather than have Saddam come back. But if they know the old devil is really gone for good, then rise up and oust the occupiers.

Just a thought that occurred to me as I was working in my yard.

[west michigan]

1. 2 to 1....

....they think that we are easier to get out of thier country than s.h.

[Dhalgren]

3. You're right,

no way would I take that bet.

[Against ME]

2. Or what if they're waiting for us to leave?

And then they will "rise up", and take control. All they would have to do is get the Kurds and Turks in a fight, and then dominate the rest of the country.

[David__77]

4. You are very much correct.

The main strategic thinking of the religious forces is that, for now, they will not conduct armed struggle. They want to "use" the US/UK to annihilate the Ba'ath forces. Once that is in the main accomplished, then the strategy changes to one of power seizure and anti-occupation resistance. No way are they allowing a pro-Zionist US lackey government to emerge. This war has more facets than are currently on display. In fact, it has been said--exactly what you theorize here.

[leesa]

5. Either way they are going to throw the US out because we invaded

them to destroy their culture and steal their oil. Why on earth would any country allow an unprovoked invasion if they have the ability to kick the invaders out?

[Porcupine]

6. All the of the squabbleing factions hate us for some reason.....

The ONLY thing I can see that they agree on is that the U.S. should pack it's bags and leave. As long as our soldiers are there it gives them something else to do other than killing each other.

[rustydog]

7. Pardon me but, "We'd be knee-deep in Shi ite."

Isn't that a correct assumption?

[Noordam]

8. You could be very right

Both US and Britain, have a major problem. The voters do not want to see a lot of dead troops. To get the US or UK out of Iraq, they know all it takes is the large scale killing of US/UK troops.

[lanlady]

9. that's exactly what they're doing

Paradoxically, the deaths of Uday and Qusay will probably hasten along the anti-US revolt.

[DrBB]

10. A lot of non-US commentators have said exactly that

I've read it several times recently--that fear of the Saddam and the Baathists retaking power has actually acted as a brake on the violence and less fear of that outcome may translate to more violence against Americans.

Of course there is a lot of wishful thinking in the Arab press about this kind of thing because Saddam's rapid fall, even though they hated him, was experienced as a humiliation. (That's also why this whole adventure is shaping up as a disaster b.t.w.--a sense of national and personal humiliation is a far greater cause of terrorism than than poverty or some of the other things usually cited). So it maybe should be viewed with some skepticism. But I believe Robert Fisk has reported this among others.

Fisk has also reported that the reason the Shiites have been relatively passive while the Sunnis have been responsible for most of the guerrilla attacks is not because, as Friedman would have it, they are "giving the Americans a chance," but because they are content to let the Sunnis carry the risks and consequences in the belief that it will strengthen their own position when the US leaves.

[Pepperbelly]

11. I think we have precipitated yet another Islamic Republic...

which is not, I suggest, what anyone was wanting. These bozos in the WH are incompetent.