Congrats, bush! Didn't think it could be done. But you did it.

[LynnTheDem]

Winners and losers:

I think the big losers from the Najaf episode (part deux) are the Americans. They have become, if it is possible, even more unpopular in Iraq than they were last spring after Abu Ghuraib, Fallujah and Najaf Part 1.

The US is perceived as culturally insensitive for its actions in the holy city of Najaf.

The Allawi government is also a big loser. Instead of looking decisive, as they had hoped, they ended up looking like the lackeys of neo-imperialists.

*note: coz that's exactly what they are?*

The big winner is Sistani, whose religious charisma has now been enhanced by solid nationalist credentials. He is a national hero for saving Najaf.

http://www.juancole.com/

As we were polling at 96% hating us this past spring, and we're more unpopular now... Who woulda thunk bush could make us EVEN MORE HATED by the people he says we had to "LIBERATE"!




http://www.juancole.com/

[chelsea0011]

1. How many US soldeirs died there?

Sadr is a terrorist? Is that what this was all about? He had something to do with 9-11?

[mhollis]

3. Sadr is a terrorist now.

Let's say that Muqtada al-Sadr probably was not a terrorist before we attacked Iraq but like many others he became one once we "liberated" the country and he realized that there would be little liklihood of any organized attack on the Shi'ia like there was after Gulf War I.

It has been my contention that Shrub has been creating 1,000 terrorists weekly with his current actions, mostly concerning the Middle East, including his unconditional re-support of continued illegal Israeli settlement construction in Palestine as well as his indefensible pre-emptive war in Iraq.

And I may be underestimating that number.

[LynnTheDem]

4. No

No Iraqis had anything whatsoever to do with 911.

al Sadr is a Shi'ite religious cleric who is very popular with Iraqi Shia youth, especially from the slum area of Baghdad.

He wants us gone. Actually all Iraqis want us gone & they never wanted us there in the first place.

But bush had to have a Bad Guy. When we couldn't find bin Laden, Bad Guy became Saddam Hussein. Then it was al Zarqawi's turn at Bad Guy but we can't find him, either. So then the cleric speaking out loudest against bushCartel and invasion/occupation, al Sadr, became Bad Guy.

He's not a terrorist. He's fighting US forces, and he has the legal right to do so. Geneva Conventions say so.

Oh. And his dad became a great martyr when Saddam Hussein had him killed because he kept speaking out against the Iraqi government.

The irony there is one for the history books.

[gratuitous]

6. Yup, al Sadr becomes The Terrorist of the Week (TOW)

There was a letter to the editor (LTTE) this week in the local paper about what a bad, bad man al Sadr was and always had been. How it was vital that the U.S. take him out, because otherwise we'd never have peace, and how al Sadr was just waiting for a chance to terrorize America if we didn't deal with him now.

I was flabbergasted, because the EXACT SAME THINGS were said about bin Laden, Hussein, Chalabi (briefly), Zarqawi, and probably some others whose turns as TOW I've forgotten. Every couple of weeks, the name changes, but the same overheated rhetoric is applied.

Naturally, by pointing this out, I am clearly marking myself as Someone Who Hates America, but you know, I don't give a flying Cheney what that segment of the population thinks.

[Toots]

2. As Bush* so fondly says "Who Cares What They think"

:shrug: I guess we won't be seeing flowers anytime soon.

[LynnTheDem]

5. So

You're trying to say the choccie is out, too???

:D