US has been actively supporting the pro-Iranian/pro-occupation Hakim clan for the past three years

[Emit]

This is a post from earlier this year:

US has been actively supporting the pro-Iranian/pro-occupation Hakim clan for the past three years
Posted by Emit on Sun Jan-14-07 07:17 AM

I was just doing a little research to help myself understand, as best I can, the dynamics of the various groups in Iraq in relation to this part of what Bushco just spewed this week:

...Al Qaeda terrorists and Sunni insurgents recognized the mortal danger that Iraq’s elections posed for their cause. And they responded with outrageous acts of murder aimed at innocent Iraqis. They blew up one of the holiest shrines in Shia Islam – the Golden Mosque of Samarra – in a calculated effort to provoke Iraq’s Shia population to retaliate. Their strategy worked. Radical Shia elements, some supported by Iran, formed death squads. And the result was a vicious cycle of sectarian violence that continues today.

So Junior sez Al Qaeda and Sunnis blew up the Golden Mosque and are the main instigators in the insurgency. Then he mentions Shia elements, "some supported by Iran..." And then he continues with "...This begins with addressing Iran and Syria. These two regimes are allowing terrorists and insurgents to use their territory to move in and out of Iraq. Iran is providing material support for attacks on American troops. We will disrupt the attacks on our forces. We will interrupt the flow of support from Iran and Syria. And we will seek out and destroy the networks providing advanced weaponry and training to our enemies in Iraq."

I had seen recently during a discussion, (I think it was Richard Holbrooke on Charlie Rose), that Maliki is closely aligned with Sadr and therefore is in a tough spot to deliver on the benchmarks -- because he'd have to confront Sadr. And I thought I saw a piece posted earlier today or yesterday here on DU about how we've funded/armed the Iranian supported Shi'ites -- which I now can not find -- which got me curious to try to piece it all together in my mind.


So, I found this piece detailing some distinctions between the Shiite factions, excerpted below, but I am uncertain as to how accurate it is. If it is correct, then it does seem that the US has actually been aligned with the very same Shiite group, Hakim's Badr/SCIRI Shiite, that Bushco now claims are being supported by Iran.

Anyone able to shed some light and help me understand the dynamics here. Does this seem correct info?

US has been actively supporting the pro-Iranian/pro-occupation Hakim clan for the past three years with weapons, military training, and with efforts to staff the Iraqi army, police, and civil bureaucracies and ministries with Hakim followers, in a similar way to how US is supporting the Iraqi Kurdish pesmerga militias.

~~snip~~

In brief summary then:

Hakim's Badr/SCIRI Shiite organisation is:


1. Pro-Iranian
2. pro-US occupation, and a US proxy-ally force against Iraqi nationalist/anti-occupation groups inside Iraq, at least tactically,
3. Anti-Baathist, anti-Saddam, anti-Sadrist
4. Pro-Iraq partition-fragmentation

Muqtada Sadr's Mehdi/Maliki Shiite organisation is:


1. Pro-Iraqi nationalist; not historically aligned nor particularly friendly with Iran
2. Anti-US occupation; considered to be a threat by the US
3. Anti-Saddam; anti-Hakim; sought alliances with non-sectarian Sunni nationalists in outlying Sunni regions.
4. Opposed to Iraq partition-fragmentation.

For the past three years the US has been supporting the Pro-Iran Hakim Shiites and building up their power as a fighting force against both Sunni and Shiite Iraqi insurgent groups. At the same time the US has been working to wipe out the pro-Iraqi-nationalist Sadr Shiites.

http://72.14.253.104/search?q=cache:fUOool_cvH0J:theforvm.org/diary/pumpkin-ash/there-are-iraqi-shiites-and-there-are-our-pro-iran-shiites+iranian+shiites&hl=en&gl=us&ct=clnk&cd=10

http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=show_topic&forum=364&topic_id=3117417#3117523

[peacetalksforall]

1. I can't speak as an educated person, but two years ago I had a gut

feeling that we had some kind of a deal with Iran that superceded everything else going on.

I wish I could go way back for support and proof, but for years before that I read about the good relationship between Israel and Iran.

Never trust our own country is what it's ending up to be as we learn what's going on. In some ways Dick and George and PNAC have caused all of us to learn a lot more and they are going to suffer fewer wins with the light shining on their agenda and methods.

Just so there is no bombing of Iran.

The other huge factor in trying to figure out maniacs is the deal-betrayal-revenge aspect of these people. They use our kids for fighting their wars over deals gone bad. From Noriega to Hussein. They use our kids, our tax money, our good will, our trust.

Leader to leader to leader - we are victims. Corporations and Israel - we are the victims. Barons - we are the victims. We = the little people.

[bemildred]

2. Shhhh, we're still in the two-minutes of hate.

America has always been enemies of Iran.

[peacetalksforall]

3. Don't abandon you're pursuit - go for it. Thanks for our education as

fragile as it is right now (if in understanding, if nothing else).

[Emit]

4. I check into it every few weeks

I always like to know what prolixity Ledeen is spewing: http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=view_all&address=389x1902271


I read this recently:

~snip~

Our most recent and more private exchange with the leaders of Hamas and Hezbollah took place in the immediate aftermath of the Palestinian elections. During the week that we spent in Beirut, no fewer than five workshops and conferences were held in Washington, DC, on the implications of the Hamas electoral victory, which included discussions of the group's political program and its leadership. A number of those experts were invited to join our delegation. All refused.

So too, one of America's most highly regarded experts on Hamas acknowledged to us personally that he had "never met one of them", though he has written innumerable papers and monographs describing their views and held conferences on who they are and "what they want".

~snip~

http://atimes01.atimes.com/atimes/Middle_East/HD01Ak02.html

Previously posted here:
http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=show_mesg&forum=389&topic_id=1895988&mesg_id=1895988


Makes me realize that we may never really know the truth as it pertains to our dealings with the ME.