It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.

Please white-list or disable AboveTopSecret.com in your ad-blocking tool.

Thank you.

 

Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.

 

WAR: US Staging Clandestine Destabilization in Iraq

page: 1
0
<<   2 >>

log in

join
share:

posted on Feb, 14 2005 @ 06:30 PM
link   
Iraq's Shi'ite south contains some of the world's largest oil fields. A strong movement is emerging for Shi'ite provinces to separate under "vilayet-e-faqih" or "rule by the clergy," and to control their own oil for their own benefit. Asia Times reports that the US intends to head off this threat with a clandestine operation, similar to the strategy employed in Afganhistan. Over the past few weeks, "the US has procured Pakistan-manufactured weapons, including rifles, rocket-propelled grenade launchers, ammunition, rockets and other light weaponry. Consignments have been loaded in bulk onto US military cargo aircraft at Chaklala airbase" and taken to Iraq. The US is "resolved to arm small militias backed by US troops" and "nip the evil in the bud."



 



www.atimes.com
Now it emerges that there is a strong movement in southern Iraq for the establishment of autonomous Shi'ite provinces as a precursor to introducing vilayet-e-faqih (rule by the clergy) in the whole country.

Of these calls for autonomy or federalism, the most disconcerting for US authorities is the call for religious rule. Already, leading Shi'ite clerics in Iraq are pushing for "Islam to be recognized as the guiding principle of the new constitution".

To head off this threat of a Shi'ite clergy-driven religious movement, the US has, according to Asia Times Online investigations, resolved to arm small militias backed by US troops and entrenched in the population to "nip the evil in the bud".

Asia Times Online has learned that in a highly clandestine operation, the US has procured Pakistan-manufactured weapons, including rifles, rocket-propelled grenade launchers, ammunition, rockets and other light weaponry. Consignments have been loaded in bulk onto US military cargo aircraft at Chaklala airbase in the past few weeks. The aircraft arrived from and departed for Iraq.

The US-armed and supported militias in the south will comprise former members of the Ba'ath Party, which has already split into three factions, only one of which is pro-Saddam Hussein. They would be expected to receive assistance from pro-US interim Prime Minister Iyad Allawi's Iraqi National Accord.

"A similar strategy was adopted in Afghanistan during the initial few years of the anti-USSR resistance [the early 1980s] movement where guerrillas were supplied with Chinese-made AK-47 rifles [which were procured by Pakistan with US money], Egyptian and German-made G-3 rifles. Similarly, other arms, like anti-aircraft guns, short-range missiles and mortars, were also procured by the US from different countries and supplied to Pakistan, which handed them over to the guerrillas," the analyst maintained.

People from different walks of life from Basra and other southern provinces can be heard on television and radio channels demanding a federal system in which southern Shi'ites could govern their oil resources for their benefit.

Notably, Ahmad Chalabi, a leading secular Shi'ite candidate in the Iraqi elections, has called for autonomy for the Shi'ite south, which contains some of the world's largest oil fields. Chalabi, a former US favorite who fell out with Washington after the 2003 invasion, said the move would ensure a fairer share of wealth for a region that provides the bulk of Iraqi revenue but receives only a fraction of state spending.





Please visit the link provided for the complete story.


Given the various religious factions already at loggerheads in Iraq, it will not be difficult to de-stabilize the country. Chaos soon will reign, and require intervention. Doubtless the appropriate dictator is already chosen.

Iraqis might find a solution to their problems if they are left on their own. Separating into autonomous regions might be a necessary step on Iraq's path to democracy. Apparently, Iraq will not be given the opportunity to find out, or to find its own way.

Apparently, the US only supports the right kind of democracy.




This is a breaking story and will be updated as news comes available.


Related News Links:
www.ict.org.il
www.mercurynews.com

[edit on 14-2-2005 by soficrow]




posted on Feb, 14 2005 @ 07:47 PM
link   
Hey I guess US will support a civil unrest after all, what a way to play the lives of the people in other countries.

Chalabi while he was still a "Friend" of the bush administration and an adviser, he had the idea that after the invasion of Iraq the countries should be divided by areas, Kurds in the norths Sunnis in the west and the rest to the Shiites.

So the country oil could be equally divided between US oil base companies.

Well I guess that perhaps that's the whole idea after all.

Giving them "democratic" elections was just a front for popularity approval for bush, but the plan for Iraq is still in the making.

What a mess, and the people in Iraq are the victims and so are we the american people and our soldiers that had been suck into this mess.



posted on Feb, 14 2005 @ 08:03 PM
link   

Originally posted by soficrow
Apparently, the US only supports the right kind of democracy.


And terrorists.

So we're supplying arms to "militias" now? To (is this right) beat back the clergy?

Isn't this how and why we made Saddam in the first place?

[edit on 14-2-2005 by RANT]



posted on Feb, 14 2005 @ 08:16 PM
link   
You know I knew that the Shiites will get divided if left alone and that the control would have shifted to Shiite leader Sadr an Iraqi and not under Al-sistani, but no US can not leave them alone.

Now US have to ignite a civil unrest.

So what role our soldiers are going to play in this scheme now?



posted on Feb, 14 2005 @ 08:21 PM
link   

Originally posted by RANT
Isn't this how and why we made Saddam in the first place?





www.idleworm.com...

(See the Pick The Saddam scenario)




History never repeats
I tell myself before I go to sleep
Don't say the words you might regret
I've lost before you know I can't forget

There was a dictator I used to know
He dealt my love a savage blow
I was so dumb, too blind to see
But anyway that's history




posted on Feb, 14 2005 @ 08:26 PM
link   
Well, I had always heard that those who didn't study history are doomed to repeat it, or something along those lines. Come on, you had to know this was coming. In a sick, perverse sort of way, it feels good to be right.

I seem to recall posing these questions last week:



Which leads to all sorts of new implications. While Abdul-Aziz al-Hakim insists that he will not have a cleric-run state, what happens if he does what so many other politicians the world over do and changes his mind? Do the US troops get to 'liberate' them again or would a theocracy be accepted?

and


If this happens, will the US administration be able to gracefully accept the will of the people of Iraq?


I like to show people where the water is. It's up to them if they choose to drink.

Strangely enough, discussion ended quite quickly. I'm a thread killer.

www.abovetopsecret.com...



posted on Feb, 14 2005 @ 08:40 PM
link   
Duzey obviously US can not and will not accept the will of the people of Iraq, it will rather have a couple of hundreds of thousand die on a civil unrest that let them have a theocracy in control, occurs only if is like in Israel.


So I guess you are right, and not you are not a thread killer you just have some strong points.



posted on Feb, 14 2005 @ 08:40 PM
link   
I know it won't happen but we should let them divide the country however they want.

In Bush's state of the union address, he spoke of spreading freedom everywhere. I guess he should have said "after we invade you, and only if it's our definition of freedom."

This type of forced nation-building has not worked very well in the past. Countless wars have been fought in Africa over borders abritarily made by colonial invaders.

If we really believed in freedom and self determination we would let this happen. It would be a small step in restoring our reputation in the world.

However, for political and diplomatic reasons this will probably never happen.

Turkey would probably immediately declare war on any Kurdish nation formed out of Iraq. The U.S would probably declare any Islamic nation in Iraq terrorists, and act accordingly.



posted on Feb, 14 2005 @ 08:58 PM
link   

Originally posted by marg6043
Duzey obviously US can not and will not accept the will of the people of Iraq, it will rather have a couple of hundreds of thousand die on a civil unrest that let them have a theocracy in control, occurs only if is like in Israel.



And I'm sure the US can expect the Thank You card from the Israeli government in the next few days. I'm sure they are pleased as punch at the prospect of another Muslim theocracy in the neighbourhood.




posted on Feb, 14 2005 @ 09:14 PM
link   

as posted by Duzey
...prospect of another Muslim theocracy in the neighbourhood.


Not so super sure that there will be "another Theocracy" in Iraq as there is in Iran, Duzey. Israel has no need to be sending a "Thank You" card anytime soon, eh? Guess you and some tohers missed these mentions?
Iraq's Shiites rule out Iran model: Political coalition says it won't create an Islamic theocracy
Shiites in Iraq Say Government Will Be Secular
U.S. Officials Say a Theocratic Iraq Is Unlikely
Rise of Iraq's Shiites could pose threat to Iran's clerical rulers

You see, the point here is that all Shi'ites are not the same. Iraqi Shi'ites are distinctly different from Iranian Shi'ites. Did you see any of those Iraqi Shi'ites go over to the Iranian Shi'ites side during that Iran-Iraq war or vice versa? Not that I am aware of. The chances of a Shi'ite Theocracy government, like Iran's, is unlikely, very unlikely. I may eventually be proven wrong on this, but I don't think so. Time will only tell though.





seekerof



posted on Feb, 14 2005 @ 09:28 PM
link   

Originally posted by Seekerof
Not so super sure that there will be "another Theocracy" in Iraq as there is in Iran, Duzey.


Never said 'super sure', I used the word prospect.


pros·pect
n.
Something expected; a possibility.

dictionary.reference.com...


The older I get, the less super-sure I am of anything. There is always a possibity I could be wrong, and I welcome the chance to expand my knowledge at any opportunity, for precisely that reason.


Israel has no need to be sending a "Thank You" card anytime soon, eh?


You're right, you probably won't receive a card. Nobody ever says thank you anymore. Good manners have become 'uncool' these days, it seems. And I do recall many American's saying nobody ever thanked them for anything, and they would know better than I, so I will concede that you probably won't get a card.

See, I can admit I'm mistaken



PS your new avatar is very 'intimidating'. I just wish they could have chosen a more flattering picture of Ms. Rice. As a female, I know how upset we get when a picture that might not be our best is widely circulated. She's not an unattractive woman, and that picture does not do her justice.

also, excellent use of 'eh'. It's nice to see cultural awareness.


[edit on 14-2-2005 by Duzey]



posted on Feb, 14 2005 @ 09:48 PM
link   

Originally posted by LeftBehind
...we should let them divide the country however they want.

In Bush's state of the union address, he spoke of spreading freedom everywhere. I guess he should have said "after we invade you, and only if it's our definition of freedom."










This type of forced nation-building has not worked very well in the past.




For the nations, no. For the colonizing corporations, yes, it has worked extremely well.




If we really believed in freedom and self determination we would let this happen.




True. But we're not letting it happen, so what does that tell you?


.



posted on Feb, 15 2005 @ 06:09 AM
link   
Did I not say this facade of "free elections" was a sham? How can you have forced free elections? What you are seeing now is the classic NWO trick "divide and rule" the Iraqi have been given a false sense of freedom and now to ensure political instability and to widen the rifts between minories, an opposition will be created and weaponized.

I've never seen it so blatantly obvious. Ah well, on the bright side, America is going to hell soon anyway. So let it bask in the sun light, then it will bask and bathe in the thousand suns of Russian nuclear light.

[edit on 15-2-2005 by Indigo_Child]



posted on Feb, 15 2005 @ 06:59 AM
link   
Ahmad Chalabi Is Probably Still A U.S. Operative

The circumstances around his public row with the CIA remain suspect -- in my opinion anyway.

It had all the appearance of a domestic dispute taken out into the street so the neighbors could see it.

If Chalabi actually were guilty of what he was accused of, he would have been dealt with quietly. Count on that.

Now he's a "renegade" stirring up trouble while the U.S. does its best McCaulay Culkin routine and frets and fumes on the sidelines.

Um, yeah, right.


Based on several other stories I've seen come from the Asia Times, I'll wait for some corroboration before I believe their claims about uncovering a "highly clandestine operation".

They may have indeed done so, but I've seen the disinformation game played enough times before to reserve judgment pending further facts

But keep an eye on Chalabi. If I'm right, he's still a U.S. player.



posted on Feb, 15 2005 @ 07:33 AM
link   

as posted by Indigo_Child
Did I not say this facade of "free elections" was a sham? How can you have forced free elections?

Oh, yes, you certainly have said so on numerous unsubstantiated occassions. This is but another. Pardon me though, please enlighten us as to how the Iraqis were forced free elections? Would that be because Saddam was toppled from power by us and theose who also joined? Or would that be because you have finally obtained photographic evidence to illustrate that the Iraqis had guns pointed to their heads and were made to vote?



Ah well, on the bright side, America is going to hell soon anyway. So let it bask in the sun light, then it will bask and bathe in the thousand suns of Russian nuclear light.

Huh? You are a seer and fortune-teller now? Can you weave prophecy, also? Personally, when and if such does take place, may you be basking in that same "Russian nuclear light" as I will.





seekerof

[edit on 15-2-2005 by Seekerof]



posted on Feb, 15 2005 @ 08:15 AM
link   

Originally posted by Duzey I just wish they could have chosen a more flattering picture of Ms. Rice. As a female, I know how upset we get when a picture that might not be our best is widely circulated. She's not an unattractive woman, and that picture does not do her justice.


Not Unattractive!?!?! She puts the 'butt' in 'butt ugly'!

But watch & re-read some posts on how the Bush Babies ( Seek, Thomas Crowne , a.k.a the Ususal Suspects!
), rally arou
nd her like she's Vanessa Williams!


On thread:

It's highly plausible that we are stage managing militias via proxy; warfare is never soley a direct offensive.
Why? It's a blood barter, whichever way you slice it: a seperate state within US Iraq securing an OPEC seat would be regularly attacked by US forces, labeled a "threat" & be another US Oil Intrests "Jihad". This saves that action.
Besides, all of the Anglo-US oil conglomerates are not about to let a save-able destabalization of profits occur if it can be countered by their proxy armies in the UK/US.



posted on Feb, 15 2005 @ 08:20 AM
link   
Ha ha, US/GB are in Iraq for the oil. Everything else is just a sideshow to facilitate that goal. If you're using the liberation and democratization of Iraq to feel patriotic you're either delusional or in for a big letdown.

Besides that, there's no democracy anywhere in the US constitution. We're a republic. lol



posted on Feb, 15 2005 @ 10:14 AM
link   
I'm not going to put my full faith in this article which claims some mysterious knowledge of US movements to arm Sunni militia against Shi'ite seperatists. I see several possibilities:

1. Those who wish to paint the news in an anti-American light are referring to the Iraqi National Guard as a militia. Yes we are probably arming the Iraqi national guard- would you prefer that we made them a protectorate and stationed troops there permanently?

2. Somebody else is arming Shi'ite seperatists for a good row with America and is leaking propaganda to their media to make it look like America's fault.

3. Maybe their wrong about where the weapons are going. Maybe America would covertly support Shia seperatists and just pretend to lose to them. Afterall, if they don't have to share with Sunni Iraq they can give more to us.

4. Maybe Jason Blair wrote this story.

There are other possibilities of course, including that the story may be true. I'm just going to reserve judgement and wait to see if there really is any disturbance in Iraq. I will bet you almost anything that non-regulated militias WILL NOT be used or supported in Iraq unless they formally join the Iraqi National Guard. America doesn't need well armed factions at war in a nation we're trying to do business in. We went in to Afghanistan specifically to END a problem like that. We only create such problems when other countries are doing the occupying.



posted on Feb, 15 2005 @ 10:28 AM
link   

Originally posted by The Vagabond

1. Those who wish to paint the news in an anti-American light are referring to the Iraqi National Guard as a militia.




Not anti-American. Anti using the US as a front for corporate colonisition.





2. Somebody else is arming Shi'ite seperatists for a good row with America and is leaking propaganda to their media to make it look like America's fault.




A possibility. Still, is standard US strategy. Ie., Afghanistan, Central America.





3. Maybe their wrong about where the weapons are going.





Looks confirmed. They had the point of origin, plus the drop-off airport.






Maybe America would covertly support Shia seperatists and just pretend to lose to them. Afterall, if they don't have to share with Sunni Iraq they can give more to us.





We don't get anything. The multinational corporations get the plunder - and don't even pay taxes in America.




There are other possibilities of course, including that the story may be true. I'm just going to reserve judgement and wait to see if there really is any disturbance in Iraq.




Good plan.


Very often, stuff like this is leaked to give players negotiating power - and/or to sabotage the plan and prevent escalation.






We went in to Afghanistan specifically to END a problem like that. We only create such problems when other countries are doing the occupying.




If the Shia win out and separate - they will control their own oil. In terms of corporate-government objectives, that is an occupation.



.



posted on Feb, 15 2005 @ 11:13 AM
link   
Ha, isn't that nice, how we allowed our country leaders to play with the minds of no only American citizens but the people of the countries we impact.

Now we are going to have, bad Shiites, and good Shiites, we have bad Sunnis and good Kurds.

So does anybody remember what we went to Iraq for.......................?

Hu mmm..........................?

I guess when the civil unrest takes place and the US takes sides, we should do in ATS a memory line of how US is shaping the country that was to liberate and give them "Freedom and Democratic elections" It's sure to become the most visited or hated thread to be made in ATS.

Because believe it or not the Iraqi situation is going to suck for the bush administration at the end, the lies the deception and true intentions for that country and the waste of our tax payer money the death of our soldiers and the "casualties of war" will never be forgotten.

Is our duty to keep it fresh in the minds of our fellow Americans.


Chalabi have more dirt on him than Saddam ever had with even been a horrible dictator.



[edit on 15-2-2005 by marg6043]




top topics



 
0
<<   2 >>

log in

join