OpEdNews » Why is General Petraeus Helping Iran?

Support OEN
With Your
Tax-Deductible Donation

Tags for This Article:

Populum Tag Cloud Control Panel
	Fine tune your search to access content

Articles	Links
Diaries	Products
Events	All

All time
Last 6 mos
Last month
Last week
Last 24 hrs

From:
Month Day Year

To:
Month Day Year

Alphabet Popularity	Count ON Count OFF
This Level	Sub-levels

Tag(s): Bush Iraq Surge; Death Squads; General Petraeus; Iran; Iraq; Iraq Mahdi Militia
Add to My Group

April 8, 2008 at 11:13:49

View Ratings | Rate It

Headlined on 4/8/08:
Why is General Petraeus Helping Iran?

by Cenk Uygur Page 1 of 1 page(s)

www.opednews.com

SAVE FAVORITES

VIEW FAVORITES

Someone should ask General Petraeus today why he is working so hard to help Iran. This is not to suggest he is some sort of enemy of the state. I suppose he is following orders, but why doesn't he question his wildly counterproductive and conflicting orders?

I hear him bemoaning Iranian influence in Iraq all the time. Yet, no one has helped Iran more inside Iraq than he has. We have lent the full force of our military might to the political faction and Shiite militia most closely associated with Iran.

Granted there aren't a lot of good guys in the different Iraqi militias (on the other hand, they don't have much reason to think we're swell, either). But why have we decided to back the most pro-Iranian militia in the whole country?

The Badr Corps is linked with the Islamic Supreme Council of Iraq (ISCI), which is the largest party inside Iraq. The Badr Corps also happens to be the militia with closest ties to Iran. They also happen to be the militia that ran those feared death squads during the ethnic cleansing of Baghdad. And get this - they are also the ones that want to split up Iraq instead of keeping it unified.

All of these objectives seem to be diametrically opposed to what we want in Iraq. So why have we thrown all our military muscle behind them? This is not just a rhetorical question. I'm actually curious as to what the answer is. Why are we helping ISCI and Bard Corps split up Iraq and allowing Iran to gain even greater influence inside Iraq?

I hope Gen. Petraeus isn't going to pretend that the Sadr's Mahdi Army has closer ties to Iran. That is demonstrably false. If he does that, then you know he is just Dick Cheney's puppet trying to stoke hostilities with Iran based on false premises. But beyond that, if we want to fight Iran so badly, why are we helping their top allies in Iraq?

I would love it if we actually used Congressional hearings to ask a real question for once and if General Petraeus, for once, gave us a real answer.

crossposted from huffingtonpost

Cenk Uygur is co-host of The Young Turks, the new morning show for Air America Radio, 6-9AM ET. The Young Turks was the first liberal radio show to air nationwide. The program was also the first original talk show for Sirius Satellite Radio. With the move to Air America, the program can now be heard on XM Satellite Radio, as well as, your local The Young Turks is also the first live, internet TV show. The show can be seen 24 hours a day on www.theyoungturks.com.

	Contact Author
	Contact Editor
	View Other Articles by Author

Bookmark this page: (what's this?)

(More...)

6 comments

viet era vet
el. eng. pilot
hlgviet era vet
el. eng. pilot

petraeus

Petraeus said "More Time"

More Time is absolutely WRONG !!!! if time is not on OUR Side.

WE have to act now, immediately after the last words are spoken on Capitol HILL. Select a PLAN . PLans have been hammered out and refined

for YEARS . Some are classified. Some even TOP SECRET.

More time means a weaker $$$

More time means more casualties.

More time means less enlistements in Infantry.

More time means troop levels shrinking.

More time means more trauma's among troops (medical hon.discharges

may come up in an earth slide effect)

More time means ,more RPG's stacked up behind the couches of

iraqi and Afghani living rooms and/or backyardstorages etc. .

RPG's can be used to (destroy vehicles and aircrfts) avoid US Troops from getting to the US SHips

waiting 100's of miles away (Re: GEN ODOM few days ago)

Holding US troops as "Guests " has been seen in 1990 in Iraq before

and brings enormious advantages to the holders.

by HLGinoped on Tuesday, April 8, 2008 at 9:33:00 AM

by hlg (0 articles, 0 quicklinks, 0 diaries, 79 comments) on Tuesday, April 8, 2008 at 12:22:28 PM

viet era vet
el. eng. pilot
hlgviet era vet
el. eng. pilot

petraeus

by hlg (0 articles, 0 quicklinks, 0 diaries, 79 comments) on Tuesday, April 8, 2008 at 12:23:10 PM

An average Iranian.
Niloufar ParsiAn average Iranian.

US-Iran alliance

The answer to the question posed may be quite simple: Maliki, Bush and Ahmadinejad have a good understanding behind the scenes and despite all the rhetoric.

In recent weeks we have seen several contributors here being totally convinced that Bush has already given the go-ahead for attacking Iran. But Petraeus has not blamed Iran for the violence in Iraq, at least not to the extent that people feared as a pretext for war with Iran.

Lets not judge on the basis of words alone and look more closely at the events on the ground. The US and Iranian governments must be working closely together in Iraq. The US military are weak and need the support of Iran in both Afghanistan and Iraq.

There is no way the US could attack Iran in such a scenario.

by Niloufar Parsi (4 articles, 0 quicklinks, 4 diaries, 74 comments) on Wednesday, April 9, 2008 at 2:56:22 AM

CPA, University Lecturer Risk Finance, Major Royal Australian Infantry (Inactive) RFD, Former Mayor City of Greater Dandenong, Wife from Arabic speaking coutry, Former Lecturer Arabic & Islamic culture - Army Reserve Command & Staff College.
kwalshCPA, University Lecturer Risk Finance, Major Royal Australian Infantry (Inactive) RFD, Former Mayor City of Greater Dandenong, Wife from Arabic speaking coutry, Former Lecturer Arabic & Islamic culture - Army Reserve Command & Staff College.

Context

Let us put General Petraeus' testimony in context. About a week before his testimony the Iraqi Government began a long planned assault on the militia of Sadr the so called Madhi Army backed by extensive US air support. President Bush hailed it as a "defining moment". It was supposed to succeed if it had the US anointed Iraqi PM and Iraqi forces would have been rid of a threat to their supply lines and in control of the oil fields in the South thereby allowing for the Iraqi Government to deliver with the signing of the Iraqi National Oil Law. General Petraeus would have been able to come to Washington to declare major progress in Iraq a vindication of McCain and the Republican pro war stance and the confounding of those who 'lost faith' in the US aka those weak liberal peaceniks.There is only one problem with this scenario, it didn't happen. More than 1,000 Iraqi police and army members deserted or worse defected to the other side and General Petraeus was left asking for more time to assess an outcome he clearly never foresaw. The timing of the assault was no coincidence.

by kwalsh (2 articles, 0 quicklinks, 6 diaries, 222 comments) on Wednesday, April 9, 2008 at 5:42:35 PM

Context

It was supposed to succeed if it had the US anointed Iraqi PM and Iraqi forces would have been rid of a threat to their supply lines and in control of the oil fields in the South thereby allowing for the Iraqi Government to deliver with the signing of the Iraqi National Oil Law. General Petraeus would have been able to come to Washington to declare major progress in Iraq a vindication of McCain and the Republican pro war stance and the confounding of those who 'lost faith' in the US aka those weak liberal peaceniks.

There is only one problem with this scenario, it didn't happen. More than 1,000 Iraqi police and army members deserted or worse defected to the other side and General Petraeus was left asking for more time to assess an outcome he clearly never foresaw. The timing of the assault was no coincidence.

by kwalsh (2 articles, 0 quicklinks, 6 diaries, 222 comments) on Wednesday, April 9, 2008 at 5:45:51 PM

Former Lawyer, current Business Consultant,history buff, Christian, father of 2 sons and a supporter of democratic government.
ArchieFormer Lawyer, current Business Consultant,history buff, Christian, father of 2 sons and a supporter of democratic government.

Why?

He is helping Iran because the invasion and occupation of Iraq automatically helped Iran. It made Iran into the powerhouse Muslim nation in that part of the Middle East. Prior to the invasion, Iraq and Iran balanced each other. Now with Iraq defeated and broken, Iran has all the power. Iran is Shiite. The majority of Iraqis are Shiite. Why shoudn't they have mutual concerns and plans? There is now no way to bring back a balance in that area. The U.S. has made sure that Iran is the power for the immediate future at least.

by Archie (0 articles, 0 quicklinks, 0 diaries, 1285 comments) on Wednesday, April 9, 2008 at 10:45:20 PM