February 01, 2007

Time to Purge

If there was ever a good time to consider purging elements of the Iraqi government that many see as being "in bed" with al-Sadr's militia and Iran, this might qualify (via Greg Tinti).

Two senior Iraqi generals are being questioned in connection with last week's attack in Karbala that left five U.S. soldiers dead, Pentagon officials told FOX News Thursday.

Military officials also said the level of sophistication of the attack where militants posed as U.S. soldiers to pass a number of security checkpoints suggested possible Iranian involvement.

The assault was carried out by nine to 12 militants wearing new U.S. military fatigues and traveling in black GMC Suburban vehicles the type used by U.S. government convoys. U.S. officials said the imposters had American weapons and spoke English.

The raid, as explained by Iraqi and American officials, began after nightfall at about 6 p.m. on Jan. 20, while American military officers were meeting with their Iraqi counterparts on the main floor of the Provisional Joint Coordination Center (PJCC) in Karbala.

The Pentagon said the investigation into the attack is ongoing and several Iraqis have been detained for questioning.

Because high-level generals were possibly involved, the Pentagon said, it raises questions about the loyalty and trustworthiness of Iraqi military officers at the highest levels.

For the sake of argument, let's consider the possibilty that the Karbala attack did involve the Qods Force branch of the Iranian Republican Guard Corps as some have suggested, and that these two Iraqi generals are in fact in some way complicit in this attack.

If this is indeed the case, then this would seem to be a case of treason by these two generals. A great deal of interest will be paid in seeing how Iraqi Prime Minister Nuri al-Maliki deals with this situation, and if he is judged to mishandle it, it could be very detrimental to his government. Many already feel that al-Maliki is far too cozy with the Madhi militia of Muqtada al-Sadr, and are critical of his apparent disinterest in Iran's involvement within Iraq.

Should al-Maliki fail here, his government stands to lose trust already wearing thin.

Posted by Confederate Yankee at February 1, 2007 12:43 PM

The title to your article says it all: Time for a Purge.

I guess we've come full circle and now its patriotic to endorse the policies we once deemed to be the signature of the most evil of all evil doers--the USSR.

But what's a purge here or there to worry about.

And the bigger picture that you seem not to be able to see is this:

We are now fighting ourselves. Is the only solution left to nuke the whole middle east region while we can?

Posted by: eddiehaskel at February 1, 2007 06:54 PM

endorse the policies we once deemed to be the signature of the most evil of all evil doers--the USSR.

Was the US "evil" to purge Benedict Arnold?

Posted by: Purple Avenger at February 1, 2007 07:04 PM

There's no shortage of targets for a purge in the Iraqi government. The problem, however, is that the U.S. cannot purge Iraqi government officials without ripping away the fig-leaf argument which says that the U.S. doesn't currently rule Iraq and that the government there is authentic and legitimate.

I feel the real question regarding the Karbala attack is; why should anybody believe this administration when they suggest that Iran may have had something to do with it? They offer zero evidence. It's o.k. to talk about the implications for argument's sake, but I have yet to hear any discussion about the significance of the U.S. government claiming Iranian involvement with no evidence what-so-ever. Is this yellow-cake all over again?

Posted by: Daniel S. at February 1, 2007 07:10 PM

A purge? Why not? It's only fascist when Saddam does it. Or Stalin. Or Hitler. Or Pol Pot. Or Idi Amin.

Yessir, if we're going to teach them eye-rakkis about democracy, we'll need to choose their leaders for them, until they learn how to choose right.

They should know better than to trust a leader who panders to fanatical religious supporters just because they have the numbers to keep him in power.

Posted by: Railroad Stone at February 1, 2007 09:01 PM

but isn't it another to purge members of another country's democratically elected government?

The Iraqi generals in question were democratically elected? Where can I find a news story on this?

That's certainly more democratic than even the US - we don't elect generals.

Posted by: Purple Avenger at February 2, 2007 12:43 AM

Proponents of the Iraq war site the fledgling Democratic goverment and Constituion as great success and then suggest we purge the Government ?

Are they a sovereign nation or a puppet government ?

Posted by: Tim at February 2, 2007 07:33 AM


You mean they were helping a foreign power control Iraq..

Oh hold on.

Posted by: sonic at February 2, 2007 07:58 AM

Perhaps we have a disconnect here... or perhaps leftists just automatically gravitate to Stalinism.

When I stated we should, "consider purging elements of the Iraqi government," I had more in mind the appointed positions--such as these generals apparently sympathetic to Iran, and perhaps some ministers and their underlings who are more sympathetic to the Madhi Army or other factions than to Iraq's government--than I was to the elected officials.

Whether you love 'em or hate 'em, or don't really care, The Iraqi people have to deal with those they elected, and the reprecussions of their decisions.

They don't however, owe any allegiance to appointees, and that is where replacing people may be in order.

I was at error for not clarifying what I meant, but boy, did your responses tell me a lot who you are, and how you think.

Posted by: Confederate Yankee at February 2, 2007 08:49 AM

It's up to the elected Iraqi officials to purge and not us. We can suggest they purge or ask they purge, but we can't purge.

Posted by: Tim at February 2, 2007 08:56 AM
It's up to the elected Iraqi officials to purge and not us. We can suggest they purge or ask they purge, but we can't purge.

A very valid point, and one I meant to imply with my comments concluding the post.

Posted by: Confederate Yankee at February 2, 2007 09:03 AM

Dollars to donuts the Iraqi troops who conducted that attack were trained by US forces. The US is offering free training and weapons to all comers. That's why these guys passed so easily.

"Half of them are [Mahdi army]. They'll wave at us during the day and shoot at us during the night," said 1st Lt. Dan Quinn, a platoon leader in the Army's 1st Infantry Division.... "People (in America) think it's bad, but that we control the city [Baghdad]. That's not the way it is. They control it, and they let us drive around. It's hostile territory."

Posted by: The Sculpin at February 2, 2007 11:38 AM

You're like Charlie Brown and the football. How Malaki handles this, will show us something about him? Puh-leez. We done done that gig before.

Posted by: TCO at February 3, 2007 07:50 PM