Monday, February 12, 2007

Juan Cole's take on the US blaming Iran for the Iraqi bombs

(At the bottom of the post):
My own take on the issue: isn't it much more likely that most shaped charges are smuggled in or made by Sunni Arab guerrillas, and that the DoD is leaping to the conclusion from a handful of Iranian ones that all are Iranian supplied? It isn't plausible that something could be made in Tehran but not in a workshop in Baghdad; Iraq is an advanced society. And, how much is left from one of those charges afterwards, that you could tell where it came from? This is the same US military that mistakenly attacked a Shiite Husayniya (mourning hall for the martyred grandson of the Prophet) as a death squad safe house, and then announced that they did not know if it was a Sunni or Shiite edifice. They also apparently don't necessarily know whether they are in Sunni or Shiite neighborhoods in Baghdad, or how to judge the likelihood that a shaped charge was set by a Sunni Arab guerrilla as opposed to the Shiite militias. I.e. it isn't necessary to deny that some Iranian weapons are getting in to conclude that they are a tiny proportion of the problem.


Wait a minute! Before we invaded Iraq, the Iraqis were soooo clever that they had hidden WMDs driving about in trucks, but now the Iraqis are soooo stupid, they must have the help of the sooooo clever Iranians!

The U.S. stance on the military capabilities of Iraqis today is the exact opposite of its position four years ago. Then, Bush and British Prime Minister Tony Blair claimed Iraqis were technically advanced enough to produce long-range missiles and to be close to producing a nuclear device.

Washington is now saying Iraqis are too backward to produce an effective roadside bomb and must seek Iranian help.

The White House may have decided that, in the runup to the 2008 presidential election, it would be to its political advantage in the U.S. to divert attention from its failure in Iraq by blaming Iran for being the hidden hand supporting its opponents.

It is likely that Shiite militias have received weapons and money from Iran and possible the Sunni insurgents have received some aid, but most Iraqi men possess weapons. Many millions of them received military training under Saddam Hussein. His well supplied arsenals were all looted after his fall. No specialist on Iraq believes that Iran has ever been a serious promoter of the Sunni insurgency.

The evidence against Iran is even more insubstantial than the faked or mistaken evidence for Iraqi WMDs disseminated by the United States and Britain in 2002 and 2003. The allegations appear to be full of exaggerations. Few Abrams tanks have been destroyed. It implies the Shiites have been at war with the U.S., when in fact they are controlled by parties which make up the Iraqi government.

1 comment:

Spocko said...

What no consistent logic in what they say? That's unpossible!

Of course they will advance the "They can make Nukes!" when it suits them and the 'They are too stupid to make a bomb" when it doesn't.

They expertise to make a working rocket and a working nuke are light years beyond blowing up some IED.

But they have to create the biggest enemy they can so they can attack.

What I expect? An attack that they WILL blame on Iran sort of a 'Remember the Maine' incident. (Or if you don't remember that "Gulf of Tonkin" event.