chicot Posted February 21, 2005 Posted February 21, 2005 Interesting. Was bound to happen sooner or later. Talking with the enemy
GG Posted February 21, 2005 Posted February 21, 2005 Interesting. Was bound to happen sooner or later. Talking with the enemy 247129[/snapback] You don't suppose it had anything to do with the potential that if the insuregents wouldn't reach out to the US, the new Iraqi government wouldn't be as concerned to wage a friendlier & gentler war?
chicot Posted February 21, 2005 Author Posted February 21, 2005 You don't suppose it had anything to do with the potential that if the insuregents wouldn't reach out to the US, the new Iraqi government wouldn't be as concerned to wage a friendlier & gentler war? 247423[/snapback] It's certainly possible, but I'm not sure that it's a major factor. I very much doubt that the "new" Iraqi army has the capability to take on the insurgents and is, in any case, heavily infiltrated. Of course, they could ask the US to do the job for them, but it's unlikely that they'd want one of their first actions to be giving the ok to Fallujah style assaults. Also, the likeliest candidate for prime minister Jaafari (I can't believe that Chalabi would get the nod, though I'm amazed that he's got this far) is very much a pragmatist, who was strongly opposed to the assault on Fallujah, while he was in the interim government. There is a certain amount of common ground between the US and Baathist elements of the resistance in that neither of them are likely to want a Shiite-dominated Islamic government, strongly allied to Iran. Increased Sunni participation in the next election would make that less likely and this may have something to do with this dialogue.
Recommended Posts