The Golden Mosque Bombing

[Mickey]

Jack Murtha on January 12, 2006:

 

According to the Random House Unabridged Dictionary, Second Edition, the definition of a civil war is a "war between political factions or regions within the same country." That is exactly what is going on in Iraq, not a global war on terrorism, as the President continues to portray it.

 

93 percent of those fighting in Iraq are Iraqis. A very small percentage of the fighting is being done by foreign fighters. Our troops are caught in between the fighting. 80 percent of Iraqis want us out of there and 45 percent think it is justified to kill American troops.

 

Iraqis went to the polls in droves on December 15th and rejected the secular, pro-democracy candidates and those who the Administration in Washington propped up. Preliminary vote results indicate that Iyad Allawi, the pro-American Prime Minister, received about 8 percent of the vote and Ahmad Chalabi, Iraq's current Oil Minister and close associate of the U.S. Iraq war planners, received less than 1 percent. According to General Vines, the top operational commander in Iraq, "the vote is reported to be primarily along sectarian lines, which is not particularly heartening." The new government he said "must be a government by and for Iraqis, not sects."

 

The ethnic and religious strife in Iraq has been going on, not for decades or centuries, but for millennia. These particular explosive hatreds and tensions will be there if our troops leave in six months, six years or six decades. It is time to re-deploy our troops and to re-focus our attention on the real threats posed by global terrorism.

 

Today's Reports in the wake of the bombing of the Golden Mosque:

 

46 Bodies Found in Wave of Iraqi Violence

 

The President's reaction:

 

"The terrorists in Iraq have again proven that they are enemies of all faiths and of all humanity. The world must stand united against them, and steadfast behind the people of Iraq."

 

Which Iraqi's are we standing behind, the Shiites who are killing Sunnis or the Sunnis who are killing Shiites or the whopping 8% that voted for Allawi? The reality is that people like Grand Ayatollah Ali al-Sistani who is forbidding his followers from taking part in reprisals against Sunni's, are just too few.

 

I have said it before and will say it again, if the Iraqi's want a civil war, they are going to have one and there is nothing we can do to prevent it. And it certainly looks like they want to have a civil war doesn't it?

[Ghost of BiB]

Sure is a mess, isn't it? I have a feeling you ain't seen nothin' yet. There was a point in time where the GWOT aspects were a lot bigger an issue than they are now. It's not that way anymore, IMO, in Iraq. If it weren't for Iran and the sh-- they are pulling in all this, I'd be happy to see the billions stop flowing in there. It's getting in the way of other stuff that needs to be done. But, leaving now without getting a handle on Iran, and to a lesser extent Syria would create more problems than it would solve. It wouldn't be long before we were back over there.

[Pine Barrens Mafia]

Sure is a mess, isn't it? I have a feeling you ain't seen nothin' yet. There was a point in time where the GWOT aspects were a lot bigger an issue than they are now. It's not that way anymore, IMO, in Iraq. If it weren't for Iran and the sh-- they are pulling in all this, I'd be happy to see the billions stop flowing in there.  It's getting in the way of other stuff that needs to be done. But, leaving now without getting a handle on Iran, and to a lesser extent Syria would create more problems than it would solve. It wouldn't be long before we were back over there.

609264[/snapback]

 

'zackly. Something needs to be done to break this cycle. Perhas it IS to split the country into Sunni, Shia and Kurdish countries. Or maybe, it is just best to leave and let them kill each other rather than us.

[Crap Throwing Monkey]

Sure is a mess, isn't it? I have a feeling you ain't seen nothin' yet. There was a point in time where the GWOT aspects were a lot bigger an issue than they are now. It's not that way anymore, IMO, in Iraq. If it weren't for Iran and the sh-- they are pulling in all this, I'd be happy to see the billions stop flowing in there.  It's getting in the way of other stuff that needs to be done. But, leaving now without getting a handle on Iran, and to a lesser extent Syria would create more problems than it would solve. It wouldn't be long before we were back over there.

609264[/snapback]

 

You've got to appreciate the genius of the strategy, though. With one well-placed bomb which damaged one building and as far as I've heard killed no one, the perpetrators of such have nearly started a civil war in Iraq and effectively blown US policy in the Middle East clean out of the water.

 

An administration with smart PR would play this as "The terrorists destroy the holiest places of your religion. They aren't Muslim, they're just criminals." Too bad we don't have an administration with smart PR.

[Pine Barrens Mafia]

You've got to appreciate the genius of the strategy, though.  With one well-placed bomb which damaged one building and as far as I've heard killed no one, the perpetrators of such have nearly started a civil war in Iraq and effectively blown US policy in the Middle East clean out of the water. 

 

An administration with smart PR would play this as "The terrorists destroy the holiest places of your religion.  They aren't Muslim, they're just criminals."  Too bad we don't have an administration with smart PR. 

609295[/snapback]

 

Again, I'd rather have them blowing each other up than us. Every terrorist who dies over there is one less we need to worry about over here.

[GG]

An administration with smart PR would play this as "The terrorists destroy the holiest places of your religion.  They aren't Muslim, they're just criminals."  Too bad we don't have an administration with smart PR. 

609295[/snapback]

 

You mean like this?

 

Q Scott, about the bombing in Iraq today. Does the administration have any sense that this is a potential flashpoint to elevate and escalate the level of violence to some new degree that would be harder to control?

 

MR. McCLELLAN: That's a good question. What we are doing is working closely with Iraqis to make the point that it's important to set aside past sectarian differences and work together to build a government of national unity. That's where our focus is. Now, the terrorists want to stir up violence and create sectarian divisions. That is what they want. That's why the President, in a statement, said violence will only contribute to what the terrorists sought to achieve by this act. And that's why he urged Iraqis to exercise restraint and let this be addressed through the appropriate channels.

 

And we are committed to working with the Iraqi government to bring those responsible to justice. We will do everything in our part [sic] to help with that. But our message to Iraqis is what I think others around the world would say, as well: Exercise restraint. Violence will only contribute to what the terrorists want. Make no mistake about it. This was a brutal terrorist attack. It was an attack against people of all faiths and against all of humanity. The terrorists have no regard for innocent human life, and all they want to do is create chaos. That's why it's important that we continue to work with the Iraqi people and win in Iraq.

 

Effective PR is only as good as a falling tree in a forest, when the literati choose to ignore it.

[VABills]

You mean like this?

Effective PR is only as good as a falling tree in a forest, when the literati choose to ignore it.

609301[/snapback]

The problem is, if the press will not get the message to the people then Bush has to take it. Communications and dealing with people has been one of his major problems. He seems to do well with the people and in polls when he does evening conferences. He needs to call a national address and take the message directly to the people on national TV. Hell if he needs to he should call a weekly, monthly, whatever national address and force the major networks to show him, and get his message across.

 

The press corps pretty ignores what is said in the whitehouse briefings, or hides it on page 22.

 

If he forces the message they will have to make it frontpage.

[Ghost of BiB]

Again, I'd rather have them blowing each other up than us. Every terrorist who dies over there is one less we need to worry about over here.

609298[/snapback]

 

It's not that simple, with Iran already stirring up a lot of this, and standing by to fill the vacuum.

[SilverNRed]

You mean like this?

Effective PR is only as good as a falling tree in a forest, when the literati choose to ignore it.

609301[/snapback]

I'm a little skeptical about a "statement" from the President effectively delivering a message to the people in Iraq. People in the US don't even hear about these statements. A major press conference about the incident might work but a statement won't. And Dumbass Scott McClellan (yay, Longhorns) sure won't.

 

Oh well.

[GG]

I'm a little skeptical about a "statement" from the President effectively delivering a message to the people in Iraq.  People in the US don't even hear about these statements.  A major press conference about the incident might work but a statement won't.  And Dumbass Scott McClellan (yay, Longhorns) sure won't.

 

Oh well. 

609361[/snapback]

 

McClellan is just parroting what Bush is saying. There's universal condemnation of the bombing, but the key is how the message is being delivered across the world. Jack Straw's comments got more prominent billing on Al Jazeera. The administration's careless handling of the press is old news, and it's virtaully impossible for them to jump start an effective PR program right now.

 

It's a weak parallel to TD's efforts to rebuild the Bills - it's not that he didn't address the issues, it was that he didn't succeed in his efforts.

[ASCI]

Lets put this in perspective. Civil war may be too noble a title for what’s going on in Iraq. Vigilante groups are conducting the violence we see after the mosques bombing not a functioning government.

 

A Civil War is a war between factions of the same country; there are five criteria for international recognition of this status: the contestants must control territory, have a functioning government, enjoy some foreign recognition, have identifiable regular armed forces, and engage in major military operations.

 

We have now a legally established government in Iraq, whose international recognized authority will not change by force, espionage, sabotage, subversion, manipulation, deception, intimidation, or propaganda and still remain legitimate. The only international recognized recourse the population has for a change in government is through legal elections. What I see occurring in Iraq is a resistance movement, an organized effort by some portion of the civil population of the country to resist the legally established government by disrupting civil order and stability. Not a civil war. The Sunni have the most to lose

[Crap Throwing Monkey]

I'm a little skeptical about a "statement" from the President effectively delivering a message to the people in Iraq.  People in the US don't even hear about these statements.  A major press conference about the incident might work but a statement won't.  And Dumbass Scott McClellan (yay, Longhorns) sure won't.

 

Oh well. 

609361[/snapback]

 

Thus illustrating, in part, the difference between a statement and public relations.

[pdh1]

Jack Murtha on January 12, 2006:

 

According to the Random House Unabridged Dictionary, Second Edition, the definition of a civil war is a "war between political factions or regions within the same country." That is exactly what is going on in Iraq, not a global war on terrorism, as the President continues to portray it.

 

93 percent of those fighting in Iraq are Iraqis. A very small percentage of the fighting is being done by foreign fighters. Our troops are caught in between the fighting. 80 percent of Iraqis want us out of there and 45 percent think it is justified to kill American troops.

 

Iraqis went to the polls in droves on December 15th and rejected the secular, pro-democracy candidates and those who the Administration in Washington propped up. Preliminary vote results indicate that Iyad Allawi, the pro-American Prime Minister, received about 8 percent of the vote and Ahmad Chalabi, Iraq's current Oil Minister and close associate of the U.S. Iraq war planners, received less than 1 percent. According to General Vines, the top operational commander in Iraq, "the vote is reported to be primarily along sectarian lines, which is not particularly heartening." The new government he said "must be a government by and for Iraqis, not sects."

 

The ethnic and religious strife in Iraq has been going on, not for decades or centuries, but for millennia. These particular explosive hatreds and tensions will be there if our troops leave in six months, six years or six decades. It is time to re-deploy our troops and to re-focus our attention on the real threats posed by global terrorism.

 

Today's Reports in the wake of the bombing of the Golden Mosque:

 

46 Bodies Found in Wave of Iraqi Violence

 

The President's reaction:

 

"The terrorists in Iraq have again proven that they are enemies of all faiths and of all humanity. The world must stand united against them, and steadfast behind the people of Iraq."

 

Which Iraqi's are we standing behind, the Shiites who are killing Sunnis or the Sunnis who are killing Shiites or the whopping 8% that voted for Allawi?  The reality is that people like Grand Ayatollah Ali al-Sistani who is forbidding his followers from taking part in reprisals against Sunni's, are just too few.

 

I have said it before and will say it again, if the Iraqi's want a civil war, they are going to have one and there is nothing we can do to prevent it.  And it certainly looks like they want to have a civil war doesn't it?

609260[/snapback]

 

 

Why have a civil war when it was the "jews" that did this, according to many in the arab media?

On tv I saw people protesting the bombing, and they were burning Israeli flags.

 

Holy self-denial Batman!

[Pine Barrens Mafia]

This Guy is a danger and needs to be taken care of.

[KRC]

He needs to call a national address and take the message directly to the people on national TV.  Hell if he needs to he should call a weekly, monthly, whatever national address and force the major networks to show him, and get his message across. 

609321[/snapback]

 

Can't do that. It would interfere with American Idol and Survivor.

[VABills]

Can't do that. It would interfere with American Idol and Survivor. 

609440[/snapback]

And yet people think Bush doesn't understand the American people.

[Mickey]

You've got to appreciate the genius of the strategy, though.  With one well-placed bomb which damaged one building and as far as I've heard killed no one, the perpetrators of such have nearly started a civil war in Iraq and effectively blown US policy in the Middle East clean out of the water. 

 

An administration with smart PR would play this as "The terrorists destroy the holiest places of your religion.  They aren't Muslim, they're just criminals."  Too bad we don't have an administration with smart PR. 

609295[/snapback]

Well, I think its cummulative. This may be the worst and most effective attack in terms of bringing about a civil war but it's hardly the only Sunni vs. Shiite clash since we invaded unfortunately.

[Cheeseburger_in_paradise]

Why Muslims Commit Suicide

 

Again, I'd rather have them blowing each other up than us. Every terrorist who dies over there is one less we need to worry about over here.

609298[/snapback]

[Mickey]

You mean like this?

Effective PR is only as good as a falling tree in a forest, when the literati choose to ignore it.

609301[/snapback]

Maybe its not effective because its simply not true. That is pretty much what the President said in the quote I listed in the first post. "It was an attack against people of all faiths is what Mclellan said and the Prex said that they are enemies of people of all faiths and of all of humanity. That PR is not falling in an empty forest, it was on the AP wire in the story I linked. To me, it looked like an attack by Sunnis against Shiites who have responded with reprisals. In a touchy-feely way, all humanity is offended, sure but that is not what is going on there. Its sectarian violence, a struggle for control in a bitterly divided nation where the status quo has been obliterated by the invasion of foreign troops, a status quo which had only been maintained through a brutal dictatorship. These are not global terrorists trying to destroy the US, these are star bellied snoots and snoots with no stars on their bellies fighting for control of the place where snoots live.

[Ghost of BiB]

Maybe its not effective because its simply not true.  That is pretty much what the President said in the quote I listed in the first post.  "It was an attack against people of all faiths is what Mclellan said and the Prex said that they are enemies of people of all faiths and of all of humanity.  That PR is not falling in an empty forest, it was on the AP wire in the story I linked.  To me, it looked like an attack by Sunnis against Shiites who have responded with reprisals.  In a touchy-feely way, all humanity is offended, sure but that is not what is going on there.  Its sectarian violence, a struggle for control in a bitterly divided nation where the status quo has been obliterated by the invasion of foreign troops, a status quo which had only been maintained through a brutal dictatorship.  These are not global terrorists trying to destroy the US, these are star bellied snoots and snoots with no stars on their bellies fighting for control of the place where snoots live.

609492[/snapback]

 

Or, someone who wants everyone to think that...