FLASHBACK

3d draft

(12/22/09 UPDATE: Al-Malaf quotes an Iraqi official as saying that what lies behind Iran's take-over of the Iraqi oil field is Iran's dissatisfaction that in the last Iraqi allotment of oil contracts to foreign companies, no oil contract was given to any Iranian company. I'm skeptical. The message could hardly be to the Iraqi government. If the message in fact is about oil, then I would say it is a message to Big Oil and its Home Countries: Do not expect an easy time in Plantation Iraq for as long as Iran is being strangled.)


NOTE:

The recent incursion into Plantation Iraq by Iranian troops - - the fleeting take-over of the oil field - - and the bombings should be seen (in part, I’m not hedging - - see other posts) as a message by the Iranians to the Israel-Anchored Reluctant Ones.

The message:

Without a settlement with us, Iran wouldn't be about to make it easy for you (the Israel-Anchored Reluctant Ones) to leave Iraq so that U.S. troops would no longer be hostage (to us) and would therefore have a freer hand on Iran -- in war and in sanctions.

Nor would we be about to allow you to withdraw from the cities and remain in bases/fortresses waiting for the propitious moment to attack Iran. You "leave" (and withdraw into fortresses away from the cities) and we'd make sure you’d have to return to those cities.

We will do whatever it takes to keep you here, in full - - and not at the level of troops you chose. No exit without cooperating with us. We want you to stay. We love you.

Here’s the flashback:


TIME: ON WHO’S SIDE IS IT?

But, to the Iranians and the Syrians, it’d be dangerous to allow the [Israel-Anchored] reluctant ones to have it both ways: to free 130,000 U.S. troops so they may focus on Iran, all of this while keeping Iraq as [an Israel-Anchored] reluctant plantation - - at worst for Iran: as a ready base for U.S. troops for their eventual assault on Iran; at best for Iran, as a neutral neighbor in the confrontation/coming war between Iran and the [Israel-Anchored] reluctant ones.

( . . . )

At one level, not the most significant, the bombings say that Iran had given up on Maliki as trusted liaison between themselves and the [Israel-Anchored] reluctant idiots. But it could be not Maliki’s fault. It’s likely and mostly the fault of the [Israel-Anchored] reluctant ones. These had renewed their hostility towards Iran and Syria. The bombings seem to say that the Iranians and the Syrians have yet a new task: to tame yet another bunch of [Israel-Anchored] idiots, this time the reluctant. (Remember the [Israel-Anchored] harmful idiots?) So Iran activated its people to help topple Maliki. One result: elements within the Iraqi security establishment, likely close to the Islamic Supreme Council of Iraq (ISCI), the former Badr Brigade, staunch allies of Iran and eminently displeased by Maliki’s sweep of the provincial elections and rising popularity, make way for the Baathist/Islamist bombers of the two ministries.


Monday, August 31, 2009.