07 May 2008

Iran's support for Moqtada's Mahdi Army and Shiia insurgents

First, I must apologize for the long delay in posting. Attending school full time while running my business (and keeping my clients happy) caused me to fall behind. Please view often as I have plenty of photos and stories to post.

Why is there fighting in formerly peaceful Sadr City and Basra? The surge had dramatically reduced violence, but now our troops are fighting in those areas.

The reasons for the flare-up in violence are as follows:

Iran is supplying money, weapons and training to Moqtada's Mahdi Army and Shiia insurgents: When I reported this in January 2007, based on personal interviews with troops during my first embed in January 2007 (http://allyouneedphoto.samsbiz.com/page/19kyx/About_Us.html), mainstream media outlets refused to publish the story, claiming that the interviews could not be verified or proven (despite the fact that I had names, ranks, unit info, and incidence data.) The MSM began reporting these stories in June 2007, and they are now common knowledge, having been mentioned by Congress, and President Bush in his speech last week (even though some people refuse to realize the significance of Iran's involvement in Iraq's internal affairs.)

Iran's support of the Mahdi Army and other Shiia militia is based upon the fact that Iran's population is majority Shiia, and Iraq's majority population is Shiia Muslim. I think this is a "marriage of convenience" based on the current circumstances, because of the following:

1) Traditionally, emphasized by the 10 year Iran - Iraq war with 1+ million casualties on each side, including the use of chemical weapons by both Iran and Iraq, Arabs (Iraqis) and Persians (Iranians) have hated each other for centuries.

2) Some of the Shiia Iraqis I've spoken to have told me that although they welcome Iran' s supply of arms to fight the Americans, they will never submit to Iranian rule or influence. In other words, it's a "marriage of convenience" for these Iraqi Shiia. They're happy to accept the money, weapons and support provided by Iran to enable them to force the U.S. out of Iraq. However, most Iraqis do NOT want (and will NOT allow) Iran to come into Iraq to fill the "void" left by the withdrawal of U.S. forces. However, to avoid Iran's colonialist plans will require either a civil war, or subservience to Iran's political and military will if coalition forces do not take steps to stem Iran's illegal influence in Iraq.

Iran is supporting the Shiia insurgency by supplying money, weapons and training because Iran believes that it can take over Iraq and it's oil reserves when the U.S. population tires of the human and monetary expenses of our presence in Iraq (in addition to the artificial political pressure to withdraw prematurely based upon unrealistic political expectations/promises!) Then, the Iranians will step in to fill the vacuum, and use their increased influence (and oil exports/income), to enforce their political will upon the region, and therefore, upon the world. (Unhappy with $4.00 per gallon gasoline? How would you feel if the price shot up to $10.00 to $15.00 per gallon if Iran's takeover of Iraq leads to a worldwide oil shortage or embargo?)

Remember, Ahmadinejad believes that the Holocaust (Nazi Germany's extermination of 10+ million Jews, Slavs, Allied POWs, mentally handicapped, and other "undesirables" is a hoax), and has said that Israel should be wiped off the face of Earth (all this from a country that is seeking to develop nuclear weapons!!!) They have the missles, enriched uranium, and are developing the warheads.

During my two embed assignments in Iraq, 99% of the men and women serving our country I interviewed echoed one common sentiment: They are committed to finishing the mission for which they volunteered. Failure now is NOT an option - to withdraw now would throw away the sacrifices of the fellow soldiers and Marines they have lost in combat. Most of them felt that their mission could be accomplished soon, and an enforced withdrawal prior to completion of their mission would lead to a "bloodbath" (an orgy of retribution against Iraqis that have assisted the U.S. by the return of the Al Qaeda in Iraq, former Baathist/anti U.S. elements that would quickly return to take power from the "now" powerless populace.)

3) IF that occurs, what does that mean for the U.S.A. and the troops that bravely served (and fought and died) in Iraq? Every soldier or Marine I interviewed said that this was their biggest fear: If our troops are not allowed to "finish" their mission (establishing stability in Iraq, with the Iraqis providing their own security against inside and outside deterrents), then their (our U.S.) sons and daughters would end up in Iraq in ten to fifteen years fighting and dying to fix an even bigger problem.

4) No one wants another war, or an extension of this one. However, Ahmadinejad and his regime seem determined to exert Iran's political influence by supplying Iraqi insurgents with money, weapons, and training, including the illegal importation of EFP's (explosive formed penetrating shape charges - which have killed hundreds of U.S. troops and can penetrate our best armor), and the 122mm rockets which the Mahdi Army insurgents continue to launch against the Green Zone during the U.S./Iraqi assault upon Shiia Mahdi Army insurgents in Sadr City.

5) Based upon my research, the nine month cease fire was called off by Moqtada Sadr for the simple reason that he wants to exert his influence prior to the national elections in October. Moqtada felt that he was "left out of the process" (understandable, since he spends most of his time in Iran with his "financiers/handlers/weapon suppliers/cheerleaders"), so he felt the need to do "something" to remind everyone that "he" controls this area/band of fighters. I, for one, hope they kill him soon, along with everyone that belongs to his support staff. If my wish comes true, then he'll at least have achieved martyrdom status, as compared to being just a thug. His father was a true leader of the people prior to his assassination, but the son has chosen to be a servant of Iran's Shiaa goals versus being a true representative
of his flock.