Maliki is fighting locals in Ramadi and Fallujah

Posted on January 9, 2014 by Pat Lang

Capt_photo_1273921384040-5-0
"Per discussions with contacts in Baghdad that have links in Anbar, ISIS / AQ are not re-embedded into Anbar – yet.  The government is mainly fighting local groups that are opposed both to Baghdad and the Sunni tribesmen on Maliki’s payroll.  At the same time some local groups have been targeting AQ elements plus fighters flowing back in from Syria.  Maliki is using this effort as a means to bolster his electoral chances (get the Shia base aligned against the Sunni threat) and further fragment the Sunni communities in support of a broader strategy to ensure Shia dominance and enable Baghdad to turn its full attention north.  For AQ, it may yet see enough space open wherein the tribes will invite them back in to battle Baghdad in full, but the tribe’s will want it on their terms.  As such a multi-dimensional battle will continue to evolve in Anbar; Shia vs. Sunni communities / tribals, Shia vs. Sunni Jehadists, Sunni faction vs. Sunni faction, and Sunni faction vs. Sunni Jehadists."  The Virginian

——————————-

TV is well known to me and he has access to this information.  pl

http://www.al-monitor.com/pulse/originals/2014/01/fighting-fallujah-borders.html?utm_source=Al-Monitor+Newsletter+[English]&utm_campaign=026ebd317b-January_9_20141_8_2014&utm_medium=email&utm_term=0_28264b27a0-026ebd317b-93066749

This entry was posted in Iraq. Bookmark the permalink.

5 Responses to Maliki is fighting locals in Ramadi and Fallujah

  1. SteveG says:
    January 9, 2014 at 2:19 pm

    Looks as if the shards of pottery
    in Colin Powell’s analogy have
    splintered at an exponential pace.

  2. r whitman says:
    January 9, 2014 at 3:12 pm

    I am very confused by all this:
    !. What is the US interest here?
    2. Who’s side are we on?
    3. Who’s side should we be on if any?
    4. What are the worst case consequences if our side loses?

  3. turcopolier says:
    January 9, 2014 at 4:24 pm

    r whitman
    The fact that you don’t understand this is sad. We don’t have a “side” in Iraq. We never did. Maliki has a “side,” his own and that of his particular Shia Arab party, not the other Shia parties, but his own. pl

  4. Fred says:
    January 9, 2014 at 4:27 pm

    Isn’t this the expected civil conflict that resulted from the US overturning the social order in Iraq after the invasion? I believed you warned us then this would happen.

  5. CK says:
    January 9, 2014 at 6:54 pm

    1) None. The major Iraqi oil fields are not in Anbar province.
    2) Saudi Arabia’s and Israel’s
    3) The USA’s. If a conflict isn’t profitable for the goyim it should be avoided.
    4) The situation remains the same. When you have no dog in the fight you usually don’t face any consequences when the fight is over.

Comments are closed.