Pentagon, 2001 : "We're Gonna Take Out 7 Countries In 5 Years"

They're a bit behind schedule.

Iraq Vows To Never Allow US To Attack Iran From Inside Its Borders

The Iraq government is now stalling on a verbal agreement given to BushCo. in late 2007 that they will sign on to allowing US forces to be based inside the country beyond 2008. More than 70% of Iraqis are now reported to be in favour of the rest of the 'Coalition of the Willing' removing its troops, sooner rather than later. Later being 2009, or 2010.

In fact, there is something of a quiet, very democratic revolution boiling in Iraq's halls of power, as Iraq not only faces a future where US troops are no longer roaming free on their cities' streets, but now rumbles to get foreign forces out of the country as soon as possible. BushCo. has made it very clear they have no intention of leaving, having just completed the world's largest embassy complex in Baghdad, which will be permanently manned by hundreds, if not thousands, of American troops. But Iraq's politicians are clear in their intent :

A majority of the Iraqi parliament has written to Congress rejecting a long-term security deal with Washington if it is not linked to a requirement that U.S. forces leave, a U.S. lawmaker said on Wednesday.

The proposed pact has become increasingly controversial in Iraq, where there have been protests against it. It has also drawn criticism from Democrats on the presidential election campaign trail in the United States, who say President George W. Bush is trying to dictate war policy after he leaves office.

"The majority of Iraqi representatives strongly reject any military-security, economic, commercial, agricultural, investment or political agreement with the United States that is not linked to clear mechanisms that obligate the occupying American military forces to fully withdraw from Iraq," the letter to the leaders of Congress said.

"What are the threats that require U.S. forces to be there?" asked Nadeem Al-Jaberi, a co-founder of the al-Fadhila Shi'ite political party, speaking through a translator.

"I would like to inform you, there are no threats on Iraq. We are capable of solving our own problems," he declared. He favored a quick pullout of U.S. forces, which invaded the country in 2003 and currently number around 155,000.

A Sunni Iraqi lawmaker, Khalaf Al-Ulayyan, founder of the National Dialogue Council, said bilateral talks on a long-term security deal should be shelved until American troops leave -- and until there is a new government in Washington.

"We prefer to delay until there is a new administration in the United States," he said.

Meanwhile, Iraq is now actively reassuring Iran that it will not let BushCo. populate the country with more bases, or more troops. Iraqis are making it clear that withdrawal comes before long-term security negotiations, a stand that Iran no doubt backs.

Can't imagine the reaction inside the White House to this exercise in self-determination by the newest democracy in the Middle East is pleasant.

If Iraq refuses to agree to the sadistic American deal detailed below, it's easy to imagine a coup attempt by plotters that will never be brought to justice, along with an upsurge of extreme violence :

Iraqi Prime Minister Nuri al-Maliki has tried to reassure Iran over a planned security pact with the US, vowing Iraq would never allow use of its territory to "harm" the Islamic republic.

"We will not allow Iraq to become a platform for harming the security of Iran and neighbours," Mr Maliki said after a late-night meeting with Iranian Foreign Minister Manouchehr Mottaki in Tehran.

Mr Maliki's comments come amid Iranian alarm over US pressure on Baghdad to sign an agreement that would keep US soldiers in the country beyond 2008. Iran has always called for the immediate withdrawal of US troops from Iraq.

US President George W Bush and Mr Maliki agreed in principle last November to sign the Status of Forces Agreement (SOFA) by the end of July. But Iraq has now said it has a "different vision" from the United States on the issue.

Iran's concern about the deal comes amid renewed tensions over its nuclear program, which the United States fears is aimed at making atomic weapons, a charge vehemently rejected by Tehran.

The United States has never ruled out a military attack to punish Tehran's defiance while Israel has also been warning there may be no alternative to a strike against Iran.

Mr Maliki, quoted by Iran's state news agency IRNA, said "Iraq's stability and security can have a great impact on the region ... We see the implementation of peace and security in Iraq and Iran as what both countries want."

Iraqi Government spokesman Ali al-Dabbagh had said Mr Maliki would be using the visit to assure Iranian leaders that Iraq "will not serve as a base or staging ground to launch attacks against neighbouring countries."

The Shiite Premier - on his third visit to Tehran since taking office two years ago - was due to also hold talks with other top officials including President Mahmoud Ahmadinejad.

Mr Mottaki, meanwhile, vowed that relations would expand further, saying the Iraqi delegation would "find good ground for creating new strategies in deepening the two countries' ties," according to IRNA.

US ambassador to Iraq Ryan Crocker stressed in Washington on Thursday that Iran and Iraq were neighbours and had to conduct a relationship. "The question is: what kind of relationship is it going to be?" he said.

It's hard to imagine that air strikes on Iran by the United States and Israel will be welcomed by the Iraqi government, who now host more than 160,000 American soldiers and more than 100,000 American private security guards and support services personnel.

Hitting Iran before the nuclear threat is resolved will make many Iraqis fresh enemies of Americans, and Iran may already have extensive special forces personnel inside Iraq. No doubt they have plenty of intelligence on how to conduct the most punishing retaliatory strikes on Americans inside Iraq. Attacking Iran would further unite Iran and Iraq, with Russia and China backing them both against the United States. EU state leaders may support the US and Israel if they hit Iran, but there would be little support amongst most Europeans, who now view the United States as probably the most dangerous threat to world peace in the world today.

Iraq Oil Flows, Western Energy Corps Lick Their Lips

News that Iraq's oil is now beginning to flow again at pre-war levels is good news for Iraqis. Whether or not it is really good news depends on how much of the profits from a new boom in Iraqi oil stay within Iraq and are poured into rebuilding the country and the economy :

Buried beneath the surface are the pipelines that carry Iraq’s liquid gold – crude oil – from Kirkuk’s giant oil-fields 50 miles (80km) down to Baiji, and then up to Turkey for export to the energy-hungry West.

The US Army Corps of Engineers began building this $30 million (£15 million) Pipeline Exclusion Zone (PEZ) between Kirkuk and Baiji last July, and will finish it next month. It has already reduced dramatically the number of attacks by those Sunni insurgents who have been waging a second, less-noticed war over the past four years – not against US troops or Shias but against the oil industry on which Iraq’s entire economy depends.

As a result, that industry is displaying unmistakable signs of recovery for the first time since the US invasion of 2003. Exports have risen almost to prewar levels, and with Iraq sitting on 113 billion barrels of proven reserves – the third largest in the world – that is welcome news not just for Baghdad but for a world reeling from record oil prices.

The PEZ is only one measure taken by the US and Iraqi authorities to secure the Kirkuk to Baiji pipelines. They have also replaced Sunni and Shia soldiers with more aggressive, trustworthy Kurds such as Private Mustafa, and removed the 3rd Strategic Infantry Battalion which was, say US army officers, “deeply corrupt”. Its locally recruited members were almost certainly working with the insurgents – telling them when the oil was flowing, helping them to steal it, even staging fake assaults on their own positions to conceal their duplicity.

The huge 46-inch wide pipeline that carries the crude 180 miles north from Baiji to the Turkish border is too long for a PEZ and a little less secure – 14 guards have been killed since September. But even there attacks have been greatly reduced, largely through coopting local tribes by giving their young men jobs in the Oil Police, the revamped, 31,000-strong mini-army that protects Iraq’s oil infrastructure.

The results of this improved security are startling. The pipeline to Turkey was operational just 17 days in the first seven months of last year, and every day but five in the last quarter. Two-thirds of the 48 million barrels of oil exported from Kirkuk last year were exported in those last three months alone. A second $100 million PEZ will be constructed this year to protect the 130-mile line from Baiji to Baghdad.

Kirkuk accounts for roughly a third of Iraq’s oil production. Fuelled by its recovery, Iraq is producing an average of 2.4 million barrels a day – just below its prewar level of 2.6 million – with the Oil Ministry confidently predicting an output of 3.5 million by next year. That would match the level Iraq last achieved in 1979, just before the Iran-Iraq War. “It’s an ambitious goal, but it’s possible,” said a US official closely involved with the industry.

Thanks to rising oil production, the International Monetary Fund believes that Iraq’s battered economy will grow 7 per cent this year. And with oil prices near record highs, the US Special Inspector for Iraq this week forecast a $15 billion windfall for a country whose $48 billion budget for 2008 was calculated when oil, which accounts for 90 per cent of its revenues, fetched a mere $55 a barrel.

US officials say the Iraqi Government now has far more money than it has the capacity to spend. In 2006, for example, the Oil Ministry spent just 3 per cent of the $3.5 billion it was allocated for oil reconstruction projects.

The tragedy is that the recovery has taken so long. At the time of the US invasion, Vice-President Dick Cheney and other senior US officials boldly predicted that production would exceed three million barrels a day within eight months, generating more than enough money to rebuild Iraq.

The Bush Administration also failed to foresee the virulence of the insurgency. The website Iraq Pipeline Watch records 466 attacks on oil infrastructure or employees since 2003, and that is probably a fraction of the real total. US officials reckon as many as half the industry’s most skilled workers fled Iraq, or were killed, as Iraq descended into mayhem. The insurgents have used the oil that was supposed to finance the country’s reconstruction to fund their efforts to destroy it.

Stats from the London Times on Iraq's oil :

113bn Barrels of proven oil reserves in Iraq, the third highest after Saudi Arabia and Iran. Experts say the real figure may be nearly double that as so little of the country has been properly explored

2.4m Barrels of oil a day now being produced, below the record of 3.5 million in 1979, the year before the Iran-Iraq war began, but nearly back to the 2.6 million before the US invasion of 2003

$39bn Amount earned by Iraq’s oil exports last year, up 31 per cent. The daily average exported was 1.6 million barrels, up 9 per cent

90% Oil accounts for 90 per cent of the country’s revenues

60% Despite its sea of oil, Iraq imports nearly 60 per cent of its petrol and other oil products because its refineries cannot produce enough

Turkey Launches Third Round Of Air Strikes On Kurds In One Week

US Accused Of Violating Iraq Sovereignty By Helping Turkey Attack Kurds

There are contradictory reports across the media about whether or not the Turkish military has been using US intelligence in plotting its jet fighter and artillery attacks on Kurdish positions inside Iraq, and just how helpful that intelligence has been to Turkey's military operations.

For the third time in seven days, Turkey has hit Kurdish separatists in Northern Iraq :

Turkish aircraft attacked positions of the separatist organization PKK before shelling the area with artillery, AFP said, citing the statement.

The statement gave no details about the targets, saying that more information would be released next week and that Turkey would carry out more operations in spite of harsh winter conditions in the mountainous region, AFP said.

As for the Americans helping Turkey to bomb Kurdistan militants, the Kurdish coalition is obviously not very happy :

A Kurdistan Coalition leader criticized on Thursday the U.S. policy of providing military assistance to Turkish troops in their bombing of northern Iraqi regions, describing the cooperation as a violation of Iraqi sovereignty.

While stressing the strength of U.S.-Kurdish relations, Kurdish leader Mahmoud Othman told the independent news agency Voices of Iraq (VOI), "U.S.-Turkish cooperation in the bombing of regions in northern Iraq is a violation of Iraqi sovereignty and a breach of U.S. commitment to protect Iraq's sovereignty and borders."

"It also contradicts the declaration of intentions and principles signed by Iraqi Prime Minister Nouri al-Maliki and U.S. President George W. Bush last month, which provides for U.S. protection of Iraqi borders and national government," the parliamentarian indicated.

Slashing the United States for providing "incorrect intelligence reports" to the Turks, Othman said, "The victims of the Turkish shelling were civilians," in referernce to a Turkish bombing of villages in Iraq's Kurdistan region a few days ago.

On Tuesday Turkish Ambassador to Washington Nabi Sensoy said that the U.S. administration provided his country with necessary intelligence that led to raids in northern Iraq on Kurdish militants on Sunday.

On Monday, about 500-600 Turkish troops penetrated two kilometers into the Kurdistan region in pursuit of members of the Kurdistan Workers Party (PKK) in northern Iraq.

Turkey has massed up to 100,000 troops along the frontier in preparation for a cross-border operation to crush about 3,000 guerrillas of the PKK, blamed for attacks that killed 15 Turkish soldiers.

Scott Sullivan, writing in Petroleum News, says it is a myth that Turkey is containing the Kurdish rebel group, the PKK. He pushes the line that Turkey must crush the PKK or face the break-up of both Turkey, and Iraq :

To avoid catastrophic defeat, Turkey must push for three options. First, Turkey should assert its claim to Mosul and send troops to Mosul, with or without US permission. The Kurds have armed forces in Kirkuk. The Iranians have armed forces in Basra. Turkey is entitled to have armed forces im Mosul.

Second, Turkey should request that Turkey and the US create a joint force to protect the oilfields in northern Iraq from Kurdish annexation. The US-Turkish joint force will push the Kurdish peshmerga militia from Kirkuk's oilfields. The peshmerga presence in Kirkuk is providing security for Kurdish officials who are literally stealing Iraq's oil. Moreover, the US will announce via President Bush that all Kurdish oil contracts must first be approved in Baghdad. The US will consider apprehending and prosecuting Kurdish officials who are stealing Iraq's oil reserves.

Finally, to demonstrate US resolve and fairness on Kurdish oil issues, President Bush shall the Hut Oil Company to suspend its oil contracts with the Kurds until such contracts are reviewed and approved by Iraq's central government.

Third, Turkey will announce that it will, with Talabani’s permission, push most of the population in Northern Iraqi PKK zones into areas controlled by Talabani. The purpose of this policy is to put an end, once and for all, to the PKK safe haven in Northern Iraq.

Fourth, the US shall request that the Iraqi flag be displayed in all government buildings in Northern Iraq. If Kurdish compliance with this rule is not forthcoming, the US shall withdraw its troops from the Kurdish zone.

The Staggering Corruption In Iraq

"Everybody Is Stealing From The State"

Americans Arm, Train Former Sunni Insurgents Into Forces Shiites Fear Could One Day Be Capable Of Taking On Government


Kidnappings, roadside bombings, executions, beheadings and civilian massacres are down in Iraq. To a point. Depending on which month of 2006 or 2004 you choose to compare September or October's figures to, you can claim that violence has dropped substantially.

But an average day still sees 40 Iraqis murdered or blown apart, and dozens more wounded and kidnapped.

The Iraqi government is still rife with disputes and crippling walkouts by party members, the most recent by an Sunni bloc. Oil laws have still not been signed, holding back foreign investment to bring Iraq's oil production up to even pre-war levels.

And, as this New York Times story reveals, the levels of corruption in Iraq, where unemployment is believed to be as high as 40%, is staggering in its depth, and reach :

Jobless men pay $500 bribes to join the police. Families build houses illegally on government land, carwashes steal water from public pipes, and nearly everything the government buys or sells can now be found on the black market.

Painkillers for cancer (from the Ministry of Health) cost $80 for a few capsules; electricity meters (from the Ministry of Electricity) go for $200 each, and even third-grade textbooks (stolen from the Ministry of Education) must be bought at bookstores for three times what schools once charged.

“Everyone is stealing from the state,” said Adel Adel al-Subihawi, a prominent Shiite tribal leader in Sadr City, throwing up his hands in disgust. “It’s a very large meal, and everyone wants to eat.”

Corruption and theft are not new to Iraq, and government officials have promised to address the problem. But as Iraqis and American officials assess the effects of this year’s American troop increase, there is a growing sense that, even as security has improved, Iraq has slipped to new depths of lawlessness.

One recent independent analysis ranked Iraq the third most corrupt country in the world. Of 180 countries surveyed, only Somalia and Myanmar were worse, according to Transparency International, a Berlin-based group that publishes the index annually.

And the extent of the theft is staggering. Some American officials estimate that as much as a third of what they spend on Iraqi contracts and grants ends up unaccounted for or stolen, with a portion going to Shiite or Sunni militias. In addition, Iraq’s top anticorruption official estimated this fall — before resigning and fleeing the country after 31 of his agency’s employees were killed over a three-year period — that $18 billion in Iraqi government money had been lost to various stealing schemes since 2004.

The collective filching undermines Iraq’s ability to provide essential services, a key to sustaining recent security gains, according to American military commanders. It also sows a corrosive distrust of democracy and hinders reconciliation as entrenched groups in the Shiite-led government resist reforms that would cut into reliable cash flows.

Of growing concern to the Iraqi government, is the Americans program of training and arming former Sunni insurgents to fight 'Al Qaeda'. The Shiites are worried, and probably rightly so, that the Americans are raising a new army that could won day take on the government forces who had killed so many Sunnis in their peak of their death squad days of 2004-2006 :

The United States, which credits much of the drop in violence to the campaign, is enrolling hundreds of people daily in "concerned local citizens" groups. More than 5,000 have been sworn in in the last eight days, for a total of 77,542 as of Tuesday. As many as 10 groups were created in the past week, bringing the total number to 192, according to the American military.

U.S. officials said they were screening new members — who generally are paid $300 a month to patrol their neighborhoods — and were subjecting them to tough security measures. More than 60,000 have had fingerprints and DNA taken and had retinal scans, American officials said, steps that will allow them to be identified later, should they turn against the government. The officials said they planned to cap membership in the groups at 100,000.

But that hasn't calmed mounting concerns among aides to Prime Minister Nouri al Maliki, who charge that some of the groups include "terrorists" who attack Shiite residents in their neighborhoods. Some of the new "concerned citizens" are occupying houses that terrified Shiite families abandoned, they said.

It also hasn't quieted criticism that the program is trading long-term Iraqi stability for short-term security gains.

"There is a danger here that we are going to have armed all three sides: the Kurds in the north, the Shiite and now the Sunni militias," said Bruce Riedel, a former CIA analyst who's now at The Brookings Institution, a center-left policy organization in Washington, D.C.

Underscoring the division, Sunni politicians said the creation of the groups was justified because it made up for the U.S. decision to disband Saddam Hussein's Sunni-led army shortly after Baghdad fell in 2003. They also said the groups helped balance the infiltration of Iraq's security forces by Shiite militias during the rapid U.S.-sponsored expansion of those forces in 2004 and 2005.

"Those who fear are the ones who have militias blatantly operating from within the official institutions and law enforcement agencies and outside them," said Omar Abdul Sattar, a leading member of the Iraqi Accordance Front, the largest Sunni group in parliament.

The thirst for revenge can last for generations.


Football Returns To Baghdad, Crowds Jubilant

'Only' 500 Iraqis Were Slaughtered In October, 2007

One Day In Iraq : 40 Iraqis Killed, Dozens Wounded, Dozens More Kidnapped

Iraq's Rainy Season Approaches, Baghdad's Ancient Decaying Sewers Not Expected To Cope, Cholera Crisis Looms

Training All Sides Could Lead To Viable Forces To Fight Prolonged Civil War

Americans Not Interested In Hollywood's Version Of The Iraq War

Bush Attacks Maliki Over Iran's Influence On Iraq's Security And Future

Iran is now taking key roles in Iraqi reconstruction and the economy, by signing up to build billions of dollars worth of power plants, to be centred in prominently Shiite locales.

President Bush is taking offense at Iran cutting key energy deals with Iran, and has attacked prime minister Nuri al-Maliki for recent statements that Iran was not a dangerous presence in Iraq and could play a "constructive" role in bringing security to the world's terrorism capital.

From Al Jazeera :

The US president has rebuked Iraq's prime minister for speaking too favourably about Iran. "If the signal [from Nuri al-Maliki] is that Iran is constructive, I will have to have a heart-to-heart with my friend, the prime minister. Because I don't believe they are constructive," George Bush said.

Al-Maliki had thanked Iran for its "positive and constructive" work in "providing security and fighting terrorism in Iraq" on a visit to Tehran, according to the state-run Islamic Republic News Agency.

Iranian leaders told the visiting al-Maliki that they wanted Iraq's friendship and would do all they could to boost Iraqi security.

Al-Maliki's talks appeared to confirm the increasingly warm relations that have emerged between majority Shia Iraq and overwhelmingly Shia Iran following the fall of Saddam Hussein's Sunni-dominated regime.

Bush is making a habit of insulting the leaders of nations the Americans are supposed to be liberating from the clutches of Al Qaeda and terrorists.

He warned Hamid Karzai, the Afghan president, on Monday during a visit to the US presidential retreat at Camp David to be more suspicious of Iran after the Afghan leader had brushed aside US accusations that Tehran was arming the Taliban.

Iran, with a majority of Shia Muslims like Iraq, has been an important political player in Iraq since the 2003 US-led invasion. Tehran denies Washington's accusations that it is supplying weapons to fighters to fuel violence, and instead blames the US military presence.

Baghdad has urged both countries to negotiate and not fight out their differences on Iraqi soil.

That fight would appear to be already well underway.

The NeoCon War On Iran Begins

Iranian President Talks Of Collapse Of 'Zionist Regimes' In US And Israel

September 11 To Mark Start Date Of Massive 'Attack Iran' Propaganda Offensive On American People Via NeoCon Media

The War On Iraq began more than a year before the 'Shock & Awe' bombing of Baghdad began. US special forces, Mossad and other allied intelligence entered Iraq and began scoping targets for bombing, attempting to buy loyalty of tribal leaders and basically preparing for the invasion that was to come.

Through all of this, the NeoCon think tanks and media allies created a War On Iraq reality for the American people through a non-stop campaign of distortions, propaganda and so-called debate.

Likewise, the ground is now be prepared for the War On Iran, in almost exactly the same way preparations at home and in the future warzone were made for Iraq a year out from the start of attacks.

Reports claim US VP Dick Cheney's office is co-ordinating the launch of a massive propaganda offensive, through NeoCon sympathetic media like the Wall Street Journal and Fox News, on the American people to rally support for attacks on Iran. The campaign is said to kick off, naturally, on September 11.

A few days, President Bush declared that the world faced "a nuclear holocaust" from Iran, claiming that Iran is building a nuclear weapons capacity, even though the IAEA completed inspections virtually the same day as Bush's speech and said there were no signs of nuclear weapons being built, and that Iran's nuclear technology did not allow even rudimentary test nuclear weapons to be completed.

Regardless, Bush delivered a fiery speech, that received blanket coverage and comment on American news channels and even news programs.

You can't get much more of a categorical declaration of coming military action than this from President Bush on Thursday :

"I have authorised our military commanders in Iraq to confront Tehran's murderous activities..."

It is clear that President Bush is now ready to move on from propaganda and warnings, and will soon give up on trying to get tighter sanctions through the United Nations, as both Russia and China do not believe Iran poses a significant threat.

Bush is using the combination evidence-free allegations of Iran weaponising nuclear technology and is bringing to a head year old allegations that Iran is arming Iraqi insurgents, and helping Islamists to attack and kill American soldiers in Iraq. Bush's allies in the media are spreading claims far and wide that the 'roadside bomb' attacks are mostly the result of Iranian weapons and training and such attacks have killed more than 600 American soldiers in the past few years.

From the London Times :

Mr Bush also talked for the first time of “two strains” of Islamic radicalism causing chaos in Iraq and the region: not only Sunni jihadists, about whom he has spoken often, but also “Shia extremism, supported and embodied by Iran’s Government”.

The comments displayed a new aggression towards Tehran, a day after President Sarkozy of France raised the prospect of airstrikes on Iran if the crisis over its nuclear ambitions could not be solved through diplomacy.

Mr Bush said: “Iran’s pursuit of technology that could lead to nuclear weapons threatens to put a region already known for instability and violence under the shadow of a nuclear holocaust.

“Iran’s actions threaten the security of nations everywhere, and the United States is rallying friends and allies to isolate Iran’s regime to impose economic sanctions. We will confront this danger before it is too late,” he told war veterans in Nevada.

Mr Ahmadinejad, in a news conference in Tehran, again denied that Iran was pursuing nuclear weapons, and dismissed any possibility of US military action against Iran. “Even if they were to decide to do so, they would be unable to carry it out,” he said.

He increased his provocation of Mr Bush, who accused Iran of arming insurgents with sophisticated roadside bombs that were killing US troops.

“The political power of the occupiers is collapsing rapidly,” Mr Ahmadinejad said. “Soon, we will see a huge power vacuum in the region. Of course, we are prepared to fill the gap.”

More from Iranian President Mahmoud Ahmadinejad :

"There is no way a possibility of such an attack by the United States. Even if they take such a decision, they cannot implement it," Ahmadinejad told a news conference marked by his characteristic defiance.

Ahmadinejad argued that an agreement last week between Iran and the International Atomic Energy Agency (IAEA) meant the nuclear issue was on the right track and there was no need to fear further UN sanctions.

"Not one member of the IAEA has cooperated as well as Iran. So from our point of view, Iran's nuclear case is closed. Iran is a nuclear nation and has the nuclear fuel cycle," he said.

Ahmadinejad said that the cooperation between Iran and the IAEA had showed Western powers that using force to bring Tehran to heel would not work.

"The Iranian people are united, they believe in God, they believe in the reappearance of the Mahdi (the Shiite hidden imam)," he added, a day ahead of a public holiday in Iran to mark the imam's birth anniversary. During his news conference, Ahmadinejad repeatedly invoked the strength of Iranian civilisation, religion and culture, saying this had ensured that Western threats had come to nothing.

Earlier, President Mahmoud Ahmadinejad launched a new verbal attack against Israel, accusing Zionists of sowing conflict, publishing offensive caricatures and "lying about being Jewish."

"Zionists are people without any religion," Ahmadinejad, who has repeatedly predicted that Israel is doomed to disappear, told a news conference in Tehran.

"They thrive on conflict and war. They are an organised minority who have infiltrated the world. They are not even a 10,000-strong organisation," he said.

"Anywhere they are found there is war. Anywhere where there is war they are behind it," Ahmadinejad added.

Cheney's Office Co-Ordinating Massive Pro-Iran War Campaign Through Wall Street Journal, Fox News, Weekly Standard, Other NeoCon Media

International Atomic Energy Agency Reports "Significant" Progress On Dealing With Iran Over Nuclear Energy Development

US Goes After European Banks That Trade, Deal With Iran

Bush Calls For Mass Murder Of Iranians

US Planning "Massive" Military Attack Against Iran

Iran Ignores Protests From Baghdad, Continues Shelling Kurd 'Terrorists' In Northern Iraq

Iran Ready To Fill Power Vacuum In Iraq, Says Iranian President, Comments Infuriate US

America Re-Arms The Middle East

Multi-Billion Dollar Arms Deals For Saudis, Israelis, Egyptians, Gulf States

Israel-US-Sunni Alliance Against Iran Becomes Reality


It was announced last week, and then it disappeared from the news. We're talking about the United States grand plan to pour more than $US60 billion into Israel and Sunni Middle East states so they can arm themselves for a future war against Iran.

The idea that the United States and Israel could form a Middle East military alliance with Saudi Arabia, Egypt, Jordan, UAE and other Gulf states doesn't ring true if you believe the propaganda liberally dosed out by the US State Department. Why would Israel want to form military alliances with Sunni states that refuse to recognise its existence?

Simple. US cash to buy arms, build munitions factories, purchase new troop vehicles, jets, tanks and heavy weaponry.

The United States wants to improve the navies and air forces and upgrade the air and missile defence systems of Saudi Arabia, Bahrain, Kuwait, Oman, Qatar and the United Arab Emirates , where appropriate.

This should be viewed as part of the worldwide implementation of the US' missile defence shield.

China and Russia are now tied to Iran through hundreds of billions of dollars in oil and natural gas deals, and plans for thousands of miles of pipelines snaking across East Asia. China and Russia have made it abundantly clear they will defend their "interests" in Iran, and Pakistan and Afghanistan, along with many of the local 'Stans around and between Russia and China's borders may eventually fall under a joint Russia-China military/security umbrella.

US Secretary of State, Condoleezza Rice, and Defence Secretary, Robert Gates, kicked off the new Israel-Sunni alliance with a reasonably low key visit to America's Arab allies. While they have a massively vested interest in holding onto Iraq, and deposing the Iran-allied Maliki government, they are now looking at using the influence and pressure of Saudi Arabia and Jordan, primarily, to help stabilise Iraq :

"As security permits we hope more states would undertake more diplomatic missions to Iraq," Rice told journalists on her way to the Red Sea resort ofSharm el-Sheikh, appealing also for further Iraq debt forgiveness.

Arab diplomatic missions in Baghdad have scaled back their representation following a campaign of attacks and kidnappings.

The US officials' arrival was preceded by Washington's announcement on Monday of a multi-billion-dollar military aid bonanza for so-called moderate Arab states whose foreign ministers the US duo is due to meet.

"We will have a chance to talk about what initiatives we might undertake with our friends and allies in the security and political areas," Rice said. "We are very concerned to be able to provide for the security of our long-standing allies in the region."

The United States revealed new military pacts worth 20 billion dollars (14.6 billion euros) for Saudi Arabia, 13 billion dollars for Egypt and 30 billion for Israel in a bid to counter Iran.

"I think if there is a destabilisation of the region, that can be laid at the feet of an Iranian regime that is engaging in the kind of activities that I just outlined," she said.

Earlier, she accused Iran of fuelling terrorism in Lebanon; backing and providing technologies to Shiite militias in Iraq; aidingHamas in the Palestinian territories; and harbouring ambitions of acquiring nuclear weapons.

Reports have cited arms deals with the six Gulf Cooperation Council (GCC) states of Saudi Arabia, Kuwait, Qatar, Oman, Bahrain and the United Arab Emirates.

Iranian foreign ministry spokesman Mohammad Ali Hosseini said: "The United States has always had a special policy of spreading fear in the region and tarnishing existing good relations" between countries in the Middle East."

From news.com.au :

"To support our continued diplomatic engagement in the region, we are forging new assistance agreements with the Gulf states, Israel, and Egypt," Rice said in a statement.

The move will "help bolster forces of moderation and support a broader strategy to counter the negative influences of Al-Qaeda, Hezbollah, Syria, and Iran," she said.

Rice said before leaving that the United States had agreed a new 10-year, US$13 billion pact to bolster Egypt's capacity to address shared strategic goals.

A new US$30 billion pact with Israel over 10 years, will soon be concluded, which hikes the value of US military assistance to the Jewish state by US$600 million-a-year on average.

More on what the Saudis are likely to get from the arms deals from the New York Times :

The proposed package of advanced weaponry for Saudi Arabia, which includes advanced satellite-guided bombs, upgrades to its fighters and new naval vessels, has made Israel and some of its supporters in Congress nervous. Senior officials who described the package on Friday said they believed that the administration had resolved those concerns, in part by promising Israel $30.4 billion in military aid over the next decade, a significant increase over what Israel has received in the past 10 years.

But administration officials remained concerned that the size of the package and the advanced weaponry it contains, as well as broader concerns about Saudi Arabia’s role in Iraq, could prompt Saudi critics in Congress to oppose the package when Congress is formally notified about the deal this fall.

The officials said the plan to bolster the militaries of Persian Gulf countries is part of an American strategy to contain the growing power of Iran in the region and to demonstrate that, no matter what happens in Iraq, Washington remains committed to its longtime Arab allies.

In addition to promising an increase in American military aid to Israel, the Pentagon is seeking to ease Israel’s concerns over the proposed weapons sales to Saudi Arabia by asking the Saudis to accept restrictions on the range, size and location of the satellite-guided bombs, including a commitment not to store the weapons at air bases close to Israeli territory, the officials said.

Worried about the impression that the United States was starting an arms race in the region, State and Defense Department officials stressed that the arms deal was being proposed largely in response to improvements in Iran’s military capabilities and to counter the threat posed by its nuclear program, which the Bush administration contends is aimed at building nuclear weapons.

And more detail on what the Saudis hope to get from the United States can be found in this story from the Washington Post :

U.S. officials said the arms sales to Saudi Arabia are expected to include air-to-air missiles as well as Joint Direct Attack Munitions, which turn standard bombs into "smart" precision-guided bombs. Most, but not all, of the arms sales to the six Gulf Cooperation Council countries -- Saudi Arabia, the United Arab Emirates, Kuwait, Qatar, Bahrain and Oman -- will be defensive, the officials said.

"This is a big development, because it's part of a larger regional strategy and the maintenance of a strong U.S. presence in the region. We're paying attention to the needs of our allies and what everyone in the region believes is a flexing of muscles by a more aggressive Iran. One way to deal with that is to make our allies and friends strong," said a senior administration official involved in the negotiations.

If the Saudis, and other oil-rich Arab states don't get their arms from the United States and Israel, they will get them elsewhere, probably Russia and China, and this will lead to a "loss of influence" for the United States in the region.

The Israel deal also confirms what the United States tried to deny during the war between Lebanon and Israel in 2006 : that the US had given tacit approval to Israel to go in hard against Hezbollah, and to destroy infrastructure in Southern Lebanon, with a plan already then in place to eventually re-supply Israel for its equipment losses during the war.

Sunni regimes across the Gulf region have been growing more and more nervous as Iraq's Maliki government increases ties with Iran.

No doubt, many of the Sunni states see an unofficial military alliance with the US and Israel as being the lesser of two evils.

But through all of this news, one simple fact must not be overlooked :

There is currently no threat of a war between the superpowers, or a wider war across the Middle East, and yet tens of billions of dollars will be spent on weapons in this new arms race. An exact mirror the kind of military build-up that occurred across the world during the 1930s, in the build-up to World War 2.

There is unlikely to be any provisions from the United States placed on Arab states like Egypt to implement full democratic elections, and human rights, and commitments to not torture or crush dissent, in order to receive the stream of new military funding.

Should the alliance between Iran and Iraq solidify, and Iraq increases pressure and demands for the United States to withdraw its forces, we could see the bizarre situation develop where, in a wider regional war, American forces, and Sunni regional allies, could go to war against theShia-dominated Iraq army trained, armed and funded by the United States.

Iraqi PM Says Americans Can Leave, Iraq Will Survive

TE Lawrence On 'Iraq' Insurgency 78 Years Ago - Not Much Has Changed



Iraq's prime minister Maliki has announced that American forces can leave his war-ravaged country any time they want, though he would prefer that they stay and keep training Iraqi police and military :

Prime Minister Nouri al-Maliki said Saturday that the Iraqi army and police are capable of keeping security in the country...

The embattled prime minister sought to show confidence at a time when congressional pressure is growing for a withdrawal and the Bush administration reported little progress had been made on the most vital of a series of political benchmarks it wants al-Maliki to carry out.

Al-Maliki said difficulty in enacting the measures was "natural" given Iraq's turmoil.

Top aides to Maliki, and numerous members of the government are furious at the latest US assessment of progress in Iraq's government, widely given a failing grade by the CIA, the majority of the US Congress, and virtually every major news organisation.

Iraqis believe the US is treating their nation like "an experiment in an American laboratory."

One aide, Hassam al-Suneid, launched a savage critique of the US military, claiming :

it was committing human rights violations, embarassing the Iraqi government with its tactics and cooperating with "gangs of killers" in its campaign against al-Qaida in Iraq.

Al-Suneid's comments were a rare show of frustration toward the Americans from within al-Maliki's inner circle as the prime minister struggles to overcome deep divisions between Shiite, Sunni and Kurdish members of his coalition and enact the American-drawn list of benchmarks.

....al-Maliki told reporters Saturday, "We say in full confidence that we are able, God willing, to take the responsibility completely in running the security file if the international forces withdraw at any time they want."

But he added that Iraqi forces are "still in need of more weapons and rehabilitation" to be ready in the case of a withdrawal.

On Friday, the Pentagon conceded that the Iraqi army has become more reliant on the U.S. military. The chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff, Gen. Peter Pace, said the number of Iraqi batallions able to operate on their own without U.S. support has dropped in recent months from 10 to six, though he said the fall was in part due to attrition from stepped-up offensives.

Al-Maliki told a Baghdad press conference that his government needs "time and effort" to enact the political reforms that Washington seeks - "particularly since the political process is facing security, economic and services pressures, as well as regional and international interference."

Al-Suneid, a Shiite lawmaker close to al-Maliki, bristled at the pressure.

He criticized U.S. overtures to Sunni groups in Anbar and Diyala, encouraging former insurgents to join the fight against al-Qaida in Iraq. "These are gangs of killers," he said.

"There are disagreements that the strategy that Petraeus is following might succeed in confronting al-Qaida in the early period but it will leave Iraq an armed nation, an armed society and militias," said al-Suneid.

Journalist Robert Fisk wrote in the UK Independent quotes extensively from a 1929 entry on "Guerilla" for the Encyclopedia Britannica written by TE Lawrence. He said "it contains (a) ghastly message to the American armies in Iraq" :

Writing of the Arab resistance to Turkish occupation in the 1914-18 war, he asks of the insurgents (in Iraq and elsewhere): "... suppose they were an influence, a thing invulnerable, intangible, without front or back, drifting about like a gas? Armies were like plants, immobile as a whole, firm-rooted, nourished through long stems to the head. The Arabs might be a vapour..."

To control the land they occupied, he continued, the Turks "would have need of a fortified post every four square miles, and a post could not be less than 20 men. The Turks would need 600,000 men to meet the combined ill wills of all the local Arab people. They had 100,000 men available."

Now who does that remind you of? The "fortified post every four square miles" is the ghostly future echo of George W Bush's absurd "surge". The Americans need 600,000 men to meet the combined ill will of the Iraqi people, and they have only 150,000 available.

More from Lawrence on Arab/Muslim insurgencies in the land that would become Iraq :

"The printing press is the greatest weapon in the armoury of the modern (guerrilla) commander..."

Exchange 'printing press' for video and the internet and it's a close match to today.

"Rebellion must have an unassailable base ...In the minds of men converted to its creed. It must have a sophisticated alien enemy, in the form of a disciplined army of occupation too small to fulfil the doctrine of acreage: too few to adjust number to space, in order to dominate the whole area effectively from fortified posts.

"It must have a friendly population, not actively friendly, but sympathetic to the point of not betraying rebel movements to the enemy. Rebellions can be made by 2 per cent active in a striking force, and 98 per cent passively sympathetic ... Granted mobility, security ... time, and doctrine ... victory will rest with the insurgents, for the algebraical factors are in the end decisive, and against them perfections of means and spirit struggle quite in vain."

Has President Bush read this definition of an Arab/Muslim insurgency by TE Lawrence, wonders Fisk. Did Rumsfeld? What about General Petraus?

The likely answer is no, no and maybe. And even if they did it, they have already shown, numerous times, that they've learned little from history, from all the wars in the Middle East that have swallowed up generations from the West.

Pentagon Kills Off Rumsfeld's Fake-Story Generating, News Controlling Iraq War Propaganda Unit - Or So They Say

The Iraqi Parliament And US Congress Are Both On Holidays Through August - But Iraqis And Americans Will Go On Dying

Pro-Bush, Pro-Iraq War Newspaper Now Joins Call For Troop Withdrawal

US Helicopter Opens Fire During Fighting With Shiite Militias - Witnesses Say Americans Killed Two Reuters Journalists

Thursday : 97 Iraqis Killed, More Than 90 Wounded

Friday : 100 Iraqis Killed, More Than 50 Wounded

US Report Paints Bleak Picture Of Political, Social Progress By Maliki Government

Will Desperate Republicans Force Cheney, Then Bush To Resign Over Iraq War Failure? Before 2008 Elections?

18 Month Old Baghdad Baby Warns Mother About Sniper Fire - Baghdad Babies Learn To Duck Early

Roadside Bombs Built To Look Like Street Curbing Bush Says Iraq War Affecting The "Psychology Of Americans", But Refuses To Withdraw Troops

Former CIA Terror Expert Says Bush Claim That Iraqi Insurgents Will Attack Americans In The Homeland Is "Insane"

Bush Lies, Distorts Al Qaeda Strength, Links In Iraq

Turkey Masses 140,000 Troops On Northern Iraq Border

We Don't Need Your Permission To Stop Terrorists, Turkey Tells US

Turkey's military leaders are now urging their government to allow them to stage an 'incursion' across the border into Northern Iraq, to deal with Kurdish PKK militants they claim are plotting terror attacks, and who have recently attacked and killed Turkish civilians. Meanwhile, large rallies have been held by nationalistic Turks openly denouncing the Kurds and the United States, who are claimed to be covertly backing PKK militants.

From Khaleej Times :

‘There is a great mobilisation on Iraq’s northern international border that the security services and intelligence (agencies) estimate at more than 140,000 military personnel with all sorts of equipment,’ Zebari told a news conference.

Tensions have soared along the mountainous border region following an upsurge in attacks across Turkey that Ankara has blamed on Kurdistan Workers Party (PKK) militants.

Financial markets were rattled in June by reports of a major Turkish incursion into northern Iraq, which Turkey denied. Zebari said Iraq wanted dialogue to resolve the issue.

‘The government’s stance on this is clear. We are against any interference or breach of Iraqi sovereignty from neighbouring states,’ Zebari said.

‘We understand Turkey’s legitimate fears over the activities of the Workers Party and view this issue as negotiable. There is a joint Iraqi, American and Turkish security committee and it is the appropriate body to solve all the issues and problems between the two countries. We are ready to host the activities of this committee in Baghdad.’

From Zaman :

US Secretary of State Condoleezza Rice phoned her Turkish counterpart Abdullah Gül to prevent a possible Turkish military intervention into northern Iraq to hit the outlawed Kurdistan Workers' Party (PKK) but received no firm assurance, the Washington Post reported yesterday.

"We don't seek permission from anyone, Turkey makes decisions and executes them on its own," Gül told reporters yesterday of his phone conversation with Rice on Friday. "We just remind the US that terrorist organizations in northern Iraq must be fought. The rest is up to us. This is what we told her."

The Washington Post article said a consensus among diplomats and observers in Washington a month ago held that a Turkish intervention is unlikely is now changing as disillusionment with US promises of dealing with the PKK in Iraq and electoral desperation take hold in Ankara. "A Turkish invasion that turns Kurdistan's relative calm into chaos and bloodshed would be the nail in the coffin for Bush's legacy in Iraq and for US public support for the American presence there. Making sure this does not happen should be Priority One for Bush in the weeks ahead," it stated.

Turkish military reportedly fired 25 shells into two villages, Merta Shesh and Gale Psagha, in northern Iraq on Friday. No casualties were reported. Local officials claim it was but the latest volley of shells fired by the Turkish military.

The United States has been frantically trying to calm Turkish government ministers, and military leaders, who want to strike at the PKK now. The United States recently had to deny that it was funnelling weapons and cash to PKK militants.

Turkey Faces Choice Between Democracy And Dictatorship In Coming Elections

Thousands Of Nationalists Turks Denounce Kurds, US In Rallies

Tehran Times : Turkish Government, Military Agree On Plans To Invade Iraq

Eastern Turkey : Turkish Soldiers Kill Five Kurd Rebels, Including Two Women

US Military Issues Stern Warning To Turkey On Launching Raids Into Northern Iraq

China : US Fury Over Chinese Weapons In Iraq & Afghanistan

US Spreads Anti-Chinese Propaganda In Preparation For The Coming US-China Trade War

Australia Airs "Concern" On Behalf Of US Over China's Arms Build Up

The United States doesn't mined if the Iraqi government, and the Iraqi insurgency, pick up their explosives, guns, bullet belts, mortars and mines from American, British, German, French and Israeli arms manufacturers and dealers. But they're having an absolute shit fit now they've discovered Chinese made weapons are finding their way through the appallingly unregulated international arms trade into the hands of insurgents and militias alike. The same goes for the Taliban, militias and government forces in Afghanistan.

The Pentagon and the US State Department are fighting their early days of the coming trade with China by spreading anti-Chinese propaganda on multiple fronts. The controversy over Chinese weapons reaching anti-American insurgencies, via Iran of course, is a double shot. Both Iran and China can be, somewhat, blamed for the shocking defeat of the American military in Iraq, and the continued wearing down of NATO forces in Afghanistan.

Australia is doing its bit for the the Bush Co./NeoCon anti-China propaganda mission by airing "concern" over China's upgrading of its naval and civil defence capabilities. The irony of Australia criticising China for 'arming up' is gagging.

China is a country of more than 1.2 billion people, with a booming economy, not too far on the global scale from massive Islamist uprisings, provoked in part by the actions of the United States, and China is expected to spend just over $40 billion in the next fiscal year on defence.

Australia is an isolated land mass, with no land meeting hostile borders, and a population of only 21 million people. Geographically, Australia could not be any further from the dangerous instability of the Middle East and Afghanistan and Pakistan. Yet Australia will spend a mind-boggling $23 billion on defence in 2008, at least $26 billion in 2009, and a projected $30 billion-plus in 2010.

China is well aware that the United States is using Australia as a proxy, and vital ally, in the eventual encirclement of China, through the US missile defence shield and the deployment of war ships and submarines to create a ready-to-go blockade of the Malacca Straits, China's energy supply gateway, should the United States ever need Australia to do so.

From Financial Times :

The US has raised concerns with the Chinese government about the discovery of Chinese-made weapons in Iraq and Afghanistan.

Richard Lawless, departing senior Pentagon official for Asia, on Friday said Washington had flagged the issue with Beijing. In recent months, the US has become increasingly alarmed that Chinese armour-piercing ammunition has been used by the Taliban in Afghanistan and insurgents in Iraq.

A senior US official recently told the FT that Iran appeared to be providing the Chinese-made weapons. He said Washington had no evidence that Beijing was complicit, but stressed that the US would like China to “do a better job of policing these sales”. Mr Lawless said the question of origin was less important than who was facilitating the transfer.

The concerns about Chinese weapons follow months of allegations from US officials that Iran is helping attack US troops in Iraq, and more recently Afghanistan, by providing technology for bombs that can destroy Humvees and other heavily armoured US vehicles.

He said the Pentagon was disappointed that China had not given Admiral Michael Mullen, chief of naval operations, the same kind of access that his Chinese counterpart received during a visit to the US. Adm Mullen, who has since been nominated as chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff, ended up not visiting China.

Mr Lawless also said it was important for China to hold talks with the US about its nuclear forces. A recent Pentagon report concluded Beijing was developing a more survivable nuclear force, including submarine-launched missiles, and mobile land-based missiles.

Since Presidents Hu Jintao and George W. Bush last year discussed increasing military exchanges, China has not responded to an offer for the commander of its strategic nuclear forces to visit US Strategic Command.

“There is a great shortfall in our understanding of China’s intentions,” said Mr Lawless, referring to the overall Chinese military build-up. “When you don’t know why they are doing it, it is pretty damn threatening . . . they leave us no choice but to assume the worst.”

From Forbes :

An Australian defense paper released Thursday warned that strains between the US and China were inevitable in coming decades, identifying Taiwan as a potential regional flashpoint.

The report, released by Prime Minister John Howard, said the US and China had so far managed their relationship well but there would be tensions as power balances in the Asia Pacific region shifted.

'The (US-China) relationship is underpinned by the region's remarkable growth, the economic interdependency between the two countries, and their mutual interest in stability in the region,' it said.

'As with any international relationship there will be tensions from time to time, but we are confident that the maturing relationship will enable the two countries to resolve any differences amicably.'

The report said Australia's alliance with the US was its most important strategic relationship, predicting that the US would remain the predominant power in the region for at least a generation.

It said China had a legitimate interest in protecting it own security but said the Asian giant's military expansion was a potential source of regional instability.

'The pace and scope of its military modernization, particularly the development of new and disruptive capabilities such as the anti-satellite (ASAT) missile tested in January 2007, could create misunderstandings and instability in the region,' it said.

The military forces of the United States and Australia wound up a massive joint training exercise on Australia's far north coast last week. The 'Talisman Saber' exercise saw more than 7000 Australian and 20,000 US troops working through a series of land and sea based defence scenarios pitting them against 'fictional' enemies.

The joint exercises were covered in detail on China's state run television and internet media.

Note : I'm having trouble embedding links in the commentary sections of the above story. Check back in a day or two if you need to see the sources and links to back up the claims made.


China Goes Hunting For Oil In Sudan

China Will Refuse Future, Harsher Sanctions Against Iran, Urges More Diplomacy
The Coming China Vs United States Trade War

China Challenges US & Europe As It Pushes Into Africa

Now US Intel Claims China Is Arming Terrorists In Iraq And Afghanistan, Via Iran

China, Russia Cop The Demonisation Treatment In American Mainstream Media

Monstrous Defence Budgets Always Require Monstrous Enemies

The fact that this story appears in "the Bush family's favourite newspaper", the Washington Times, doesn't make the claims that are raised factually true, or untrue. In reality, it's probably a bit of both.

But it does mean someone in the Pentagon, or the White House, wanted the so-called 'intelligence' on China arming terrorists who are trying to kill Americans to get out into the mainstream media, and to smack heavily onto the news desks of right-wing talkback radio and Fox News.

This is the latest chapter in the growing demonisation of China and her military plans fashioned for an American audience.

At the same time, Russia is also getting the demonisation treatment in the mainstream American media.

As the Bush administration loses further ground in Iraq, and it becomes all but impossible to claim that the troop "surge" is working, or needs more time to work, the media voices blaming Iran, Russia and China for America's problems in Iraq and Afghanistan will only get louder.

Such leaked 'intelligence' serves to not only fill news time and column inches that would otherwise be devoted to the horror of Iraq, or the ceaseless bad news about the Bush administration, but it creates a need in the minds of Americans that they must continue to spend stunning amounts of money on defence - an estimated $530 billion in the next twelve months alone.

That China, as one of the top five weapons and arms manufacturers in the world, is selling military product that eventually winds up in the hands of terrorists and insurgents is barely an issue at all.

The other key arms makers - Russia, France, the UK, Germany, Israel and the US - also sell their weapons of war in open markets across the planet that constantly infiltrated by middle men who see no problem selling weapons on to genocidal thugs in Africa, jihadist tribes in Afghanistan, or IED-planting insurgents in Iraq, and face little international restrictions when it comes to doing so.

The international sales and export of bombs, missiles and bullets and the means to deliver them into humans is the biggest legal industry in the world, worth more than a trillion dollars a year.

When it comes to filling the world with appallingly vicious weapons of war, the five permanent members of the United Nations Security Council, who also happen to be the five biggest manufacturers of the weapons of war, are all as guilty as each other.

From the Washington Times :

New intelligence reveals China is covertly supplying large quantities of small arms and weapons to insurgents in Iraq and the Taliban militia in Afghanistan, through Iran.

U.S. government appeals to China to check some of the arms shipments in advance were met with stonewalling by Beijing, which insisted it knew nothing about the shipments and asked for additional intelligence on the transfers. The ploy has been used in the past by China to hide its arms-proliferation activities from the United States, according to U.S. officials with access to the intelligence reports.

Some arms were sent by aircraft directly from Chinese factories to Afghanistan and included large-caliber sniper rifles, millions of rounds of ammunition, rocket-propelled grenades and components for roadside bombs, as well as other small arms.

The Washington Times reported June 5 that Chinese-made HN-5 anti-aircraft missiles were being used by the Taliban.

According to the officials, the Iranians, in buying the arms, asked Chinese state-run suppliers to expedite the transfers and to remove serial numbers to prevent tracing their origin. China, for its part, offered to transport the weapons in order to prevent the weapons from being interdicted.

But here's the disclaimer, the double-cover :

The Bush administration has been trying to hide or downplay the intelligence reports to protect its pro-business policies toward China, and to continue to claim that China is helping the United States in the war on terrorism. U.S. officials have openly criticized Iran for the arms transfers but so far there has been no mention that China is a main supplier.

Defense Secretary Robert M. Gates said Wednesday that the flow of Iranian arms to Afghanistan is "fairly substantial" and that it is likely taking place with the help of the Iranian government.

Defense officials are upset that Chinese weapons are being used to kill Americans. "Americans are being killed by Chinese-supplied weapons, with the full knowledge and understanding of Beijing where these weapons are going," one official said.

The arms shipments show that the idea that China is helping the United States in the war on terrorism is "utter nonsense," the official said.

Behind the demonisation of China over allegedly supplying weapons to terrorists are a ream of vastly under-reported financial and business-related stories.

The US wants China to devalue its currency, and to help wind back attempts by Iran and Russia to cease pricing its oil and energy in Euros, or other non-US currencies.

Bush himself said that China, and other Asian nations, must encourage its citizens to stop saving so much of their money, and start spending it, preferably on American goods and services, or even better, on American stocks and bonds.

But of course, those stories are nowhere near as exciting, or instantly infuriating, as hearing that China is supplying weapons that terrorists use to kill American soldiers.

War may break out one day between China and the US, probably over the independence of Taiwan, as many have long predicted.

But the trade war between China and the United States is already well underway. As readers of the history of World War I well know, the trade war always begins a few years before the military war fires up.

US Prepared For "Worst" With China As Military Tensions Increase

China, US To Hold 4th Strategic Dialogue In Washingon

China Objects To US Playing Up "China Threat", Warns US Not To Interfere On Taiwan

China Wants To End US Naval Dominance Of The Pacific

China Rejects US Pressure On Currency

Chinese Yuan Hits Highs As Currency Showdown With US Looms

Five Permanent Members Of UN Security Council To Spend More Than $1 Trillion On Weapons

US & Iran Hold First Talks In 27 Years, Over The Future Of Iraq

US Seen In Arab World As Moving To Make Peace With Iran

It is a shocking sign of just how badly the War On Iraq is going, and how little influence the NeoCons now hold over the White House, to see diplomats from Iran and the United States sitting down to talk. Particularly when the media, and blogs like this one, were only speculating a few days ago about when, or if, the US might launch airstrikes against Iran.

The meeting between Iran and the United States was, of course, centred around the future of Iraq, and how both countries may be able to work together to solve the appalling horror that is now daily life for millions of Iraqis.

But less than two months ago President Bush, and Vice President Dick Cheney, and their songbirds across the NeoCon-sympathetic American media, were railing against Iran and blaring they would never negotiate or enter talks with Iran while they continued to enrich uranium.

Not only has America and Iran sat down at the same table for talks, for the first time in 27 years, but there are clear signs this is just the beginning of a series of talks. That Iran had not halted enriching uranium wasn't even mentioned in most of the American media coverage.

Is the United States still demanding that Iran halt all enrichment work before further talks proceed? American envoy to the talks, Charles Crocker, didn't say.

Nor were there more than a few reflections in the American media on the fact that Iran was, and presumably, still remains one-third of the infamous Bush-tagged 'Axis Of Evil'.

Iran clearly has the upper hand in these talks. Iran wants the Shia-led Iraqi government to hold onto power as much as the Americans do, and the Iranians already know this will not lead to Iraq being transformed into a little America in the Middle East. If anything, Iraq is already transforming into another Iran, with Islamists in the corridors of power in Iraq quietly bringing in Sharia law and all the anti-human rights and freedom violations that come with it.

The United States still claims that Iran is feeding and arming and fuelling the insurgency in Iraq, and is somehow possibly involved with Al Qaeda attacks inside the country. But this is all just headlines for the American media, and Iran knows it.

It has been an astounding testimony to the power of spin that the American media has reported on the Iran-Iraq talks without recognising that it is the United States who finally went to Iran and took them up on their months-old offer of helping to bring peace to Iraq.

An incredibly historic day, all the more because the talks took place in Iraq, with an opening speech by Iraqi prime miniser al-Maliki, and that this monumental thaw in Iran-US relations occurred on America's Memorial Day. Probably no accident in itself, with most news broadcasts devoted to solemn ceremony and reflection on the 300,000 plus Americans who have died in more than 100 years of American wars, and the 3800 who have been killed in wars in Iraq and Afghanistan.

It is becoming clear that Iran will probably develop nuclear weapons, if they want them, and the US will allow this to happen.

It will then be to Israel to decide whether they will bomb Iran and unleash carnage across the region, and upon themselves, clearly aware that any attacks on Iranian nuclear facilities will only put back the creation of nuclear weapons by a few years, if at all. Iran know how to make nuclear weapons now, and that knowledge cannot be bombed out of existence.

The NeoCons may not like it, but it is a reality. The United States is left with little choice but to make sure Iran has no need for such weapons, or for them to use the weapons they may build in the future.

The most obvious way the US can guarantee that Iran doesn't move forward with nuclear weapons is to sign a deal which assures Iran they will not be attacked by the US, and that the US will restrain Israel, if need be.

But tonight, Iranians and Arabs and Muslims across the Middle East, and across the world, are stunned and pleased by the spectacular backdown by the United States. Stunned that it actually happened, and pleased that the talks foreshadow a less aggressive role for the United States in the Middle East.

Memorial Day ceremonies and coverage may have filled the news in the United States, but on Arab cable news, watched by hundreds of millions, the United States moving to make peace with Iran, for this is how it has been widely portrayed, was the big news story of the day, perhaps even of the year.

From the Associated Press :

The United States ambassador in Baghdad said he and his Iranian counterpart agreed broadly on policy toward Iraq during four-hour groundbreaking talks on Monday, but insisted that Iran end its support for militants.

The Iranian ambassador later said the two sides would meet again in less than a month.

Hassan Kazemi Qomi, the Iranian envoy, also said that he told the Americans that his government was ready to train and equip the Iraqi army and police to create "a new military and security structure."

Iran proposed setting up a "trilateral security mechanism" that would include the U.S., Iraq and Iran, an idea he said would require study in Washington.

House Speaker Nancy Pelosi, who was criticized by the White House for her trip to Syria - also a U.S. rival - praised the Bush administration for holding Monday's talks.

"I think it's very important, and at the end of the day we want to know that every remedy, every diplomatic remedy has been exhausted," she said in Berlin.

The talks were held at Iraqi Prime Minister Nouri al-Maliki's Green Zone office.

Al-Maliki did not attend the meeting, but the prime minister greeted the two ambassadors, who shook hands, and led them into a conference room, where the ambassadors sat across from each other.

Before leaving, al-Maliki told both sides that Iraqis wanted a stable country free of foreign forces and regional interference. The country should not be turned into a base for terrorist groups, he said. He also said that the U.S.-led forces in Iraq were only here to help build up the army and police and the country would not be used as a launching ground for a U.S. attack on a neighbor, a clear reference to Iran.

Speaking in Tehran, Iranian Foreign Minister Manouchehr Mottaki said the United States should admit its Middle East policy has failed.

"We are hopeful that Washington's realistic approach to the current issues of Iraq by confessing its failed policy in Iraq and the region and by showing a determination to changing the policy guarantees success of the talks and possible further talks," Mottaki said.

Monday's talks, as predicted, had a pinpoint focus: What Washington and Iran - separately or together - could do to contain the sectarian conflagration in Iraq.

"The American side has accusations against Iran and the Iranian side has some remarks on the presence of the American forces on Iraqi lands, which they see as a threat to their government," said Ali al-Dabagh, an Iraqi government spokesman.

But much more encumbered the narrow agenda - primarily Iran's nuclear program and Iranian fears that the Bush administration will seek regime change in Tehran as it did against Saddam Hussein in Iraq.

Washington and its Sunni Arab allies, on their side, are deeply unnerved by growing Iranian influence in the Middle East and the spread of increasingly radical Islam.

The talks did not all go smoothly, and there were more than a few harsh words exchanged across the conference table during the four hour long meeting.

The United States and Iran both blamed each other for the chaos and destruction in Iraq, but Iran also offered to train and arm Iraqi forces, something the US did not loudly object to, as it may provide a way for the United States to pull out of a conflict that is deeply unpopular back home, and causing widespread dissent within its own military :

US ambassador to Iraq Ryan Crocker accused Iran of fomenting unrest in the country by funnelling weapons and training to extremist militias, and called on Tehran to live up to its promises to support stability.

His Iranian counterpart Hassan Kazemi Qomi, however, accused the US military of not doing enough to arm Iraqi government forces and said the Islamic republic was prepared to step in and do this itself.

Mr Crocker said he had insisted that Iran must back up its stated support for Prime Minister Nuri al-Maliki's beleaguered government by halting its backing for armed factions fighting in Iraq.

"The purpose of our efforts in this meeting was not to build a legal case - presumably the Iranians know what they were doing - our point was simply to say what we know as well; this is dangerous for Iraq," he said.

"What we underscored to the Iranians was that beyond principle there is practice," he said. "The Iranian actions on the ground have to come into harmony with their principles."

Mr Crocker said the Iranians did not address specific US complaints, but instead criticised the American occupation as a whole and complained that US efforts to train Iraqi security forces were inadequate.

Kazemi Qomi described the meeting as positive but blamed the violence in Iraq on the US military presence. He also offered to arm the Iraqi government.

"The Iraqi government is in need of strong military and security structure to confront its security problems and we have offered all forms of assistance such as weapons, training and equipment," he said.

While the United States has to appear to be controlling the situation with Iran, and setting the time and the place for the next talks, behind the scenes the negotiations will continue, as low-level talks between Iran and the United States have already been going on for more than two years over the situation in Iraq.

That Iran has offered to arm and train Iraqi forces, and the United States did not immediately object, is perhaps the more stunning outcome of the meeting.

What then does Israel think of the idea of Iran, perhaps its most hated enemy, arming and training the Iraqi Army and security forces, under an Iraqi government that is firmly pro-Iran?

Israel has barely said a word about the Iran and US talks, presumably because the US told them to keep it down for a few days.

But one prominent story in the Jerusalem Post, discussing the concept of a "Grand Bargain, appeared to be setting the scene for a future where Iran and Iraq are closely and publicly allied, and the United States has pulled back from threatening Iran over its nuclear development programs :

US and Iranian goals and interests in Iraq are diametrically opposed. America's goals are to defeat the insurgency, establish a stable democracy and be able to declare victory as its troops are withdrawn.

Iran's goals are to maintain the status quo - keep the Americans tied down in Iraq, without making the pressure on US forces so great that it will force an early withdrawal.

Keeping US forces bogged down in Iraq not only limits the US's ability to attack Iran's nuclear facilities, it also leaves 160,000 American targets nearby for easy Iranian retaliation should the US attack.

So if there is little hope for the US and Iran joining forces and creating a stable Iraq, why is this meeting so potentially important? Should the talks lead to a dialogue that would try to resolve all the outstanding issues between the two countries - what is often referred to as "the grand bargain"- there is some limited hope for creating a more stable Middle East.

The suggested price (of the "Grand Bargain") has been, until now, a US guarantee not to destabilize the Iranian regime. While in the past the US has refused to give such a guarantee, there might not be a better policy alternative.

The future of the Middle East may have just taken a very unexpected turn for the better.

Worthless Claims :Robert Baer On More Bad Intelligence On Iran And Iraq

The Great Satan Sits Down To Talk With The Axis Of Evil

Republican Embrace Widely Discredited Bush Propaganda Of Iraq Links To Al Qaeda

Eight US Soldiers Killed In Iraq On Memorial Day

In Iraq, Every Day Is Memorial Day

American Troops In Iraq No Longer True Believers : Why Are We Here? They Ask, As Iraqi Army 'Allies' Are Caught Planting Roadside Bombs That Kill Americans

Iran Arrests 14,000 During 'Moralisation' Programs

Supreme NeoCon Iraq War Hawk, Richard Perle, Has No Regrets