We now know what Israeli turn-over of Gaza and
American democratization of Baghdad mean: pour
concrete on them all and when it dries shoot from the
air whatever still moves.

Gareth Porter-- my personal nemesis supporting Hanoi
back in the Vietnam War days-- has proven to be one of
the most astute analysts of the Iraq situation in Wash
DC (perhaps I should reconsider Vietnam too). In a
recent analysis he reads Maliki's attack on Basra as a
last minute attempt to preempt an American assault on
the city, pre-planned since last June as part of the
surge. Porter is spot-on, as oil companies execs will
testify.

To ease the high cost of gasoline suffered by
Americans before he leave office Bush wants to at
least secure the Basra fields, where 80% of Iraq's
known oil reserves are located, and the port of exit,
Basra City. He believes that cheap oil will make the
Iraq War worth it to Americans and all his
incompetence and indecisiveness would be forgiven. It
should be remembered that the first priority of the
Iraq invasion of 2003 was not to allow Saddam to, in
defeat, set fire to the oil wells as he had done in
Kuwait. So, while in 2003 every building and person in
Baghdad was pillaged, plundered and molested by roving
gangs, American soldiers stood by watching-- a crime
by international law, for safety and order are the
responsibility of the occupying power-- the oil fields
were safe and sound.

With oil now at twice the price back when Bush sought
to make Iraq America's own oil gusher, Bush would like
to leave office with "mission [partially]
accomplished" at least: Basra safe for imperial
plunder by Western oil companies so that Iraq's oil
can drown OPEC's quotas.

PM Maliki is still resisting the oil privatization
law-- allowing Western investment in and domination of
the oil fields-- that the US tried to shove down his
throat. Maliki knows well that if the US seizes Basra,
who masters the fields becomes moot. To date, with the
British having abandoned the imperial program early,
the oil has been flowing through the hands of
everything from religious militias to criminal gangs
on to the global black market. For five years now, so
fearful of the explosive insecurity, American oil
giants have shied away from commitment to seizing
Iraq's oil. In that sense, one can say that the
insurgency has-- so far-- been successful.

But suddenly, after Hunt made a totally illegal deal
with the Kurds, bypassing the Iraqi government, for
the smaller fields in the North of Iraq, Maliki,
having denounced and rejected the deal, noted that
American oil companies were lining up to sign on for
the Basra fields in the South. So, to head off Bush's
plans for Basra oil, Maliki moved to seize Basra first
and forced the US to provide logistic and air support
by placing before Petraeus a fait accompli. To deny
support would violate Iraq's sovereignty and Malki
could demand that the US leave immediately. Already he
faced down the US last year claiming that if the US
stops supporting him he can find other friends
elsewhere. First the British complied and then
Petraeus had no choice.

But there is a further absurdity in all this. PM
Maiki-- who came to power thanks to Sadr's political
support-- has now focused his forces on Sadr's Mahdi
Militia, insisting that they disarm and disband and
that Sadr himself abandon all political aspirations.
To mount his offensive, Maliki aligned with Hakim's
Iran run and created Badr forces for the Basra
offensive. The Iran created ISCI that Hakim heads
wants to make a separate autonomous federal unit of
Iraq's nine Southern provinces, where 80% of the
proven oil reserves lie. So, using the Iran-proxy for
troops, the Brits and US for air support and
logistics, Maliki hoped to destroy the Shi'ite Sadr
Tendency Movement before the US does.

Unlike Hakim, Sadr is an Iraqi nationalist who does
not allow the similar Shia confessional bond with Iran
to eclipse the fact that Iraqis are Arabs, not
Persians. He sought a Shia-Sunni Iraqi alliance to
expel the US with ceremonial thank yous for removing
Saddam and bands playing all the way to the door: it's
time to go home, Yankee!

Maliki is also an Iraqi nationalist who does not want
Iranian domination. But he realizes that, just as Bush
is on his way out of the White House, the US is on its
way out of Iraq. He must, therefore, come up with a
counter-force to the Sunni neighboring states that
have been feeding the insurgency all along (Saudis
provided suicide volunteers and technology while
Kuwait provided the money and Gulf states serve as
bankers with transferred Saddam's billions for the
insurgency). Maliki's solution was a temporary
alliance with ISCI (whose Badr forces were killing
Iraqis for Iran during the 1980s Iran-Iraq War). By
working with this creature of Tehran-- whom Bush
Administration schemers saw as the best ally in order
to stop Iranian involvement in the war-- Maliki felt
confident that Iran would support his regime while he
brings the Sunnis in line after the Americans leave.
Prior to the invasion, Hakim was in on all the CIA
guided and funded exiles' councils in London of the
Iraqi National Council, led by Ahmed Chalabi, another
proven Iranian spy. Back then it didn't matter because
Bush was planning a one-two regime change two-step:
Iraq-->Iran. But with no regime change possible in
Iran to date, Bush had to grumble and watch helpless
while all Shia factions maneuvered for Iranian
backing.

All this is clever by half. As Americans, given our
original oily motives, let us ask ourselves what does
it cost in blood, time and money to kill one insurgent
and how many must we kill in order to secure the oil
fields for ourselves?

Making the multiplication, the price seems almost as
great as the technological revolution that would make
the US independent of Mideast oil. Yet, we rather copy
the storm trooper tactics which the Israelis in turn
copied from the English, Germans, Soviets and South
Africans in order to suppress any objection to our
imperial designs on Iraqi oil; we are thus losing
irreplaceable *VOLUNTEER* soldiers (none of the neocon
chicken-hawks are stepping up to replace them!) and
creating orphans and widows just because we can't
admit that we were defeated by our own military's
criminal incompetence. How much top-down
low-brain-powered arrogance will it take before
America realizes that it has been morally, globally
and economically exsanguinated?

The Arab survivors of our war crimes, as the Israelis
learned the hard way, will for generation afterward
never forget and never forgive. In that sense (and
also given that we invited use of airliners as suicide
guided missiles by leaving ALL pilot's cabin doors
wide open) we are at fault for 9/11 by providing
generations of victims of our violent oil grabs reason
to hate us and want to kill us as they kill themselves
in revenge for generations to come. On might say that
Reverend Wright-- who served his country as a Marine,
unlike Bill Clinton who evaded the Draft and
demonstrated against America in Moscow Square-- might
have a point: avarice and hubris make us our own worst
enemy.

a new old spammer...