Iran’s Rafsanjani hails Iraqi vote ‘victory’

is this guy smoking?

peace

Iran's victory cost the country of Iran...zero dollars, zero lives and zero effort. It's amazing what happens when you let the Keystone Cops run American foreign policy -- another failure of the scrubbies.

And that's why I think we're seeing this whole degenerate regime (in Washington, that is) come down before our eyes.

The real heavy hitters, the power-wielding insiders have concluded that the war in Iraq is a mess. It's a liability.

It was a long shot, to begin with. Wolfowitz knew that. But they couldn't NOT grab Iraq. So we're left with -

a country which was supposed to be "democratic" which will ultimately be a close ally of Iran.

Happy, George?

Preliminary results being circulated among the Iraqi political class are showing a complete route by the United Iraqi Alliance of rival contenders in all Shia domains of Iraq. The Islamists (list no. ‘555’) are winning by a landslide in almost all precincts, and by landslide I mean over 80%.
http://talismangate.blogspot.com/2005/12/oops.html

n/t

The United Iraqi Alliance is a broad-based coalition of over 20 groups, but it is dominated by the two major Shia parties, Prime Minister Ibrahim Jaafari's Islamic Daawa Party, and Abd al-Aziz Hakim's Supreme Council for the Islamic Revolution in Iraq (SCIRI).

The UIA won a narrow majority of 140 seats out of a total 275 seats in the Transitional National Assembly in January.

For December's poll, the alliance has been joined by parties supporting radical Shia cleric Muqtada Sadr.

The alliance's platform calls for national unity, the enforcement of the new constitution, the end of the US-led coalition's presence, the de-politicisation of government institutions, and the formation of regional governments.

More:
http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/middle_east/4511450.stm#uia

n/t

The Iraqis are voting for what they are familiar with. And comfortable with.

So what happens when Iraq and iran become best friends?

Well, golly gee.

And we know how reliable they are. I expect a dead heat between Allawi and Chalabi, with each getting 150% of the vote. Bush will flip a coin to break the tie. The U.S. Supreme Court will rule in the affirmative.

Rafsanjani is simply expressing what is the most likely outcome of this "election" held while Iraq is under foreign occupation.

So, if the Shi'ites win big, as expected, this is a big defeat for the Bushites and the neocons. It means that eventually, Iraq will move from being a puppet of the U.S. to becoming a client state of Iran.

Nothing good can come out of Bush's lies ... 'The Islamic Republic of Iraq' is the consequences of American deceit in the Middle East. For that we can all thank George W. Bush.

I guess a sharia fundementalist Iraq fits in with PNAC's permanant war plans.

The Bushes have a history of being taken for a ride by the Iranians.

And Bush Junior really screwed the pooch this time. He handed the best part of Iraq to Iran. What a moron.

"BRING EM ON" he SCREECHED

Have you no respect for your govt?

He is excercising his freedom of speech for one, for two Bush isn't Louis XIV.

First time I ever heard him actually talk. Instead of just stutter.

But I can't seem to get a feel for the guy. Nothing at all. Its like there is just no one home. No feeling, no emotion, no nothing.

:evilgrin:

After all, it's Bush who is such a lying bellicose incompetent and inhumane piece of crap that he is losing a PR war to Osama. The reaction against the western democratic ideals that Bush trumpets and then betrays is going to cost generations of Iraqis freedom and democracy that might, MIGHT have occured if Bush hadn't fucked up each and every aspect of his handling of Iraq.

... at one point he was accused of passing American secrets to the Iranians, I forget how that turned out. I think Bush just dropped it, probably too embarassing to him.

I thought you forgot how it turned out. That's how it turned out.

Hi

It doesnt really matter what Iran says, the fact is that their best interest is for Iraq to remain chaotic and unstable. This is because chaos in Iraq ties down US fighting power which could otherwise be directed at them- Iran's regime feels that they are in the crosshairs and have been since the 'axis of evil' was first mentioned, and only nuclear weapons can get them out of the crosshairs. So the mayhem in Iraq is buying them time. Which means that they may like seeing parties come to power that are aligned with their government to some degree, but they do not want the insurgency to end and a large scale US withdrawal to commence.

Also, I think its important to remember that Iran and Iraq's shias are not exactly the same, nor do they think the same way or have the same political philosophy.

Finally, I would warn against all the panic regarding a shia theocracy in Iraq- it isnt going to happen. First of all, the Iraqi constitution makes it impossible, secondly the Shia islamist coalition will NOT have enough parliamentary representation to form a government on their own- they will be forced to form a coalition with the sunnis, kurds, or secularists which means they will have to make concessions. So yeah, we may see Iraq adopt more sharia law in their civil and family law, like most Arab countries, but its unlikely that this upcoming government will form a theocracy.

And well said, too.
:hi:

mean anything.

He was on Lehrer one night explaining that away.

That guy is just such a loser. And such a liar. But he is back in good graces with Condi and Rummy.

it's not your god that is winning! Fool!

:evilgrin: