Of course the Sunni’s want Peace. And so do the Shite’s. At the expense of utter annhiliation of the other.

“And what role are the occupiers playing in all of this? It’s very convenient for them, I believe. It’s all very good if Iraqis are abducting and killing each other - then they can be the neutral foreign party trying to promote peace and understanding between people who, up until the occupation, were very peaceful and understanding.”

What she really means is; Before the coalition arrived, the Sunnis who had control (under Saddam) could peacefully, and with understanding watch a brutal regime kill not only Shias in the south but Sunni Kurds as well. And for Sunnis this was peace. After all, they were the oppressors. Now the shoe is on the other foot and she and those of her sect don’t like it.

Hey, Riverbend. Now it is your turn in the barrel!

Ironically my previous statements were not meant as humor but fact. Theres what? 5 major poltical/religious factions in Iraq.

Each one is willing to live in peace provided the other 4 are ground completely under their heel.

Thats the short version of it. There’s all sorts of nuances and minor tribal BS, but the end result is for the factions, It’s all; or nothing.

And if they can’t have it, they don’t want anyone else to either.

Tribalism is the mark of a primative society which is something we in the west need to understand. These people think with a 15th century mentality. They understand only a few principles. They are; Force, Violence, Subjugation of the weak and do what ever it takes to destroy those outside your tribe (like strapping a bomb to yourself so you can earn your way into heaven by killing women and children.).

I have to wonder, are Iraqis (or any Arabs for that matter) worth helping. I honestly don’t know anymore.

“You don’t have to be crazy to set yourself on fire and run in to a enemy tank: But it sure helps!”

But your dead on. It’s not peace thru superior firepower. Its peace thru utter destruction terror and ruling by fear.

During that time, the Shiites held back, following the counsel of al-Sistani and other leaders. Now, many Shiites have had enough and are beginning to exact a terrible retribution.

This for example. Not all Shias (as is the preferred pronunciation) held back. You’ve made Shias out to be the victims, which they were to a great extent under Sadaam, but aren’t any longer. The numbers of Shia and Sunni insurgents have been pretty similar. Idiots exist in all religions and all sects.

The Shiites are going to kill as many Sunnis (guilty and innocent) as they need to until the terrorists are destroyed. Soon Riverbend and other Sunnis will not only be willing to tolerate an American occupation, but will be demanding it.

Again, you’re generalising. Try not to, because it makes your arguments sound weak. Riverbend also is neither a Sunni nor a Shia, but a mixture of both. What’s your prediction for the views of those people?

Commissar, 107 days after your 90-day prediction, Riverbend’s still telling the US to get out. Does it mean the US needs to stay in Iraq?

When I read Riverbend’s latest, I remembered the gist of the post, but had forgotten the prediction. But, in a way, it’s come true. Did you read the “and the Americans just stood by” post. The inference is that we should have protected the Sunnis. I’ll post on this. Thanks.