Comments on: Morose over Maliki

By: Ray

Ray — Mon, 28 Jan 2008 21:10:10 +0000

Minor quibble: Maliki is the prime minister, not the president. We decided to ditch the presidential system for Iraq, due to bad experiences with it in the past.

By: STEVEC

STEVEC — Mon, 28 Jan 2008 20:28:26 +0000

I think that the larger worry is whether Iran will ultimately control Iraq through their surrogate Shiites?

And the second but larger long-term question: Will the U.S. ever get it’s head out and do something about Iran? I mean, they’ve been killing our folks and making trouble for us since the ’70′s and still our government thinks that talking to them and warnings will accomplish something. They won’t. Our sequential Secretaries of State can say that the language used is “strong” and “dire”, but repeated warnings lose meaning incrementally as each one is made unless action will follow – we’ve not shown that we are likely to do anything.

By: Kris, in New England

Kris, in New England — Mon, 28 Jan 2008 19:03:04 +0000

Malaki will eventually be overthrown by the strongman-enabled by the Army we trained-to take over the country.

It does beg the question – once Bush is out of office, no matter who is voted in – will Iraq’s fledgling democracy hold? Without the unquestioning support of the President of the United States, is it possible that they will revert to the only thing they have ever known – dictatorship?

By: unkawill

unkawill — Mon, 28 Jan 2008 15:58:08 +0000

On the eve of my departure from Baghdag, I am saddened to see Skippy’s callus bigotry on display.

By: Skippy-san

Skippy-san — Mon, 28 Jan 2008 15:43:17 +0000

It just proves my point. Arabs are worhtless and they wil screw away any opportunity given them. Malaki will eventually be overthrown by the strongman-enabled by the Army we trained-to take over the country. Problem is he will probably be still an Islamic-which means he is of no use to the US.

Throw the Iraqis into the pool and let them sink or swim. The US needs to move on.