Turns out it's Sun Tzu's Art of War, and is expressed somewhat more verbosely:
If you know the enemy and know yourself, you need not fear the result of a hundred battles.Why did I seek this maxim?
The good Gen Petraeus!
Gen David Petraeus told the BBC he thought Tehran had trained, equipped and funded insurgents who fired the barrage of mortars and rockets.All news stories related to the Green Zone attack acknowledge that it was carried out by core members - not splinter groups - of al Sadr's Mahdi Army.
[Iran 'behind Green Zone attack' ]
Al Sadr is fiercely nationalistic - his Mahdi Army is not allied with Iran.
What evidence has Petraeus to support his belief that the attackers were "trained, equipped and funded" by Iran?
Short answer: none.
Why did he make this claim?
Short answer: it pleased his political masters.
Of the frequently identified Shiite militias, the one generally associated with Iran is the Badr Brigade, associated with the Supreme Islamic Iraqi Council (SIIC).
[I'd post Wikipedia links, but you all can look it up for yourselves... I'm tired.]
Petraeus's attribution of Iranian influence to al Sadr's Mahdi Army is not quite the gaffe that McCain's claim that Iran trained al Qaeda was, but it's close.
Both demonstrate a profound misunderstanding of the enemy.
["Outside agitators" are a favorite scapegoat of those in power. Somehow it is easier to blame them for problems than to admit that - in this particular case - Iraqi nationals object to our presence!
("Outside agitators" were a favorite scapegoat of Administrations during the Viet Nam debacle. Those in power simply could not admit that their own constituents could possibly object to U.S. policy - it had to be "the other".)]
And, in this particular case, blaming the Iranian bogey-man serves an additional political purpose: it helps set the stage for future action against Iran.
Okay, I'm ready to launch into my naked conspiracy theory again, so it's clear that I need to stop typing!
Stop the madness!
No comments:
Post a Comment