Much of 2007 and 2008 in Iraq was characterized by a downturn in general sectarian violence and the tit-for-tat attacks on civilians by Shia and Sunni groups. The previous period, known as the ‘Civil War’ was remarkably for two reasons, the absolute lawlessness and bloody killings, and also for support of the Maliki government. This support of course did not reveal any general affection for the US-puppet regime in the Green Zone, but rather a ‘enemy of my enemy is my friend’ mentality. The Iraqi people want an end to the US puppet regime and it’s goal of enforced privatization and looting of Iraqi wealth to rich foreign companies and the bourgeois political class. After Saddam was first overthrown it was the Iraqi people collectively who set up their own elections nationwide, demanding an end to the US privatization and looting of Iraqi oil wealth and a return of a strong public service for employment opportunities. Indeed these local ad hoc politicians in those days truly represented the people. They knew that the recent US sacking of the entire Iraqi army (some 500,000 soldiers) plus sacking of millions of public servants with links to the Baath Party, would eventually lead to civil war because of the chaotic atmosphere and the power vacuum left by the Baathist regime. The US military estimates that in the period preceding the overthrow that over a million shells (now used for everything from carbombs, suicide bombings and IEDs) were looted from the munitions dumps left unguarded.

The rise of the bloody religious extremists was all but inevitable, but largely this rise of al-qaeda worked brilliantly for the US occupiers. Before the Interim government Iraq was ruled directly as a US client state, the so called Provisional Government, by Paul Bremer, who preceded over various neoliberal policies such as a 10% flat corporate tax, introducing no limits on foreign ownership, and a wholesale campaign of deregulation and privatization. The results were horrible; the complete loss of social services and everything that bound Iraqi people together now resulted in a complete disintegration of the entire country, a void quickly filled by the religious extremists. The economic deregulation of the protectionism of the Iraqi economy was also brought down, which resulted in the destruction of Iraqi agriculture by subsidized US agribusiness.

The war in Iraq can roughly be put into two main categories and an emerging third one I will discuss later. The first period lasted for the life of the US-client state period and the Interim government, it was characterized a general popular resistance to US imperialism. They fought the dictatorship of Bremer who was a US citizen and literally head of state of Iraq, who could literally write a law, sign it, and it was law. The common Iraqi people saw the effects of the right-wing neoliberal policies on their country and refuse to accept them, they organize their own elections with candidates who would support what the people wanted. These elections were deemed ‘illegitimate’ by the Bremer dictatorship and were banned by his authority. ‘Democracy’ was to be on US terms, and with pro-US candidates only, and the Maliki puppet government quickly filled this void.

The next period of the war might have been a continuation of the popular national resistance against US imperialism, but alas the ‘election’ of the Maliki regime quickly worked in just the way America wanted. The sectarianists took advantage and the frail bond which had held the Sunni and Shia Iraqis was now broken, and a bloody civil war broke out characterized by death squad massacres, car bombings of crowded areas and various other atrocities. Most Americans would regard the ethnic civil war period of the war as the worst period, and for the Iraqi people it certainly was, the US military could consolidate it’s position with lowered casualties from the first period as Iraqis killed each other by the thousand.

Indeed so advantageous to the Americans was the civil war that it almost completely delegitimized any ‘resistance’ to the occupation, because instantly any occupation to the foreign occupier was indistinguishable from the bloody sectarianism of the ethnic gangs. The civil war and the violence of it completely overshadowed the previous role of the Iraqi nationalists to ended occupation and looting (privatization) of their nation. Now the occupiers could simply say ‘look they kill women, children and innocents’ when confronted. The civil war cemented US occupation by providing a smokescreen (at the cost of tens of thousands of Iraqis) over legitimate resistance. It wrongly painted the invader as the liberator.

But as quickly as the rise of the ethnic sectarianism, just as quick was it’s fall as common Iraqis rejected the violence of the ethnic-religious groups and opted for national unity. The attempt of the mostly foreign Jihadists to use Iraq as another Algeria or Afghanistan for their bloody religious wars was ultimately thwarted and rejected by the Iraqi people, albeit at a high cost. Indeed the end of the ethnic civil war is being portrayed in US political circles as a ‘victory’, yes it is, but the victory is not to the occupiers would have benefited from an indefinite civil war, but to the Iraqi people.

This week tens of thousands of supporters of the Mehdi Army marched in Baghdad in a massive show of force for their cleric, demanding the puppet Maliki's removal. In the vast Sadr City slum, named after the cleric's slain father, crowds of angry men chanted slogans.
"We demand the downfall of the Maliki government. It does not represent the people. It represents Bush and Cheney," marcher Hussein Abu Ali said.
Indeed such is the irony for the Americans that just as the civil war has all but ended that the previous interrupted fight, the one against US occupation, has been re-launched with the Mehdi uprising in Sadr city. The national focus has shifted overnight to the Maliki puppet regime and it’s military backers the US. Indeed Sadr city is a symbol of the divide that the neoliberal policies of American imposed on the Iraqi people have had. The ‘Green Zone’, the seat of the Iraqi puppet regime, is a pristine corporate utopia of clean streets, well paid politicians, palace like embassies protected by mercenaries. Compared to Sadr city, a slum of over 2 million people constantly living under siege and without basic necessities, it is an apt comparison.

The new fight in Iraq is between the Iraqi people, the masses of disenfranchised and downtrodden people, and the Green Zone US-puppet regime of Maliki. And without a distraction like a civil war to stop them, surely the Iraqi people will soon seize power.

Here is a Muslim reporter who disagrees with your thesis, though he did not support the war for other reasons. It is well worth reading the whole article, here. In fact, I think I shall post it in its own thread.

By the way, the idea that Iraq is a 'client' state of the US or that the US actually 'occupies' it with an army the size of a small city is preposterous. Remember the purple finger? That was the hopes of the man and woman in the Iraqi street, not the greedy US looking to suck Iraq dry and destroy it. U.S went there with idealist hopes. If those hopes are shattered it will not be the fault of the US but of people/governments with your mindset.

__________________
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=4x0bU...watch_response
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ZL0C2QvqIlo#
"The courageous over the infidels, make war for Allah and are not afraid... This is the depiction of the army of Allah that will come at Allah's decree, from here or from there, to liberate these lands from the defilement of the Jews, for Allah was angry with them in his book and called them once 'monkeys,' once 'swine,' and once 'donkeys.'" (Palestinian TV, March 30, 2001)

You ignoring the fact that Iraq was systematically economically destroyed by the privatized looting of the CPA and Interim government. The Iraqis set up their own democracy after Saddam fell and the Americans banned the elections and all trade unions until they could set up their own candidate as the only real choice in the election.

Bremer did come with ideals, neoconservative ones for 'opening Iraq for business' and looting the oil wealth.

Al-qaeda is now irrelevant and the focus of anger is on the Americans and their puppet Maliki, he won't last very long now, Iraqi soldiers are defecting and deserting in their hundreds through this week. Tens of thousands of Iraqis protested in the streets of Baghdad and even Maliki can only ignore the popular will for so long.

And yes, the CPA and Interim government were puppet regimes by every definition of the word, the CPA was run by Americans and the Interim was appointed by them so only pro-American Iraqis were chosen.

The actual election itself was undemocratic because it did not represent over half of the eligible Iraqi population who boycotted because it was obvious the only candidates were pro-America and would not implement policies which they wanted, ie ending privatization theft of Iraqi national resources and ending full public service employment.

It was the Americans who gave the insurgency the breath it needed to thrive, the deregulation of business and trade meant a culture of black marketering, crime and gangsterism prevailed in much of the country. Social solidarity in Iraq broke down after everything the Iraqi state had was thrown out.

Your careful avoidance of the fact and attempts to get around them by quoting articles which have nothing to do with my points nor address them proves my point.

"systematically....destroyed by looting"? It's an oxymoron. The IRaqis did not set up their own democracy right after Saddam fell. Democracies are not made in 5 minutes. Candidates have to stand and tell the people what their policies are, constitutions had to be written protecting the ordinary person. Terrorists were killing those who dared to stand up for principle and it was clear that Al Qaeda was operating in the area. Do you remember all the political assassinations that went on and who was responsible for them? It wasn't the U.S.

Nonsense about neoconservatives looting the oil wealth. I guess you have forgotten how Saddam put the oil fields on fire and the U.S. put them out? Since the war started over there the US pays at least twice what we were paying for a gallon of gas. It is currently at record highs and the northern tier states cannot afford to both eat and heat their homes. Americans have lost their lives trying to prevent Iraqis (or Iranians and Syrians) from terrorising and killing their civilian population. It is not the U.S that is terrorising and bombing civilians in marketplaces; it is people in the region. The U.S has lost 4000 of their best soldiers in trying to help the Iraqi people get and maintain something that looks like independence, and all you can say is that we are there to steal from them!

Al Qaeda is not irrelevant, I assure you, though you also have other Muslim terrorist groups there for sure. I would like to see a reliable article demonstrating your numbers.
The Iraqi people had the opportunity to participate in free elections. Those that chose not to do so chose to undermine those that did with violence and terror and murder. Your position is that the violence and terror and murder against Americans and those who agree with the American position is justified because of theft. Black marketering, crime and gangsterism is not the fault of the US but the fault of the culture itself. The Iraqis have a government -- let them vote in "regulation of business and trade" though I am willing to bet that it has not even been de-regulated, that it is just something that has happened due to the chaos that is inevitable after any social upheaval. Things will get better but only if the people themselves want them to get better. Violence and terror only breeds violence and terror.

Your vague generalities are not accompanied with any real facts or figures. It will take more than vague generalities to convince us that the US is the culprit in Iraq and that Al Qaeda and foreign and homegrown Jihads are not!

__________________
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=4x0bU...watch_response
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ZL0C2QvqIlo#
"The courageous over the infidels, make war for Allah and are not afraid... This is the depiction of the army of Allah that will come at Allah's decree, from here or from there, to liberate these lands from the defilement of the Jews, for Allah was angry with them in his book and called them once 'monkeys,' once 'swine,' and once 'donkeys.'" (Palestinian TV, March 30, 2001)