That is a pretty broad group...is it based upon intentions or results?

The banning is a setback for the election, and unless someone overturns the decision it will show that Iraq's political system is not ruled by law.

That being said, it will not lead to civil war. If there is Sunni disatisfaction it's likely to be seen in lower voter turnout rather than a return to violence. Second, why would the Shiite parties turn on each other and start fighting over this? Both Maliki's State of Law and the SIIC/Sadrist National Alliance List have been playing sectarian politics since the end of last year, and this banning is just more of the same. Why would they start fighting each other when they are playing the SAME game???

Last, postponing the elections would the worst decision. The elections are already hapening past a constitutional deadline. Delaying it would show that one small group could overturn the entire system, which is not the message that should be sent at this time.

Iraq's politics are a mess but these posts are always yelling fire, with no motivations for why one would start in the first place.

Forgot to say that the ban is not aimed at Sunnis, rather it's an attempt by the old sectarian Shiite parties to hit te new nationalist/secular parties, basically the old vs the new. It's also meant to make Baathism an issue rather than the economy, services, etc. because fear of Baathists still plays well with a lot of Shiites.

Our Generals are waiting for an excuse to end the force drawdown. They have failed, and plan to keep a huge US occupation force in Iraq for decades, lest Congress cut their budget.

Isn't this war over?

US brought most of the folks in power in Iraq with very strong pro-Iranian background so Chalabi he is playing his game to be pro-Iranian.

Chalabi? Forrest Gump?

One commentor indicated that he thought military leaders were happy to stay in Iraq forever. Not true.

I spent 2008 in Northern Iraq with LTG Mark Hertling, no fan of the war, and anxious to get his troops of the line as soon as possible.

In December, MG Caslan, Hertling's replacement, gave an end-of-tour briefing at the US Institute of Peace. First, he explained that, as aresult of the defective 2005 elections, the provinces in the North were filled with ineffective and non-representative leaders---until the 2009 election, when the Sunnis fully participated and effective leadership arrived. As for withdrawal and turn-over, he indicated that he was initially skeptical, but pressure by Odierno, who indicated how important self-reliance was to the Iraqis---a point which, in hindsight, he very much agreed with. Might be plenty of folks inside the Beltway who appreciate "business as usual" but it is not in the military leadership. The folks who have to write those letters (Your son was killed in the post-war), have a very real appreciation for the sacrifice.

Iraq's latest. Recognizing what Caslan said above, skipping the election, or holding one without full participation is very troubling. But we know that Chalabi's philosophy (Let's you and him go fight) always pulls back from total destruction---it is a strategy in play, and some other compromise will have to be reached somehow.

Iraq is still dangerous, and still spinning, with wobbles in every direction.

The American people knew this colonial effort was a mistake, which is why most want our troops out of Iraq. Obama was elected because he was the only one to promise to pull all our troops out. During the election he said they would ALL be gone by this Summer, so the chaos in Iraq should not be of concern.

As for this one, it's a bit light. More in depth stuff from Adam Silverman here and here.

Charlie:

To a great extent, it is a difference without a distinction. Whether we have troops there or not, they are so much of a paper tiger based on the Security Agrement. It is entirely possible that if some of Tom's worst fears were to come true, they would be more of a pawn than an asset.

I was reading some more of Adam Silverman's reports of how the COIN "success" were not flipped into sustainable reconciliation. While i don't take his position whole cloth in particular because he overstates the military accomplishments and their flipability, there was a shining moment or two where, if all went right (as if it ever does?) some better alternatives were possible. His analyses, too, are too often that US view that is, often, too fixated on the big players and diplomatic contacts, and not on the opportunities and drivers that appear elsewhere which, by strategic patience and meaningful engagement, you find now and again. Little flowers that might bloom into something other than the fruits we usually seem to raise in these places.

Specifically, in April, May 2008, there were real opportunities for the US to engage Iraq in a wholly different manner than to-down paternalism. I remember coming from a national planning conference where provincial and ministerial folks were trying in earnest to put legs on this democracy thing, and we could have stepped up into that type of opportunity with what they were yearning for (technical assistance, engineering, practical stuff) while all we were sending them was "democracy building" and other pap.

Like anything else, "the moving finger writes, and having wrote, moves on...), but there will continue, surely, to be windows and openings, but, if we don't see them, or understand them when they appear, it not much,

Tom, I'm still watching it spin, and wobble a lot, but it hasn't fallen down. I'm hopeful for the real people of Iraq that they can get beyond the leadership lessons to the next steps in a very long and arduous path.

I try to imagine an Iraq, like Viet Nam, where we few hundred thousands who experienced it will want to go back to one day---and enjoy. (my prayer)

Steve

Before taking your pride of your dirty war read this
Iraq littered with high levels of nuclear and dioxin contamination, study finds
Iraq littered with high levels of nuclear and dioxin contamination, study finds
http://www.guardian.co.uk/world/2010/jan/22/iraq-nuclear-contaminated-sites

See your real crime against the humanity