Right Wing Lunatic

Since we've already killed the guy, he won't be cutting heads off of anyone anymore, but the contents of this document found in his hideout is very telling:

As an overall picture, time has been an element in affecting negatively the forces of the occupying countries, due to the losses they sustain economically in human lives, which are increasing with time. However, here in Iraq, time is now beginning to be of service to the American forces and harmful to the resistance for the following reasons:

1. By allowing the American forces to form the forces of the National Guard, to reinforce them and enable them to undertake military operations against the resistance.

2. By undertaking massive arrest operations, invading regions that have an impact on the resistance, and hence causing the resistance to lose many of its elements.

Here he talks about using time against the US. In other words, "if we wait it out, we win". However, he does notice that things are starting to look better for the US now that we're able to conduct raids against insurgents. This progress is already starting to be seen in Iraq. With more troops able to cover more area, that leaves some of our guys enough time to actively go out and find bad guys which is al-Zarqawi's main concern.

However, it's this next portion that I'm very interested in:

In general and despite the current bleak situation, we think that the best suggestions in order to get out of this crisis is to entangle the American forces into another war against another country or with another of our enemy force, that is to try and inflame the situation between American and Iran or between America and the Shi'a in general.

Specifically the Sistani Shi'a, since most of the support that the Americans are getting is from the Sistani Shi'a, then, there is a possibility to instill differences between them and to weaken the support line between them; in addition to the losses we can inflict on both parties. Consequently, to embroil America in another war against another enemy is the answer that we find to be the most appropriate, and to have a war through a delegate has the following benefits:

1. To occupy the Americans by another front will allow the resistance freedom of movement and alleviate the pressure imposed on it.

2. To dissolve the cohesion between the Americans and the Shi'a will weaken and close this front.

3. To have a loss of trust between the Americans and the Shi'a will cause the Americans to lose many of their spies.

4. To involve both parties, the Americans and the Shi'a, in a war that will result in both parties being losers.

In essence, he's saying that a technique that might be tried should be to get us to fight another enemy.

7. A war between the Americans and Iran. We have noticed that the best of these wars to be ignited is the one between the Americans and Iran, because it will have many benefits in favor of the Sunni and the resistance, such as:

1. Freeing the Sunni people in Iran, who are (30 percent) of the population and under the Shi'a Rule.

2. Drowning the Americans in another war that will engage many of their forces.

3. The possibility of acquiring new weapons from the Iranian side, either after the fall of Iran or during the battles.

4. To entice Iran towards helping the resistance because of its need for its help.

5. Weakening the Shi'a supply line.

So this line of thought has me wondering: Did al-Zarqawi play both sides of the Iranian-American tensions right now?

The question remains, how to draw the Americans into fighting a war against Iran? It is not known whether American is serious in its animosity towards Iran, because of the big support Iran is offering to America in its war in Afghanistan and in Iraq. Hence, it is necessary first to exaggerate the Iranian danger and to convince America and the west in general, of the real danger coming from Iran, and this would be done by the following:

1. By disseminating threatening messages against American interests and the American people and attribute them to a Shi'a Iranian side.

2. By executing operations of kidnapping hostages and implicating the Shi'a Iranian side.

3. By advertising that Iran has chemical and nuclear weapons and is threatening the west with these weapons.

4. By executing exploding operations in the west and accusing Iran by planting Iranian Shi'a fingerprints and evidence.

5. By declaring the existence of a relationship between Iran and terrorist groups (as termed by the Americans).

6. By disseminating bogus messages about confessions showing that Iran is in possession of weapons of mass destruction or that there are attempts by the Iranian intelligence to undertake terrorist operations in America and the west and against western interests.

It certainly appears that way by the above mentioned items. Surely we have much more evidence against Iran for activities against US troops, but a document like this is pretty damning if true. Are we playing into the late al-Zarqawi's plan? Is that why we're not seeing much in terms of action against Iranian interests?

Certainly their nuclear program and their idiotic President Ahmadinejad aren't helping matters in the least, but al-Zarqawi talks about Iranian "help" in Afghanistan and Iraq. Is this true? It seems very far fetched to me, but it certainly is within the realm of possibility.

If Iran does indeed only want their nuclear program for peaceful purposes, why the secrecy? Why the refusal to work even with their closest allies such as China and Russia? The evidence so far does speak of a covert nuclear weapons programs, and with Iran's acknowledged support of Hezbollah, you certainly cannot dismiss it.

The other question that I have is: How truthful is this document? Surely it's coming from a guy who lopped people's heads off for no other reason than they weren't his own color and religion, so how truthful is it?

Are we being lead down a path of war with Iran because of a guy who's been dead for over a year now? Are we dealing with a suspicious Iranian government who doesn't trust the US government and is throwing out disinformation about their nuclear program? No one in the region (Saudi Arabia, Jordan, Egypt) wants Iran to even have a nuclear program, peaceful or not. So that's got to speak volumes about the trust able nature that the Iranians have built a reputation for themselves.

My main concern for all this is that if the Iranians truly don't want war and only want their nuclear program for energy, then they need to come to the UN and say "We'll gladly open up our facilities to inspectors and gladly shut down their centrifuges and take in fuel from a third party nation that can only be used for nuclear energy, not weapons. The UN is already working on a "nuclear repository" that any nation can get fuel from and send the fuel back to. No one has a problem with this except Iran.

Travis
travis@rightwinglunatic.com