Established in 2006 as a Community of Reality

Welcome to the Neno's Place!

Neno's Place Established in 2006 as a Community of Reality


Neno

I can be reached by phone or text 8am-7pm cst 972-768-9772 or, once joining the board I can be reached by a (PM) Private Message.

Join the forum, it's quick and easy

Established in 2006 as a Community of Reality

Welcome to the Neno's Place!

Neno's Place Established in 2006 as a Community of Reality


Neno

I can be reached by phone or text 8am-7pm cst 972-768-9772 or, once joining the board I can be reached by a (PM) Private Message.

Established in 2006 as a Community of Reality

Would you like to react to this message? Create an account in a few clicks or log in to continue.
Established in 2006 as a Community of Reality

Many Topics Including The Oldest Dinar Community. Copyright © 2006-2020


    This is how Washington reads the events of Iraq

    Rocky
    Rocky
    Rocky
    Admin Assist
    Admin Assist


    Posts : 281403
    Join date : 2012-12-21
    • Post n°1

    This is how Washington reads the events of Iraq Empty This is how Washington reads the events of Iraq

    Post by Rocky Wed 26 Oct 2022, 5:28 am

    [size=38]This is how Washington reads the events of Iraq[/size]


    [You must be registered and logged in to see this image.]

    October 26, 2022[You must be registered and logged in to see this link.]
    Baghdad/The Obelisk:
    Adel Al-Jubouri
    Perhaps it is known to many, especially politicians and observers of its various events and interactions, that American think tanks play important pivotal roles in decision-making and in formulating and drawing strategies of the United States of America, in the political, security and economic fields, and that most - if not All - these centers are run by political, military or security figures who have occupied advanced leadership positions in higher institutions, in addition to the fact that researchers and writers in them are among the elites close to decision-making circles, if they are not part of them. The Washington Institute for Near East Policy, which was founded in 1985 by the American-Israel Public Affairs Committee, known for its acronym (AIPAC), and by the former US ambassador to “Tel Aviv” Martin Indyk, may be a good and reliable example of this.
    The Washington Institute, through its studies, research, reports and articles, in addition to seminars, seminars and intellectual conferences, is interested in all Middle East issues and files, in a manner and methodology that clearly reflects the trends, positions and interests of Washington and with it “Tel Aviv.” Since Iraq, after the fall of Saddam’s regime and the transformations and changes that have taken place since 2003, has turned into a field inflamed with events and hot facts always, not to mention that it has become a point of intersection and conflict of different projects and agendas, it was very natural for it to occupy a large part of the space of interest of the Institute Washington, as well as other American and Western research centers.
    There are specific and clear trends adopted, promoted and focused by The Washington Institute, which are:
    Targeting the Islamic-Shiite forces and personalities that have good relations with the Islamic Republic and are consistent in their positions and orientations with the axis of resistance.
    Warning of the danger of these powers’ domination of power, and even their participation in it, on the interests of the United States, its allies, friends and followers in the region and the world.
    Classifying all armed factions affiliated with or close to Shiite political forces and figures, along with the Popular Mobilization Forces, as terrorist organizations and groups that must be eliminated, even though they actively and effectively contributed to the war against the terrorist organization “ISIS.”
    The continuous calls for dissolving the “Popular Mobilization,” or at best, integrating it into the government’s military and security institutions, such as the Ministries of Defense and Interior, under the pretext that the conditions and requirements of its establishment and existence were negated by the defeat and defeat of the “ISIS” organization.
    These and other issues were drawn up by The Washington Institute when Mustafa Al-Kazemi assumed the duties of the premiership in May of 2020, succeeding Adel Abdul-Mahdi, through the pens of many researchers and writers, most notably “Michael Knights”, that controversial writer and the owner of the abhorrent inciting approach and style, Which often took advantage of political and popular turmoil, such as protest demonstrations, to raise the pace of shuffling papers, stirring up strife, and inciting the street, as part of American and Zionist policies and plans to direct the course of facts and events in Iraq in directions that serve Washington and “Tel Aviv,” and worsen matters and crises. exacerbation.
    Meanwhile, all friends of Iraq should keep a keen eye on the new government to ensure that militias and corrupt politicians do not neutralize technocrats, campaign against Western-leaning officials, cover up past acts of corruption, or unleash a new wave of “asset drain” through state institutions. After several false alarms, maintaining Iraq's close relationship with the West is really at stake at the present time, and the continuation of this partnership can only be ensured by setting firm expectations!", according to his claim.
    Perhaps this is a clear indication that Washington has decided on the scheme to thwart the expected Sudanese government and bring it down in case it does not follow the American vision, and opens the front of confrontation and hostility with Washington’s opponents, and thus it is a tool in the hands of the latter. In other words, it can be understood, that Washington will work to bring down the Sudanese government, as it did with Abdul-Mahdi's government.
    The Washington Institute claims, “Back on track in 2018 and 2019 will have the same devastating effect domestically. This approach eventually caused widespread popular uprisings against the militia-controlled government, and even attracted the Iraqi religious establishment. Al-Sudani may be friendly and capable, but we must not forget that Abdul-Mahdi was like that when he took power, before handing over the reins to Iran’s proxies without hesitation,” he said.
    There is no doubt that such a rhetoric charged with intimidation, treachery, falsification and misrepresentation confirms and reflects the reality and nature of American thinking at all stages, and represents the general and permanent feature of the aggressive and subversive American policies. And the mouthpiece of Washington politicians says to Al-Sudani (If you do not do what we want, we will bring you down as we did Abdul-Mahdi). This is what the stakeholders in Baghdad should pay close attention to, especially since the post-Abdul-Mahdi’s resignation phase is sufficient with all its problems, crises, risks, threats and challenges, to work hard so that mistakes are not repeated, and so that Washington is not able to set fires again.
    [You must be registered and logged in to see this link.]
    • Back to top
      Current date/time is Wed 27 Nov 2024, 1:22 pm