Silicon Investor (SI) -- The First Internet Community

STOCKTALK

We've detected that you're using an ad content blocking browser plug-in or feature. Ads provide a critical source of revenue to the continued operation of Silicon Investor. We ask that you disable ad blocking while on Silicon Investor in the best interests of our community. If you are not using an ad blocker but are still receiving this message, make sure your browser's tracking protection is set to the 'standard' level.

Politics : Formerly About Advanced Micro Devices -- Ignore unavailable to you. Want to Upgrade?

To: steve harris who wrote (324544)	2/5/2007 2:18:01 PM
From: tejek	Respond to of 1573222

you weren't old enough to vote for Bush1... But you were old enough to vote for Bush II twice and you did. Brilliant! _______________________________________________________________ Intelligence Report Predicts Spiraling of Violence in Iraq By MARK MAZZETTI and DAVID STOUT Published: February 2, 2007 WASHINGTON, Feb. 2 — A much-anticipated assessment of Iraq by America’s intelligence agencies describes a worsening cycle of chaos in the country, and predicts that the sectarian strife will continue to fracture the country without bold actions by Iraqi politicians. And even if violence is diminished, prospects for a political reconciliation in the country are dim “given the current winner-take-all attitude and sectarian animosities infecting the political scene,” the assessment warns. The assessment, titled "Prospects for Iraq’s Stability: A Challenging Road Ahead", begins with this blunt conclusion: "Iraqi society’s growing polarization, the persistent weakness of the security forces and the state in general, and all sides’ ready recourse to violence are collectively driving an increase in communal and insurgent violence and political extremism. "Unless efforts to reverse these conditions show measurable progress during the term of this estimate, the coming 12 to 18 months, we assess that the overall security situation will continue to deteriorate at rates comparable to the latter part of 2006." The term “civil war” accurately describes key elements of the conflict, including “the hardening of ethno-sectarian identities,” the report says, but the overall struggle is more complicated. The report points to a lethal stew of Iraqi-on-Iraqi bloodshed across and within ethnic lines, Al Qaeda and Sunni insurgent attacks, “and widespread criminally motivated violence.” Defense Secretary Robert M. Gates called the term “civil war” a “bumper-sticker answer” that oversimplified the reality of overlapping conflicts. “I believe that there are essentially four wars going on in Iraq,” he said at a Pentagon briefing today, citing Shia-on-Shia strife, principally in the South; sectarian violence, largely in Baghdad; the Sunni insurgency, and attacks by Al Qaeda. The assessment contains the consensus judgments of the 16 agencies that make up the intelligence community and is sure to fuel the debate within Congress and between some lawmakers and the White House over what to do. Senator Harry Reid of Nevada, the Democratic majority leader, called the document “the latest in a long line of bleak assessments by foreign policy and military experts indicating the president’s plan is flawed and failing. This conclusion is shared by a bipartisan group of Congress and an overwhelming majority of Americans.” In general, the assessment is gloomy about the eroding security in the country and the prospects for Iraq’s government to reign in the violence between Sunni and Shia sects. The report also argues against a withdrawal of American forces from Iraq, concluding that a rapid military pullout “almost certainly would lead” to carnage worse in scale and scope. Some of the report’s judgments were first reported today in The Washington Post. There are a few grains of optimism. The Iraqi security forces have shown “real improvements,” the report says, even though they are unlikely to be able to assume greater responsibilities and battle Shiite militias successfully in the next 12 to 18 months. And the assessment says that some developments “could” help to reverse the downward spiral: broader Sunni acceptance of the political structure; concessions by Shiites and Kurds to “create space” for Sunni acceptance, and “a bottom-up approach” to help mend frayed tribal and religious relationships. But prospects for better relations between Shiites and Sunnis are clouded by the Shiites’ deep feelings of insecurity spawned by decades of subordination by the Sunnis under Saddam Hussein — and the Sunnis’ lack of respect for the central government and reluctance to accept their minority status now. Moreover, the Kurds, while “willing” to take part in building a new Iraq, are reluctant to surrender the autonomy they have achieved recently, the report says. The Kurds are a particular concern to Turkey, which does not want Iraq to disintegrate and is determined to eliminate the safe haven in northern Iraq for a Turkish Kurdish terrorist group, the assessment notes. But while Iraq’s neighbors, especially Iran and Syria, “influence and are influenced by” events in Iraq, they probably do not have enough influence to stabilize Iraq because that country’s “internal sectarian dynamics” are self-sustaining, the documents states. The report says Iraq could break apart “with grave humanitarian, political and security consequences” through a deadly mix of sectarian killings, assassinations of political and religious leaders and the complete Sunni repudiation of the government. Moreover, the documents says, many of Iraq’s professional and entrepreneurial people have already fled their country. Should the worst happen and the new country fall apart completely, the assessment sees three possible outcomes, all dire: 1 2 Next Page » nytimes.com