PDA

View Full Version : Out of Maliki's frying pan into the fire of Abdul Mehdi!?


Alborz Taha
08-30-2007, 03:49 PM
Who is Adel Abdul Mehdi? A 'Shiite Moderate' or another Iran's Puppet?
Regarding the man after Nouri al-Maliki in Iraq, Bobby Ghosh of Time Magazine wrote on Aug. 22, 2007 :
"The Shi'ite coalition's most likely candidate is Adel Abdul-Mahdi, a French-trained economist and political chameleon. Having been, at various points in his career, a communist, a Ba'athist and a secular liberal democrat, he has switched directions so many times it's hard to know which way he's going. These days, Abdul-Mahdi represents the Shi'ite-fundamentalist Supreme Islamic Iraqi Council (SIIC), which, like Maliki's Dawa Party, is beholden to Tehran. Twice in the past two years, Abdul-Mahdi has told journalists he was on the verge of quitting the SIIC to form his own party, only to change his mind — likely because he knows he has no grassroots support or street cred of his own. As Prime Minister, he would be little more than a puppet in the hand of Iran's ayatollahs, and would be unlikely to do more than Maliki has done to accommodate the Sunnis."
Abdul Mehdi is a top official of Supreme Council of Islamic Revolution in Iran (SCIRI or SIIC) who joined this entity in late 90s. SCIRI was formed in Iran under the supervision and command of the Quds Force.

After joining SCIRI, he was assigned by Iran as a key agent in Iraqi Kurdistan to coordinate activities and affairs among groups associated with Iran such as SCIRI, Badr Corps and Kurdish groups. To this end, he had close relations with Quds Force commanders in Kurdistan; among whom were Muhammad Karami, Mesgari and Majid Qaemi. Qaemi an IRGC high ranking officer was one of the Iranians captured in Irbil by US forces.

During Abdul Mehdi's stay in Kurdistan, one of his activities was to select and recruit agents for Iran. He also advocated Islamic fundamentalism and the Iran's ruling system (velayat-e-faqih) in Kurdish cities.

Following Saddam's Army raid on Irbil in 1997, Abdul Mehdi fled to Iran and lived there for a while. Later on, he was sent to France as the representative of SCIRI.
He returned Iraq after the fall of Saddam and continued his activities in the SCIRI as deputy to Abdul Aziz al-Hakim, head of SCIRI.
Before the war in 2003, Adel was in France and among his other jobs he was in charge of recruiting young Shiite men from various countries including Algeria and sending them to Iran.
Abdul Mehdi regularly travels to Iran. He had 7 visits to Iran since June 2006 up to June 2007. In his visits, he has had meetings with top Iranian officials, especially from Intelligence Ministry(MOIS) and Revolutionary Guards (IRGC).

Conclusion
Back to Bobby Ghosh comment on him as "it's hard to know which way he's going", one should say that it is quite clear which way he is going; he is absolutely playing Iran's card in who-is-after-Maliki game.
If he wins this game, which is the win of Iran's mullahs, not only the U.S. has lost the whole Iraq game, but also many other states in the region that are thirsting for democracy. That would be "Out of Maliki's frying pan into the fire!"

jafar00
08-30-2007, 04:53 PM
Either way it goes, Iraq is going to be influenced by Iran in the end. The majority are Shia and are connected to Iran in some way. Invading Iraq was the best present Bush could have given Iran.

bobbylien
08-31-2007, 02:41 PM
Who are you Alborz? Whats your agenda?

jafar00
08-31-2007, 03:44 PM
Who are you Alborz? Whats your agenda?


Propaganda anyone?
http://www.democracyforums.com/showthread.php?tid=7352&pid=84974#pid84974 :thumbsup:

bobbylien
09-01-2007, 03:30 AM
I know its the same guy, I'm just asking him who he is and why hes posting this stuff.

jafar00
09-01-2007, 12:59 PM
Propaganda. I haven't seen him bother to return to debate what he posts. He just spams.

lily
09-02-2007, 02:47 AM
Either way it goes, Iraq is going to be influenced by Iran in the end. The majority are Shia and are connected to Iran in some way. Invading Iraq was the best present Bush could have given Iran.



You know jafar........maybe it's the mood I'm in tonight.....but is Iraq even Iraq anymore?

Cobra
09-02-2007, 02:49 AM
Well they haven't changed the maps yet so I'd say Iraq is Iraq.

lily
09-02-2007, 03:05 AM
On a map maybe Cobra.........and even that is subject to change.

Cobra
09-02-2007, 03:09 AM
Well we will hafta see on that one. It's not a unfied country to say the least and there's nothing to point that it would remain a country in it's current state if we left.

But we are holding it together right now. The Kurds haven't "officially" broken off, and Iran hasn't "officially" siezed control of the southern areas.

Jaaaman
09-02-2007, 03:14 AM
But we are holding it together right now. The Kurds haven't "officially" broken off, and Iran hasn't "officially" siezed control of the southern areas.


Good point Cobra. :clapper:

lily
09-02-2007, 04:19 AM
But we are holding it together right now. The Kurds haven't "officially" broken off, and Iran hasn't "officially" siezed control of the southern areas.


No, the Kurds haven't "officially" broken off and they are pretty much doing just fine on their own.......but just like Iran is waiting, so is Turkey for the Kurds.

Cobra
09-02-2007, 04:24 AM
Yep, which is another complication to our pull out. We don't want to empower Iran or screw the Kurds over again. Tho they could put up their own fight against Turkey.

lily
09-02-2007, 04:27 AM
Oh cripes.........not that empower word.......:lmao:

Cobra.......do you not think that Iran is already "empowered"? We're stretched thin as string and they know it.

Cobra
09-02-2007, 04:29 AM
Yes we are and yes they are but they would be even more so if they won a victory over us through Iraq. Tough situation, and a no win one for us no matter what we do which for the last 6 years has been about nothing but stay the course.

lily
09-02-2007, 04:32 AM
Well, you've got it right........now we are in a damned if we do and damned if we don't situation. We either need new leadership or some diplomacy.......because this sure can't be done militarily.

bobbylien
09-02-2007, 04:39 AM
You are right to say that it can't be done militarily but you surely must know that we cannot put attempt either without securing Baghdad, right?

lily
09-02-2007, 05:01 AM
I will agree with you bobby.......but it's like a game of wack-a-mole. Secure Baghdad and they just move to another city. This thing has been run so badly for so long that I honestly don't think anything can be done under this administration. I know that sounds like a "bash Bush", but it's honestly how I feel. There have been so many things done wrong.