War in Iraq ends. Really? "Shock and aw, man!"

Yesterday, I watched on C-Span (how do I ever live without that!) a rerun.  Yes, a repeat.  Of Britain's Iraq (Chilcot) Inquiry hearings, with Claire Short providing testimony.  Short was a loud dissenter in Tony "the poodle" Blair's cabinet, and she quit as a result of her differences, after serving for six years.

Watching that was depressing because it reminded me all over again about the bloody lies from the 'Bushies' ever since the day after 9/11.  I still recall watching on TV Colin Powell presenting his case at the UN--from the beginning until the end, and feeling so let down ... I, like many, used to think of him as presidential material, but there he was at the UN serving as his excellency's the president's minion.  While I don't condone how Harry Belafonte described Powell, it is not difficult to see how emotionally upset the Banana Boat singer would have been about another luminary with West Indian roots.

After all those lies, Obama (a better political version of Slick Willie, without the sex at least thus far) did nothing to change the warmongering.  Which is why it did not surprise me at all that Obama as the president was not in favor of any inquiry even about one side-story--the tortures--when declared that he was not going to look back, and would only look forward.  If that was the case about torture (editor: the US does not torture--only enhanced interrogations!)  If only we had an inquiry commission of our own ...

Now, we are told that the combat operations in Iraq are over.  In effect, we ought to be celebrating the end of war, right?  Leave it to Colbert to talk about this:

The Colbert Report	Mon - Thurs 11:30pm / 10:30c
The Word - What If You Threw a Peace and Nobody Came?
www.colbertnation.com
Colbert Report Full Episodes 2010 Election Fox News

So, how are things in Iraq, anyway?  Do they have a government yet?
Nope!

And the key person to determine Iraq's political fate has been living in exile in Iran for the last three years: Moqtada al-Sadr

Sadr reminds of me of many wily and opportunistic politicians in India who know well how to manipulate the system and the peoples by appealing to the basest religious, communal, and ethnic biases.  (editor: how different is this from the Manhattan Mosque controversy?)  and to quite an extent, the Khalistan movement's Jarnail Singh Bhindranwale.

So, what is Sadr up to now?

More than a year before the elections in March, Sadr and his top aides set up an election strategy committee they dubbed the "machine." The goal was to game the electoral system as best as they could. A team of seven pored over the election law, dissected district maps, and built an extensive database of voters in every province. In the end, Sadr's Free Movement party won 39 seats in parliament, giving his followers a decisive vote within the National Iraqi Alliance, the dominant Shiite bloc of which they are part.

Now that Sadr has those valuable seats, ...

So what does Sadr want? One issue that has come up again and again in the negotiations to form the government is detainees. In a recent interview with Al Jazeera, Sadr estimated that there are as many as 2,000 detainees linked to his movement, most swept up in U.S. operations in 2007 and 2008, whom he would like to see released. ...

But the detainees are only a short-term bargaining chip. What Sadr is after is power itself -- and if his past record is any indication, he won't be shy about using it. There are any number of issues he could block or help push through parliament. Sadr has previously butted heads with Kurdish groups about the final status of Kirkuk, an oil-rich city that the Kurds claim as their capital. He is a proponent of putting oil revenues under central government control, a position at odds with the Kurds as well as some rival Shiite groups, such as ISCI. Women's rights groups have already voiced strong concerns that the Sadrists could block their attempts to reform laws that cover property ownership, divorce, and child custody. Some even fear that Mahdi fighters will again target women's rights activists, as they did in Basra in 2007 and 2008.

Sadr's ambitions don't cover Iraq's domestic agenda alone. His high-profile trips to Jordan, Turkey, Lebanon, Saudi Arabia and elsewhere indicate that he wants to be seen as a prominent regional player. He would like to promote his Mahdi Army as a member of the so-called "axis of resistance" made up by Hezbollah and Hamas, both of which have made their names by confronting the United States and Israel.

For now, Sadr is undoubtedly pleased by his opportunity to have a key vote in who becomes the next prime minister. And it's hard to miss the irony from a man who has built his image on being among the people. He's not casting that vote from Baghdad, where he could rally millions of supporters, but from a comfortable perch hundreds of miles away in neighboring Iran.

Welcome to the post-war Iraq.

And, BTW, Iran is firing up its nuclear reactor.

So, you want to be an "ayatollah" ....

You get up early morning because you have to pray. Many good clerics even get up at two or three o'clock in the early morning to pray. After the morning prayer, for example at 5 o'clock, 6 o'clock, they start to read. And at 7 o'clock, the courses start. Usually the courses are 45 minutes. Each student chooses a fellow [student] to discuss each course with him each day. Sometimes I play the role of teacher for you; I teach you the same thing I was taught yesterday. If I say anything wrong, you correct me. Tomorrow you're going to be my teacher. In this way, [students] repeat the courses and correct each others' possible misunderstandings. Usually, you take three or four courses per day.

At noon, you go back to your home or, if you live in a traditional school, you go to the school. You eat something, and you get some rest. At four o'clock, you start your classes until sunset. At sunset, you pray your sunset prayer. After that, you go home and you start to read. You go to bed early because you have to get up early.

So says Mehdi Khalaji in this very interesting piece in FP

But, what he describes is, Khalaji notes, the seminary life before the full effects of the Islamic Revolution were felt in Iran. A generation later, seminary life is very different:

people are not going to the seminary for the study of religion; people are going because the seminary became a place for training employees for the government. They are going to become wealthy and to become close to the political circles. After 30 years, the new generation of the seminary is intellectually very poor but economically very rich -- just the opposite of what it used to be.