THE ANGER OF IRAQIS AGAINST THE US
The US Deep State may not need to concoct another false flag attack if anti-US militias in Iraq decide to take revenge for Abu Mahdi al-Muhandis, who was killed along with Soleimani. Qais al-Khazali, a commander of the Iran-backed Popular Mobilization Forces (PMF) in Iraq, vowed to exact revenge for the killing of their leader saying,
“The first Iranian response to the assassination of the martyr leader Soleimani took place,” he tweeted. “Now is the time for the initial Iraqi response to the assassination of the martyr leader Muhandis.”
Muhandis was particularly disliked by the Deep State because he documented more than anyone else in Iraq the fact that the US refused to help them eliminate ISIS once it overran the US-trained Iraqi army in Mosul. In fact the Iraqi army ran away like rabbits and left all their heavy armor and guns behind for ISIS to capture. He points out that it was Iran that provided them the weapons and ammunition to defeat ISIS—thus Soleimani was not supporting terror, but fighting against it.
Russia Today was the only one to cover what Pepe Escobar and Elijah Magnier, (a top Middle East expert) had to say about Muhandis’ complaints about the US phony war on terror:
On a sandstorm-swept morning in Baghdad earlier last week, Abu Mahdi al-Muhandis, the legendary deputy leader of Hashd al-Shaabi, a.k.a. People Mobilization Units (PMUs) and the actual mastermind of numerous ground battles against ISIS/Daesh, met a small number of independent foreign journalists and analysts.
This was a game-changing moment in more ways than one. It was the first detailed interview granted by Muhandis since the fatwa issued by Grand Ayatollah al-Sistani – [calling] “upon every Iraqi capable of carrying guns to volunteer with the Iraqi Armed Forces to defend the sanctities of the nation.”
Muhandis took time out of the battlefield especially for the meeting, and then left straight for al-Qaim… a reference to the crucial Daesh-held Iraqi border town connecting to Daesh stronghold Abu Kamal in Syria.
Adding to the drama, the US State Department describes Muhandis as a “terrorist.” That amounts in practice to criminalizing the Iraqi government in Baghdad – which duly released an official statement furiously refuting the characterization.
The PMUs are an official body with tens of thousands of volunteers linked to the office of the Commander in Chief of the Iraqi Armed Forces. The Iraqi Parliament fully legalized the PMUs in November 2016 via resolution 91 (item number 4, for instance, states that “the PMU and its affiliates are subject to military regulations that are enforced from all angles.”)
Its 25 combat brigades – comprising Shi’ites, Sunnis, Christians, Yazidis, Turkmen, Shabak and Kurds – have been absolutely crucial in the fight against Daesh in Samarra, Amirli, Jalawla, Balad, Salahuddin, Fallujah (35 different battles), Shirqat and Mosul (especially over the western axis from Qayara base to the Iraq-Syrian border, cutting off supply chains and sealing Mosul from an attempted Daesh escape to Syria).
Muhandis describes the PMUs as “an official military force” which plays a “complementary role” to the Iraqi Army. The initial plan was for the PMUs to become a national guard – which in fact they are now; “We have recon drones and engineering units that the Army does not have. We don’t mind if we are called gendarmes.” He’s proud the PMUs are fighting an “unconventional war,” holding the high ground “militarily and morally” with “victories achieved in record time.” And “contrary to Syria,” with no direct Russian support.
Muhandis is clear that Iran was the only nation supporting Iraq’s fight against Daesh. Iraq reciprocated by helping Syria, “facilitating over flights by Iranian planes.” With no Status of Forces Agreement (SOFA) between Washington and Baghdad, “the Americans withdrew companies that maintain Abrams tanks.” In 2014 “we didn’t even have AK-47s. Iran gave them to us. The US embassy had 12 Apache helicopters ready to transport diplomats if Baghdad fell to Daesh” [not to support the war against ISIS].
One year later, “Baghdad would have been occupied” were [it] not for the PMUs; “It’s like you’re in a hospital and you need blood. The Americans would show up with the transfusion when it was too late.” He is adamant “the US did not provide a single bullet” in the overall fight against Daesh. And yet, Muhandis clarifies that the “US may stay in Iraq should the Iraqi government decide it. My personal opinion is well known.”
Muhandis considers the [Western] “media war waged against Hashd al-Shaabi” as “normal from the beginning”; “Countries that supported terrorism [US and Western Europe] would not perceive [and did not like] that a popular force would emerge, and did not recognize the new political system in Iraq.” On that note, he added ruefully, “you can smell petrol.”
Meaning that a big fire or explosion against the US occupation would someday emerge. It is here now, and the globalists show no signs of leaving Iraq to defuse it. They want to justify staying in the Middle East.
From: World Affairs Brief, January 10, 2020 — Copyright Joel Skousen. Partial quotations with attribution permitted. Cite source as Joel Skousen’s World Affairs Brief (http://www.worldaffairsbrief.com).