http://www.star-telegram.com/national_news/story/140722.html

The Fort Worth Star-Telegram
Posted on Mon, Jun. 18, 2007

Officers: Arming Sunnis is bad idea
By Nancy A. Youssef and Leila Fadel

McClatchy Newspapers

WASHINGTON -- A U.S. program to combat al Qaeda in Iraq by arming Sunni Muslims undercuts the Iraqi government and years of U.S. policy, and is a tacit acknowledgment that the country's violence is really a civil war, some U.S. military officials in Washington and foreign policy experts say.

The program, which Bush administration officials have hailed as a sign of progress in Iraq, has sparked heated debate among military and foreign policy analysts. It is opposed by the Iraqi government of Prime Minister Nouri al-Maliki.

Supporters see it as a welcome change in the American approach in Iraq, one whose benefits have been obvious in the drop in violence in Iraq's Anbar province, where al Qaeda formerly held sway. They say it could give impetus to the Shiites and Kurds to make political concessions.

But others contend the program has long-term repercussions that can only be guessed at now. By giving weapons and training to Sunnis in Anbar and Baghdad who've been previously associated with Sunni insurgent groups, the program endorses unofficial armed groups over official Iraqi forces as guarantors of Iraqi security, military officers who oppose the program say.

Those officers also say it abandons the long-stated U.S. goal of disarming militias and reinforces the idea that U.S.-trained Iraqi forces cannot control their country.

At the Pentagon, at least six officers who served in Iraq shook their heads when asked about the idea of arming the Sunnis. They said they had little faith in a Sunni community that was aggressively killing their comrades just months ago.

"Why did we spend all that capital disarming them last year?" asked one officer who served last year under former Iraq commander Gen. George Casey. "As a military man, I cannot fathom the logic of putting more weapons out there."

The officer declined to be identified because he was not authorized to speak about the matter.

By specifically aiding Sunni groups, it also seems to be an acknowledgement that Iraq is mired in a civil war that pits Sunnis against better-armed Shiite militias, some say.

"It is the U.S. basically acknowledging that Iraq is in a civil war," said Vali Nasr, an expert on Shiism at the Council on Foreign Relations, a nonpartisan foreign policy organization. "And that the government is irrelevant."

In Baghdad, the mostly Shiite government already is saying it cannot be expected to disarm militias if Sunni groups are receiving arms from the U.S.

Al-Maliki, a Shiite, voiced his opposition directly to Petraeus, according to Sami al-Askari, a close adviser to al-Maliki.

"It's a sort of militia, when we are trying to get rid of the current militias," al-Askari said. "By arming these tribes we'll make it worse."

One of the best definitions of 'insanity' I have heard is "The act of repeating something over again and expecting a different result"

The US armed al Qaeda, i.e., Bin Laden during the Soviet confrontation in Afghanistan.

Seems like that got us into this mess in a way.

Reverend Wally, It seems that you and Ron Paul are some of the very few who truly understand the problems in the Middle East. That is that we have caused them by our own actions.

I am a die hard Democrat but Ron Paul speaks the truth and is the only Republican to have the guts to do so.