Feeds: 
symbol identifies content for paid subscribers only.
A QUESTION...
The conservative media and Right Blogistan have been undertaken to steadfastly ignore any hint that Prime Minister Maliki might and his political allies might have connections with Iran, preferring instead to assert that Iran influences events in Iraq through Sadrist militia and Sunni tribes (!). Given Maliki's statements on withdrawal, I wonder this: How long it will take for an anti-Maliki trope to develop on the American right that concentrates on his Iranian connections?
--Robert Farley
COMMENTS (3)
Already has:
http://corner.nationalreview.com/post/?q=MzNhYTJmMmUyOTViM2FmNWFkYTJkOTQ5MjIzZmYzYTU=
Andy McCarthy in NRO
"As I've mentioned before, Maliki, of the Shiite Dawa Party which opposed the 2003 U.S. invasion of Iraq in the first place, has long-standing ties to Iran and Syria — and has expressed support for Hezbollah. The only thing that surprises me about this story is that anyone is surprised."
Posted by: RickDFL | July 21, 2008 12:15 PM
The more the wingnuts talk up the connection between Maliki and Iran, the better. The fact is, they don't have another horse in the stable.
If you're looking for a reasonably America-friendly Shi'ite in the Iraqi government, Maliki is about as good as it gets.
Besides, if we get back into the business of telling Iraq who their leaders are supposed to be at this point, when Iraq is supposedly in pretty decent shape, then it's clear that we're not respecting their sovereignty at all - that we're staying because we want to stay, and we're not going to take 'no' for an answer.
Posted by: low-tech cyclist | July 21, 2008 1:07 PM
How long does anyone think it wil be before Maliki is disappeared?
Posted by: John in Nashville | July 21, 2008 1:46 PM