CentCom Commander Changes Outlook On Future of Iraq; Now Suggests Civil War Is Possible
CentCom Commander Changes Outlook On Future of Iraq; Now Suggests Civil War Is Possible
Today, Gen. John Abizaid, the Commander of the U.S. Central Command, told the Senate Armed Services Committee that Iraq may be on the brink of a civil war, noting that the violence in Baghdad was worse than at any point since he assumed command in July 2003. Watch it.
LEVIN: The British ambassador made the following assessment. According to USA Today, the British ambassador to Iraq — it’s Mr. Patey I believe — P-A-T-E-Y — has warned that Iraq is descending towards civil war and he said it is likely to split along ethnic lines and he has reported as predicting that Iraq’s security situation could remain volatile for the next 10 years. Do you agree, General, with the ambassador from Britain to Iraq, that Iraq is sliding toward civil war?
ABIZAID: I believe that the sectarian violence is probably is as bad as I’ve seen it in Baghdad in particular, and that if not stopped, it is possible that Iraq could move toward civil war.
Just four months ago, Abizaid was asked a similar question by Sen. Levin, and he responded that that Iraq remained “a long way from civil war.â€
LEVIN: [Ambassador Khalilzad] said that “Iraq is in a crisis, the country is bleeding and moving toward civil war. “I’m wondering if you agree with those sentiments.
ABIZAID: Senator Levin, I’m not going to comment on anything that Ambassador Khalilzad said. I’ll give you my impression about where we stand with regard to moving toward civil war. I think that Iraq remains a long way from civil war. [Senate Armed Services Committee hearing, 3/16/06]
Accepting Abizaid’s evolving statements, Iraq has descended “a long way†into more and more chaotic violence in just the last four months. “Stay the course†has gotten us into this problem, it’s not going to get us out.
Sort Comments By: Top Rated | Date
62 Responses to “CentCom Commander Changes Outlook On Future of Iraq; Now Suggests Civil War Is Possible”
Topic Cloud
ArchivesBlog Roll
Well suprise, surprise, surprise!
August 3rd, 2006 at 1:18 pmHow will the clowns running the show spin this?
Will Abizaid be “swift boated” by the ReichWingNuts?
August 3rd, 2006 at 1:18 pmWith this statement, Gen Abizaid is undermining the troops’ morale and emboldening the terrorrists.
Why does Gen Abizaid hate America?
We want good news only, all the time!
(Heard at a FoxNews watchers convention)
August 3rd, 2006 at 1:22 pmI am sure John Abiziad is just trying to sell a book or something right?
/sarcasm
August 3rd, 2006 at 1:23 pmIs this “Another Inconvenient Truth”?
August 3rd, 2006 at 1:26 pmIt occurs to me that this is country which was created by the Brittish following their COLONIAL period which gave no credence to ethnic divisions . Perhaps its time to allow the Iraqi’s to decide if they want one country or 3 ,and that can be decided by their ” free elections “.Maybe 2/3 of the country want to be Iranian ?Just as the kurds in turkey want a separate country with their Iraqi brethren
August 3rd, 2006 at 1:27 pmIf I hear much more of this I’m gonna start second guessing these guys…
I think we know where this is going. Alot of pomp and circumstance in Iraq about the Iraqis “standing up” by years end…
There’s only one question: Where will the troops go next?
August 3rd, 2006 at 1:28 pmListen, Iraq is ALREADY in a civil war. Shia and Sunni are slaughtering each other. They are bombing each others’ mosques. They are kidnapping each other and butchering those they abduct. Chaos rules in Iraq, and no matter how hard we try the United States will never bring peace to Iraq so long as our troops are still there on the ground.
The best thing that we can do is get our troops out of their way and let the Iraqi civil war run its course. No more American blood should be shed just so that the world has yet another theocratic Islamist state.
August 3rd, 2006 at 1:28 pmGeneral, please bring our troops home? We may have to fight SOMEBODY over here. Oh, I know! Bring ‘em home now–they can hand count ballots. Oh yeah–seen Osoma Been Forgotten lately Herr General? Asshat with medals–big deal.
August 3rd, 2006 at 1:29 pmWell, the experiment “let’s split the country if they hate each other” hasn’t worked very well in the case of Pakistan and India. 60 years of hate and counting. Oh, and both have nucular weapons.
August 3rd, 2006 at 1:29 pmThe FCC had put this testimony on a five month delay, ever since the Janet Jackson incident and all. Hope the kids are in bed?
August 3rd, 2006 at 1:30 pmthe mixing of seperate ethnic groups by the Brits has done wonders in the politics of Africa !
August 3rd, 2006 at 1:30 pm…and a collective, loud “Doh!” was heard in the hearing room…
August 3rd, 2006 at 1:32 pmSay, isn’t Abizaid an ARABIC name?
August 3rd, 2006 at 1:34 pm.
Evil spaniard #10 good point but its still worth considering other options to all this murder .
August 3rd, 2006 at 1:35 pmpeople people, we have to keep our eyes on the three-card monty being played out in front of us. khalizad was/is/remains part of the core cabal at pnac. the civil war in iraq is part of their master plan for chaos and cash in iraq.
this to and fro with levin and the general is part of the ‘crazy talk’ that confuses the media and the public–it is the quick hand movements of the game; all the while, the master plan unfolds. the talk then becomes ‘what is a civil war’ ‘when is the civil war’ ‘are we closer to a civil war’.
this is the way it is: there is a civil war, and the pnac end-of-timers are quite content with the chaos. the core question is when are we going to put an end to the pnac and its cabal? THEY are the enemy.
August 3rd, 2006 at 1:35 pmNO KIDDING !!!!
August 3rd, 2006 at 1:40 pmthe same, i would argue, goes for the rumsfeld/clinton silliness going on at the other end of the table. we must get beyond this you said this then and now you say you did not say that then nonsense. it makes everyone focus on the outside of the game and not on the cancerous, deadly players who, instead of being asked cutesy ‘gotcha’ questions, ought to be put into handcuffs when they next show up at a hearing!
we need to get to MEATY questions and demand answers of the crime family.
August 3rd, 2006 at 1:43 pmThe Bush and Rumsfeld duet have spun this “ain’t no civil war in Iraq†as far as they could. The only reason the general public hasn’t accept that there’s a civil in Iraq is because they don’t want to. This could attribute to either being totally stupid or completely psychotic. Take your pick.
August 3rd, 2006 at 1:43 pmBoy, Abizaid’s gonna incur the wrath of Michelle Malkin.
August 3rd, 2006 at 1:46 pmHow come Georgie’s boys are ALWAYS the last to see the obvious!!
August 3rd, 2006 at 1:47 pmWell, that’s it, we’ll just have to get rid of PNAC. First thing, tomorrow morning when I take out the trash.
August 3rd, 2006 at 1:49 pmarmando,
try this: look beyond the question of whether there is or is not a civil war, and what that means and when does it start/end. believe your eyes. there is a civil war.
what if levin and clinton and the others, rather than playing coy games with these three animals, said:
‘rumsfeld, you filthy bastard, how dare you parade around here with your tan and your crooked fingers! you are responsible for the deaths of ten of thousands. secretary rumsfeld, who has gained the most because of your deviousness? why should i not have the seargent-at-arms put you in jail this very minute for your lie upon lie upon lie and your violation of the war crimes statute, 18 usc 2441?’
August 3rd, 2006 at 1:49 pm#1 DITTO
August 3rd, 2006 at 1:50 pmWe can see and read what’s going on and again Bush plays Americans for fools.
Now what this soldier get fired because he told the truth, Bush will get another wanna be to say things are going great and we’re winning the war on terror. Where’s the rest of the world in this mess notice all have pulled out their troops while Americans troops are being picked off one by one.
The Bush and Rumsfeld duet have spun this “ain’t no civil war in Iraq†as far as they could. The only reason the general public hasn’t accept that there’s a civil in Iraq is because they don’t want to. This could attribute to either being totally stupid or completely psychotic. Take your pick.
Comment by Armando Gomez — August 3, 2006 @ 1:43 pm
I pick (C) All of the above.
The general public are completely totally stupid psychotics.
August 3rd, 2006 at 2:17 pm23—hint of reality,
I could not agree with you more, especially with “what if Levin and Clinton and the other…†conclusion of statement (Why hasn’t the sergeant of arms put you in jail). Reality, “reality†is not the par of the course in Washington politics nor will it ever be. We’re not in the mess in the Middle East because of “them terrorists†acting up. We’re not in the mess here, our own country, because of “them traitors,†us citizens. No, we’re in this MESS because we—THEM—allowed it. Since 9/11 we have gone soft between the ears and soft between the legs. That’s why Remsfeld, Bush, Cheney, Rice, and the rest of the garbage are “allowed†to stink up this world for generations to come.
August 3rd, 2006 at 2:20 pm#15 Yes, freeman, every answer must be explored to finish the murdering, but I was referencing the India and Pakistan case specially, because when the official split was done, milions of muslim people were forced to travel to Pakistan, among thousands of killings done by the indians mainly. Was a bloodbath all the way. And will happen the same in Iraq if things are done without care (as have been until now). In plus, you would evict thousands or milions of people of their land, land who has been theirs for many years, generations maybe. The stronger ones would massacrate the weaker ones everywhere, until a majority of each population moves to their “official” land. And then, you would end with two or three countries that hate each other for years to come.
August 3rd, 2006 at 2:21 pmWhy is it that the politicians and the think tanks — who are supposedly experts — always about a year late and several billion dollars later arriving at the obvious conclusions that we came to about a year earlier and much more cheaply?
August 3rd, 2006 at 2:32 pmlisa,
M O N E Y
P O W E R
D E A T H
P N A C
August 3rd, 2006 at 2:35 pm28,
That’s their whole plan: to keep you wandering in Wanderland and not come to the obvious conclusion: keep you going around in circles asking the same questions and not coming to the obvious conclusion: We’re crooks–and we don’t care.
August 3rd, 2006 at 2:42 pm“…it is possible that Iraq could move toward civil war”, says the general.
Hell, it MOVED TOWARD civil war ages ago! It is now bogged down in one.
August 3rd, 2006 at 3:06 pmThank goodness our friends and allies did not desert us during our Civil War!! I have hope that the moderate Muslim community of Iraq can take the wheel from the radical Islamo-wacks. I hope there are enough of them to get the job done and establish a workable democracy for their country.
August 3rd, 2006 at 3:22 pmP.S. I really enoyed listening to the Queen of DLC, Hillary Clinton, imparting her vast military knowledge during the same hearings. (How do Think Progress bloggers and bloggettes view the “Repub Lite” DLC?
Thank goodness our friends and allies did not desert us during our Civil War!!
Comment by mighty aphrodite — August 3, 2006 @ 3:22 pm
You have a very interesting version of history.
Exactly what foreign “friends and allies” had troops on the ground fighting side by side the Union forces?
Assuming you are not talking about the Confederacy…
August 3rd, 2006 at 3:28 pmActually if I remember correctly, the British did desert the Union in favor of the confederate forces. Mostly because they thought they might be able to retake control of US Colonies. The Union blockade proved effective in preventing confederate cotton being sold to British textile mills.
August 3rd, 2006 at 3:35 pmTurning and turning in the widening gyre
The falcon cannot hear the falconer;
Things fall apart; the centre cannot hold;
Mere anarchy is loosed upon the world,
The blood-dimmed tide is loosed, and everywhere
The ceremony of innocence is drowned;
The best lack all conviction, while the worst
Are full of passionate intensity.
Surely some revelation is at hand;
Surely the Second Coming is at hand.
The Second Coming! Hardly are those words out
When a vast image out of Spritus Mundi
Troubles my sight: somewhere in the sands of the desert
A shape with lion body and the head of a man,
A gaze blank and pitiless as the sun,
Is moving its slow thighs, while all about it
Reel shadows of the indignant desert birds.
The darkness drops again; but now I know
That twenty centuries of stony sleep
were vexed to nightmare by a rocking cradle,
And what rough beast, its hour come round at last,
Slouches towards Bethlehem to be born?
William Butler Yeats
August 3rd, 2006 at 3:45 pmLove the trolls peddling the ORIGINAL POLICY of partition as if it just occured to them.
“It occurs to me that this is country which was created by the Brittish…” –freeman (lieberman)
“There IS NO MORE IRAQ. There will be three territories.”
– Kissinger, early 2004, to his Saudi clients
It occurs to me that the only way to keep four major airbases and a citadel is to chop the country into pieces. It occurs to me that this has been the PNAC policy since 1990. It occurs to me that policy is a violation of the UN charter which guarantees Iraqi sovereignty against ILLEGAL INVASIONS WITH DISMANTLEMENT AS THEIR POLICY.
• WHY spend rebuilding money, or turn on water and power, or deploy the Iraqi military in peacekeeping, when that would stabilize the country you intend to dismantle?
• Why tell the American people the truth?
• Why RAPE the country’s national treasure (looting the National Museum, burning the Koran-Torah Repository to the ground, burning the National Library to the ground) during an illegal invasion, if not to violate the Hague Conventions, and perform a genocide of Iraq?
“Article II: In the present Convention, genocide means any of the following acts committed with intent to destroy, in whole or in part, a national, ethnical, racial or religious group, as such:
(a) Killing members of the group;
(b) Causing serious bodily or mental harm to members of the group;
(c) Deliberately inflicting on the group conditions of life calculated to bring about its physical destruction in whole or in part;
(d) Imposing measures intended to prevent births within the group;
(e) Forcibly transferring children of the group to another group. ”
• Why do everything in invader power to foster civil war?
You lot, ‘freeman,’ you racist lot — you are the disease that the human race must seek to cure. You, and not ‘Islam’ are the enemy we are fighting.
August 3rd, 2006 at 3:46 pmPaul the problem with splitting Iraq into three or more countries, is it would give the Kurds in the north there own territory. Turkey has a large population of Kurds in the sourthern part of their country. The Kurds in Turkey would press even harder to join with the Iraqi Kurds. It may have been in the original plan, but it won’t happen.
August 3rd, 2006 at 3:49 pm“(d) Imposing measures intended to prevent births within the group;
(e) Forcibly transferring children of the group to another group. â€
The US military has spread TENS OF THOUSANDS OF TONS of radioactive, half-strength Uranium all over Iraq.
This brutal POISON finds its way into children’s bones, where it is covered over by normal bone, producing a PERMANENT major cause of childhood leukemia and BONE CANCER.
Such is GENOCIDE. Poisoning a people’s children IS genocide.
‘It occurs to me that Hitler would have applauded.’
And that GFH Bush does applaud his cleverness, the sociopath.
August 3rd, 2006 at 3:51 pmThings fall apart; the centre cannot hold;
Mere anarchy is loosed upon the world,
The blood-dimmed tide is loosed, and everywhere
The ceremony of innocence is drowned;
The best lack all conviction, while the worst
Are full of passionate intensity.
thus describes conditions on the ground in Iraq today. WB Yeats is as good as Nostradamus!
August 3rd, 2006 at 3:57 pm“Paul the problem with splitting Iraq into three or more countries,”
Is that it is genocide.
“is it would give the Kurds in the north there own territory. …It may have been in the original plan, but it won’t happen.: –Krazny
Krazny, if you’ve been following this discussion for awhile, you will recognize that back in 2003 when we first started noticing the real policy, everyone acted like democracy was going to break out in Iraq, and anyhow, had to go get those WMD.
The real policy is OBVIOUS, and if you think that the PNAC will let Turkey get in the way of partition, you are just buying that chunk of the hype. Turkey will probably attack the Kurd partition and kill a lot of Kurds. So what? They destroyed Armenia just the same, and 80 years later, the modern-day Talat, this bastard GFH Bush, cares not at all about a repeat of the exercise.
Just so the upcoming dirty bombing of Tel Aviv. People say that this would violate three religions. But other people realize that WE ARE TALKING ABOUT INSANE PEOPLE, not normal people who are concerned about downsides.
• What is the downside of releasing 380 tons of high-explosives to unknown hostiles, and 450 shoulder-fired missiles?
• What is the downside of a trillion dollars stolen from our Treasury?
• What is the downside of taking over the United States by creating permanent war in the ME?
Turkey will just have to get used to it, or else Istanbul may add a new layer of rubble to its foundations. Heehaw IS a foreign policy, and the moderate perspective you and many others refer to has SERIOUSLY missed out on the real forces at work, and their real willingness to work their evil.
August 3rd, 2006 at 3:58 pmPaul in LA
But other people realize that WE ARE TALKING ABOUT INSANE PEOPLE, not normal people who are concerned about downsides.
are you talking about Don Rumsfeld ?
August 3rd, 2006 at 4:03 pmMighty,
That was weak, what’s your problem, we are concerned.
August 3rd, 2006 at 4:10 pmFor Truth - No weaker than ignoring my question to progs on their thoughts about the Democrat Leaderhip Council (DLC)….but why exceed my expectations at this late date?
August 3rd, 2006 at 4:16 pmDLC = Democrat Losers Council. C’mon guys there is no true representation anymore in america. give up
August 3rd, 2006 at 4:27 pmnope. americans are losers. the two party system is broke. you fools dont seem to realize it.
August 3rd, 2006 at 4:49 pmP.S. I really enoyed listening to the Queen of DLC, Hillary Clinton, imparting her vast military knowledge during the same hearings. (How do Think Progress bloggers and bloggettes view the “Repub Lite†DLC?
finally, the mighty she-male MA has something good!
August 3rd, 2006 at 4:50 pmNo weaker than ignoring my question to progs on (…)
Comment by mighty aphrodite — August 3, 2006 @ 4:16 pm
My answer is: I don’t care.
Now answer the question posed to you: What are those “friends and allies” you were talking about? How many of them had troops fighting alonside either the Union or the Confederate forces?
August 3rd, 2006 at 5:23 pmDear Grgrrrr -The US is an ally of Israel - do you see our boots on the ground?? Your question reeks with ignorance….
August 3rd, 2006 at 5:33 pmWow yeah because thank god Isreal stood by the US during the US civil war. Oh wait….
August 3rd, 2006 at 5:42 pmThe US is an ally of Israel - do you see our boots on the ground?? Your question reeks with ignorance….
Comment by mighty aphrodite — August 3, 2006 @ 5:33 pm
Dear Mighty Aphrodite,
Your response reeks of inability to remember what you posted not even three hours ago and follow a logical argumentation. Are you going through an early onset of Alzheimer’s?
Your comment trying to compare the US civil war to Iraq’s was a stretch. Your latest comment on the US-Israel alliance is not even related to either of those events.
There is no way you are a lawyer. Or you are a lawyer in the way George Constanza was an architect.
Mighty Aphrodite: ThinkProgress’ own George Constanza wannabe.
August 3rd, 2006 at 5:59 pm“Thank goodness our friends and allies did not desert us during our civil war”. Comment by Mighty MORON.
Irrefutable proof that you exposed yourself as having absolutely NO idea of WTF you’re talking about. You are definitely NO lawyer or veteran.
August 3rd, 2006 at 6:55 pmSo - mighty America once again finds itself in the midst of problems more or less of its own making, and refuses to really go to others for any help other than the help
August 3rd, 2006 at 9:08 pm— other than the help IT prescribes!
August 3rd, 2006 at 9:09 pmHey, Mighty Moron, Did you say that it was the Eskimos who beat Grant at the Hastings in 1066? sarcasm plenty.
And you can’t duck this one by trying to change the subject like in your last post. First you cliam we had friends and allies in our civil war then you go off-topic about “can’t meake friends with islamo-wacks”. I know this is verrrry hard for you, but stick to the topic, and name those “friends and allies”.
August 3rd, 2006 at 9:27 pmCivil war already exists in Iraq, but Rumsfeld and his goofy generals hardly seem to notice!
August 4th, 2006 at 12:22 am“Civil war already exists in Iraq, but Rumsfeld and his goofy generals hardly seem to notice!” –JR
Just like the firebug pretends not to notice the house he just lit up.
Ron Dumbsfeld is the ULTIMATE in ‘Who, ME?’
‘What, me worry? I got an IDIOT for C-in-C, and if I get the boot, I get to retire to my mountain retreat. It’s YOU PEOPLE who have the problem.’
August 4th, 2006 at 1:23 amThere is NO PURE DNA BASIS FOR RACE, RELIGION, ETHNICITY, or any other group characteristic. - Paul in La-la land
Wow! Thanks for that “scientific minute” of bullsh*t.
So you’re saying that me and my wife’s next baby might be black, hispanic or Japanese (we’re caucasions)? Our genes are IN our DNA, stupid. Your genes determine EVERY PHYSICAL CHARACTERISTIC YOU HAVE, so, WTF are you talking about (race and ethnicity?)
Put down the bong, put down the bong…
August 4th, 2006 at 2:05 am[…] Major military commanders have finally come out to say that an Iraqi Civil War is much more likely than democracy now. General John Abizaid, the Commander of the U.S. Central Command, told the Senate Armed Services Committee that the violence in Baghdad was worse now than at any point since he assumed command in July 2003. Watch it! […]
August 4th, 2006 at 8:48 amBlame it on the weather…
… you can always count on Rummy to give new meaning to the words “alternate reality”……
August 4th, 2006 at 11:55 amI could have told them that this would happen. All you’ve got to do is look at US Military history in these types of conflicts. We go in with good intentions and kick butt at first, then we get bogged down and start playing with words. If this isn’t another Viet Nam, I don’t know what could be. You’ve got gorilla fighting us using hit and run or bomb and hide tactics, and our Generals shade the truth to hide the own incompetence. As I recall General Westmorland, God rest his soul, kept, “Seeing light at the end of the tunnel” and asking for more troops to quail the violence in Saigon. Now Abizaid, “Doesn’t think we will have civil war”, and is asking for more troops in Baghdad to quail the violence.
Like Yogi Barra said, “It’s da-javu all over again”, but Rumsfeld, Gen Pace and the other moron at the Pentagon can’t see it. I’m sorry but it doesn’t take another 2500 dead, and 10,000 wounded for me to see the obvious. It wouldn’t be so bad if the diplomates hadn’t screwed their end up so bad. I have a simple solution to the in fighting in the government: You divide the parilment up into the three groups, sunni, Kurd, and Shitte, with each one holding 50 seats. Then you require a 76 vote majority to approve legislation, and have a rotating Prime Minister who serves for 16 Months, and hold elections every two years for the legislature and 4 for Prime Minister. Then you have 2 Vice presidents one from each party or group. Their job is to work with their group to get things done.
August 4th, 2006 at 3:59 pm[…] Evidence: Here’s a quote from General John Abizaid about the impending civil war, and some more facts that highlight that it’s already happening. […]
August 8th, 2006 at 1:35 pm[…] Bush has dismissed media reports of sectarian violence for months, even more than a year now, as simply that liberal media which only reports the bad news. Last week, Gen. Abizaid, the Commander of the US Central Command, and thus a person who should know a thing or two about the Iraq War, stated that Iraq may be “sliding toward civil war” based on the level of sectarian violence. Gen. Pace (Chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff) agreed, saying that he believed “we do have the possibility of that devolving to a civil war.” […]
October 28th, 2006 at 7:35 pm