Iraqi MP Blasts Neighboring Countries and Declares: "Iraq Will Be an Ally of the West"

The following are excerpts from an interview with Iraqi MP Mithal Al-Alousi, which aired on Al-Salam TV on July 17, 2008.

To view this clip on MEMRI TV, visit http://www.memritv.org/clip/en/1825.htm.

"Iran Has Clear National Expansionist Ambitions [Which] Can Only Be at the Expense of Iraq"

Mithal Al-Alousi: "Some people want to keep Iraq weak. They do not want Iraq to have powerful friends. They do not want Iraq to have room to operate on the international level. They do not want Iraq to receive economic support, or to be able to operate through international banks. They don't want Iraq to be able to send its sons to international universities - that new generation that will return with knowledge, and bring prosperity to our society. They do not want this for Iraq.

"Kuwait wants the great Iraq to have the same power as 'beautiful' Kuwait - I don't want to call it a 'beggar' country today... They want the Iraqi army to be less powerful than a military brigade, so they can always overcome it. Iran does not want Iraq to have any [regional] standing. It says that the Arab Gulf is Persian. Even in sports - if the term 'pan-Arab games' is used, Iran objects and withdraws from the games. Iran has clear national expansionist ambitions. Iran's expansion can only be at the expense of Iraq. Iraq must fade away so they can control it.

Our neighbor Turkey - that Muslim neighbor, which is now ruled by an Islamic party and not by the army - cuts off the water supply to the Iraqis, knowing this spells drought for the fields, and harms the Iraqi citizens and their economy. The king of Saudi Arabia is the Guardian of the Two Holy Places, in Mecca and Al-Madina, but this does not prevent some [Saudis] from sponsoring terrorists, killers, and criminals. The Syrian regime, which heralds pan-Arabism, does not dare to fire a single bullet in the Golan Heights, or even mention the word 'Golan,' yet it has the audacity to kill Iraqis. [...]"

We Need International Agreements to Defend Iraq's Borders

"If we do not have international commitments and agreements, with which we can force the international community and that strong country, America, to defend the Iraqi borders and sovereignty - who will defend Iraq's borders in the east, the west, or even Basra?

[...]

"The Arab regimes want to replace the Palestinian-Israeli problem, which has lasted for the past 60 years, with the problem of Iraq... No Arab leader - not a sultan, a king, a prince, or a president - dares to talk about Palestine anymore, because they all know that this issue is now dealt with on the international level. They want some issue to preoccupy their peoples with, some issue which they can peddle, so that they can continue to oppress their own peoples. They want a victim, and Iraq is that victim.

[...]

"I want a strategic agreement [with the U.S.], which would guarantee the building of an army, as well as Iraqi universities, which would guarantee that American universities be open to Iraqis, and which would guarantee financial ties between Iraqi and American banks. With all due respect to the employees of Al-Rafidein Bank - this is not a bank. It is a meeting place for the unemployed. It is banking hocus-pocus.

[...]

"Non-Iraqi elements, like Al-Jazeera TV and the regimes of Syria and Tehran, want to cast doubt upon the heart of our political process - the parliament. The heart and mind of this political process is the parliament. If you destroy the heart and mind - you destroy the entire body.

[...]

"By Allah, we will build a strong Iraq, which will be an ally of the West. Let Iran and all those foolish Arab countries listen carefully. Iraq will be the ally of the West, and will progress more than the Emirates and Singapore, and all the rest will come looking for work in Iraq."

It would be incredible but I have no doubt that maybe a decade or two down the road, provided we don't give up, it will happen (fully stabilized Iraq and regime change in Iran after removal of their WMD). The power of Freedom and the US would be unmatched. It would also make the Saudi's "friendship" (hahaha) worthless.

BTW do you by chance remember that idiot Paul Emil Erdman? He wrote in 1974 a novel (later a spin-off book named "The crash of '79) titled:

"The Coming Oil War: How the Shah Will Win the World"

(You can read the full short story at the above link.)

Erdmann did his part in portraying the Shah as a lunatic villain who was hellbent on conquering the entire Middle East to dominate the world! And many readers bought that paranoid crock, which worked with the leftist propaganda against the Shah spread in the West.

In retrospective, after the world witnessed the real madmen in form of Saddam and Khomeini (and his successors today), the fictious scenario of an uber-powerful Shah in the Middle East doesn't look that bad, doesn't it?

Persians love the US, and to this day, the majority of the populace of the country known as Iran identify themselves as Persian, not Iranian.

To be accurate, those identifying themselves as Persians do this to distance themselves from the "official" Iranians (speak islamists). This is a post-1979 phenomenon and understandable. However before 1979 (and BTW the accurate description) is Iranian, since Persians are only a segment (albeit the largest) of the Iranian people, which include the Kurds, Azeris, Dari etc. Irani is also the native word for Persians, just as Iran was since millenia for the country, althout the West called them Persia. The nationalistic, patriotic minded folks under Reza Shah therefore insisted on the world calling them Iran instead of Persia. Iranian was the modern, secular and patriotic slogan of the hour, while Persian was equated with backwards, superstitous, fanatic and dependent. Ironic that the usage of words was twisted after 1979.

Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.