Home
On: Saturday 08/20/2011 19:03
Iraq in the foreign press: New York Times (U.S.)
He started in the newspaper, David Dayan, Iran is pushing the government of Nouri al-Maliki in Iraq, to support the regime of Syrian President Bashar al-Assad. The valleys that Iran «played a role in decision-making Iraq», pointing out that «the big story» which was absent in the midst of explosions witnessed by the Iraq, is that the Iraqi leadership has supported the Syrian side in the crackdown.
He pointed out that while denouncing the leaders in the Arab States and other countries, the lion of his blood on the demonstrators, al-Maliki follow the tone of a more friendly, as he urged the demonstrators to avoid «sabotage» State, hosted a delegation Syria formally.
The newspaper quoted Deputy Director of the Middle East program at the «International Crisis Group» Joost Hiltermann, saying that «the unrest in Syria exacerbated sectarian divisions, the old in Iraq, because some leaders come closer than a lion, and the other leaders Faistafon with the people there».
Hiltermann said Maliki relies on his strength on Tehran, and Iran is supporting Syria in full. The newspaper pointed out that the Iraqi government are not all united on this issue, adding that the Iraqi parliament condemned the violence in Syria, especially the Kurdish factions and other groups, but «Maliki seems resolute in standing in the Syrian camp, in contrast with his anger at the Bahrain ». Diane concluded by saying that« the sectarian perspective has become the regional governing positions of Iraq ». He also stressed
This shows «How the U.S. lost the war (in Iraq)», explaining that Washington «set up a friendly government in Iraq can not even make it compatible with it when a neighbor shot and killed its citizens». On the other hand, the «axis led by Iran has a greater influence on foreign policy for Iraq »according to confirmed by the U.S., which is« embarrassing for Washington ».
Therefore, he concluded that it should make Americans wonder about the feasibility to lose more blood and resources in Iraq, saying he did not the feasibility of the debate about the survival of U.S. forces in Iraq, noting, however, that the relationship between Washington and Baghdad, is not expected to be completed soon.
Iraq in the foreign press: New York Times (U.S.)
He started in the newspaper, David Dayan, Iran is pushing the government of Nouri al-Maliki in Iraq, to support the regime of Syrian President Bashar al-Assad. The valleys that Iran «played a role in decision-making Iraq», pointing out that «the big story» which was absent in the midst of explosions witnessed by the Iraq, is that the Iraqi leadership has supported the Syrian side in the crackdown.
He pointed out that while denouncing the leaders in the Arab States and other countries, the lion of his blood on the demonstrators, al-Maliki follow the tone of a more friendly, as he urged the demonstrators to avoid «sabotage» State, hosted a delegation Syria formally.
The newspaper quoted Deputy Director of the Middle East program at the «International Crisis Group» Joost Hiltermann, saying that «the unrest in Syria exacerbated sectarian divisions, the old in Iraq, because some leaders come closer than a lion, and the other leaders Faistafon with the people there».
Hiltermann said Maliki relies on his strength on Tehran, and Iran is supporting Syria in full. The newspaper pointed out that the Iraqi government are not all united on this issue, adding that the Iraqi parliament condemned the violence in Syria, especially the Kurdish factions and other groups, but «Maliki seems resolute in standing in the Syrian camp, in contrast with his anger at the Bahrain ». Diane concluded by saying that« the sectarian perspective has become the regional governing positions of Iraq ». He also stressed
This shows «How the U.S. lost the war (in Iraq)», explaining that Washington «set up a friendly government in Iraq can not even make it compatible with it when a neighbor shot and killed its citizens». On the other hand, the «axis led by Iran has a greater influence on foreign policy for Iraq »according to confirmed by the U.S., which is« embarrassing for Washington ».
Therefore, he concluded that it should make Americans wonder about the feasibility to lose more blood and resources in Iraq, saying he did not the feasibility of the debate about the survival of U.S. forces in Iraq, noting, however, that the relationship between Washington and Baghdad, is not expected to be completed soon.
