IRAQ EXIT STRATEGY

In 1912-15, German climatologist Alfred Wegener came up with what was then an ingenuous theory of plate tectonics and continental drift.
The hypothesis, Wegener claimed, was necessary to explain what was right in front of his nose.
Look at how the continents of North and South America appear to fit into the other side of the Atlantic like the pieces of a giant jigsaw puzzle.
In past years, that was dismissed, explained, as coincidence.
But, said Wegener,
"No. It's not coincidence."
And, so, if it were not coincidence, a theory was needed to explain how this could happen.
Hence, the above.
Here's alittle something about Wegner's background and theory, if you're interested:

www.pangaea.org/wegener.htm

From Wegener to Iraq.

How could I have been so stupid as to overlook what is/was so obvious, right in front of my nose regarding Iraq's "exit strategy."
In previous blogs, I highlighted a few items.
First, my brief recapitulation, April 7, 2008:

www.karlmarxwasright2.blogspot.com/2008/04/recapitulation-iraqs-mopping-up.html

I indicated that a previous deal was cut during Cheney's Iraq visit, including Sadr's demise.
That, indeed now occurs.
I also said, previously, that Sadr's "offensive" in Basra would accomplish two items on the US home front, first, a reason, excuse, justification to increase or stabilize American/Western military forces in Iraq, which, indeed, happened, and, two, opening the dirty, dark secret of Iran's prominence in Iraq, also accomplished.
Iran's involvement in Iraq now front and center, even though the narrative, as usual, "spun," depending on source.

However, this Faustian bargain between Iran's militias in Iraq and the US, specifically, the Bush-Cheney group, has, as I also said, created just as many difficulties and problems as it was supposed to solve, from ethnic cleansing, genocide, regional conflicts, destabilization, refugees, backlash, not only in Iraq, but, throughout the region, which has parallel repercussions within Iran, as well.
It's become a dilemma for all concerned, an insolvable paradox, or, so it seems.
(By the way, I can't resist a side note.
Next time Sadr claims he's opposing the US, please, remind him it is/was US taxpayer dollars that put him into Iraq in the first place. I'm the first one who would like to send him a bill. He's extremely ungrateful. Somebody should really remind Sadr that he who pays the piper calls the tune. And, it was the US, not Iran, who paid the bills that put him there in the first place.
Don't bite the hand that feeds you!)

Now, the present quandary, conundrum and circumstantial cul-de-sac in which both the US and Iran find themselves regarding Iraq and the region, created by their mutual occupations, can equally be resolved only by two more or less parallel turn of events.
Regime change in BOTH countries, the US AND Iran.
It's so eminently logical and CONGRUENT.
(Keep Wegener's hypothesis in mind.)
It creates a context, pretext from which new internal and external dynamics can play themselves out.
US regime change will be accomplished with the next, upcoming Presidential election.
But, parallel regime change being necessary in Iran, in order to create an entirely new context necessary for mutually desired accommodation, now that they BOTH destroyed Iraq.

Towards these ends, Sadr should be seen as the first step.
When watching ALL the events unfolding, evaluate them towards achieving the desired goals, above.