Iraqi Civil War Planned?

"One of the abiding myths about the War on Iraq is that the neocons were too stupid to realize that they would confront an unrelenting, indigenous resistance to their occupation of Iraq. Unwittingly, the story line goes, they led the U.S. into a conflict which has now produced a civil war. But this simply does not fit the facts. The neocons clearly anticipated such an outcome before they launched their war as Stephen Zunes documents in Antiwar.com:

"Top analysts in the CIA and State Department, as well as large numbers of Middle East experts, warned that a U.S. invasion of Iraq could result in a violent ethnic and sectarian conflict. Even some of the war's intellectual architects acknowledged as much: In a 1997 paper, prior to becoming major figures in the Bush foreign policy team, David Wurmser, Richard Perle, and Douglas Feith predicted that a post-Saddam Iraq would likely be "ripped apart" by sectarianism and other cleavages but called on the United States to "expedite" such a collapse anyway."

I've wondered about that from the start of the war. It seemed as though our war plans were purposely inadequate, simply because those inadequacies were never corrected. True, it wouldn't and didn't take a large force to conquer Iraq, but keeping the peace and rebuilding just seemed so screwed up that it seemed another part of the overall plan. There was no excuse for having too little troop numbers to stabilize the country, especially after disbanding the Iraqi military, which in itself, seems to have been designed to release well trained Iraqi soldiers into the general population so they would be available for any forthcoming insurgencies.

The lack of a sufficiant post-war force could lead to nothing other than exactly what is taking place now. Questions about Iraqi death squads being under the supervision of the coalition, if true, does fit perfectly into a plan to keep Iraq weak, divided, and fighting amongst themselves, so we can claim that we must stay for years to come.

Only the blind can believe that there's no way we could've stabilized the country by now, if we really wanted to. If we had succeeded in calming the country down and re-establishing a degree of normalcy in the lives of the Iraqis, we would not be shipping home so many bodybags. We would've shown people in the region that it was actually the regime that was the target, and not it's citizens. We would've been more convincing in quelling the belief that we are on a crusade against the Muslum world. But that just would'nt have fit into the neocon plans for the region that involve total domination of the oil production through the use of puppet governments, and a divided opposition. We want unrest in the region, and we want the people there to think we're on a religious crusade, because it causes exactly the conditions we need, to give us more reason to step up our aggression against oil rich regions, that in turn, incites terrorist acts that justify totalitarian control at home, to prevent domestic opposition.

As it stands now, there's only one group of people in the world who can still put a stop to these insane plans, and that's the American people. Until we wake up, get off our complacent asses, and take back our government, "we the people" will become as despised in history, as the Germans who sat quietly while their government ran amuck.