No, but 2004 presented a chance: the Abu Ghraib scandal and the joint uprising of Sunni and Shiites: <http://news.pacificnews.org/news/view_article.html?article_id=9384ee3ba6fe3e8d4535443108da081a>. If US activists had rocked the government (in a way that French students and workers did recently against the CPE) at home at the same time, it would have been a great boost to the joint uprising. But streets of America were quet. The missed opportunity was costly. Since then, Washington's exploitation of electoral politics, assisted by Sistani, and its employment of sectarian death squads have sown the seeds of Iraqi-on-Iraqi violence, flowering this year.
> In history, mass movements of this type take time to accomplish their
> goals
We've already taken too much time, given the volatile circumstances of Iraq. Iraq is on the way to becoming an Afghanistan.
If modern Iran survives the current siege by Washington, however, it may do in Iraq what Vietnam did in Cambodia. That's one of the reason we should prioritize Iran and Palestine.
> I agree. But the right way to prevent a war with Iran is by defeating
> U.S. imperialism in Iraq.
Well, in that case, there will be a war with Iran, then, for US imperialism won't be defeated in Iraq any time soon.
There will be prices to be paid for Washington's and Tel Aviv's strategy of dual regime changes in Iran and Palestine, prices mostly paid by workers of the world, but they can affect the multinational ruling class as well. -- Yoshie <http://montages.blogspot.com/> <http://mrzine.org> <http://monthlyreview.org/>