So, in an twist of supreme irony (from the Washington Post):
When the Bush administration decided to invade Iraq two years ago, it envisioned a quick handover to handpicked allies in a secular government that would be the antithesis of Iran's theocracy -- potentially even a foil to Tehran's regional ambitions.
But, in one of the greatest ironies of the U.S. intervention, Iraqis instead went to the polls and elected a government with a strong religious base -- and very close ties to the Islamic republic next door. It is the last thing the administration expected from its costly Iraq policy -- $300 billion and counting, U.S. and regional analysts say...
...Yet the top two winning parties -- which together won more than 70 percent of the vote and are expected to name Iraq's new prime minister and president -- are Iran's closest allies in Iraq.
Thousands of members of the United Iraqi Alliance, a Shiite-dominated slate that won almost half of the 8.5 million votes and will name the prime minister, spent decades in exile in Iran. Most of the militia members in its largest faction were trained in Shiite-dominated Iran.
And the winning Kurdish alliance, whose co-leader Jalal Talabani is the top nominee for president, has roots in a province abutting Iran, which long served as its economic and political lifeline.
Unintended consequences sure seem to be the rule rather than the exception these days. Remember when the US trained Osama bin Laden to fight the Soviets in Afghanistan? Remember how that ended up turning out? Remember when the US backed Saddam Hussein in the '80s and sold him anthrax and the means of making chemical weapons? Who'da thought that we wouldn't always be on friendly terms? I mean, Saddam and Rumsfeld looked so chummy in the '80s. Remember how the Iraq Army was disbanded, but then weapons weren't restricted, and how the ammo depots weren't secured?
Remember how much has been forgotten?