Militiamen Wound 6 British Soldiers
Sadrist Rejoin Parliament
Shiite militiamen fired mortars at a British base at Basra, seriously wounding one British soldier and lightly injuring 5 others.
The Sadr Bloc of deputies in Parliament, who had staged a walkout to protest PM Nuri al-Maliki's meeting with George W. Bush, are now returning to the United Iraqi Alliance (the Shiite fundamentalist coalition). They did so despite the arrest by US and Iraqi forces of Abdul Hadi Darraj, a major Sadr aide.
Al-Hayat reports in Arabic that Muqtada al-Sadr's lieutenants are predicting major chaos if the US moves against him.
Mclatchy reports on political violence in Iraq, including several bombings and 17 bodies showing up in the street on Friday
Iraq's system of higher education was near to collapsing even before the recent bombing at al-Mustansiriya University. Attendance is down by as much as half, and thousands of professionals have fled the country.
posted by Juan Cole @ 1/20/2007 12:29:00 AM
|
Facebook
6 Comments:
I've got one of those On This Day books. For today, January 20, there's an entry that reads: "US president and vice- president terms of office end at noon."
In short, two years to go (if the information's correct). 730 days. Seventy five per cent of the way there.
Not that it'll be glad confident morning in America again come 1201 pm January 20, 2008. The "Decider" - aka "shitter in the bed" - is just the outward and most visible sign of the disease. And make no mistake, the thing's metastasized.
Prof. Cole: as Eason Jordan notes, Coalition forces have been suffering significantly fewer fatalities in January than they were in the last few months of last year.
According to www.icasualties.org/oif/, in December 115 Coalition troops were killed for an average of 3.71/day. So far in January, 26 have been reported killed for an average of 1.3/day.
What is the most likely explanation for this dramatic improvement?
I am not suggesting that this is part of a trend. February 2004 saw 'only' 23 fatalities, less than one per day on average. Needless to say, that rate did not last. But was there evidence of particular reasons for the lower number back then, or do we say it was just the lowest ebb of the necessary ebb and flow, for now beyond understanding?
I am also, of course, not suggesting that there has been any commensurate improvement in the number of troops or civilians being hurt, still less that any number above zero is acceptable.
The reported Shia militia mortar attack raises a question: why so "rare"? Reports are infrequent. Or are military instructions to withhold or censor such events, unless the command is under instruction to publicize them? During Vietnam, mortar attacks were a steady, occasionally fatal, nuissance. VC could lob a few shells and then hide. A shell hurled 4KM might not have great accuracy, but still cause damage or have a terror effect in a dense urban zone. Infra-red detection of launchers is also nearly useless if they are surrounded by 1,000s of other civilian heat / light sources and hideaways. Presumably, Saddam's army left behind many, many launchers and shells now in possession of insurgents and militia. A jerry-rigged device hit the hotel lodging the US DOD Deputy in late 2003. A mess hall also got hit. But mortar fire does not figure in many journalists' reports. Is it a miracle the Green Zone has been spared protracted fire? Or is this simply filtered from the media? IEDs are deadly to US patrols and convoys, but cannot penetrate the Green Zone.
Dr. Cole,
Looks like the surge will increase US presence aided by a lesser host of unwilling Iraqis bound to vanish when the going gets rough. Not quite the scenario Fred Kagan and his McCain/Lieberman echo chamber had in mind.
See this McClatchy Newspapers report by Leila Fadel and Yaseen Taha:
Kurdish Iraqi soldiers are deserting to avoid the conflict in Baghdad [...] In interviews soldiers in Sulaimaniyah expressed loyalty to their Kurdish brethren, not to Iraq. Many said they'd already deserted, and those who are going to Baghdad said they'd flee if the situation there became too difficult.
In an earlier comment I asked why "Coalition forces have been suffering significantly fewer fatalities in January than they were in the last few months of last year." I wish I hadn't.
www.icasualties.org/oif/ is now reporting 20 US military fatalities in Iraq for Saturday alone, all due to "hostile" action, nearly doubling January's toll in a single day.
Not the answer I was hoping for; too abrupt, too bloody. Made me physically nauseous.
Which reminds of an article published on the same day these 20 people died. Jacqueline Marcus writes that "during the recent televised interviews, George W. Bush referred to our soldiers as “kids.” He was smiling, completely unaffected by the unconscionable fact of his assertion."
http://www.commondreams.org/views07/0120-23.htm
5 us soldiers killed by shia in Kerbala.
This could be huge.
Post a Comment
<< Home