Mahdi Army Stands Firm in its Basra Neighborhoods;
Demonstrations in Baghdad against al-Maliki
People are asking me the significance of the fighting going on in Basra and elsewhere. My reading is that the US faced a dilemma in Iraq. It needed to have new provincial elections in an attempt to mollify the Sunni Arabs, especially in Sunni-majority provinces like Diyala, which has nevertheless been ruled by the Shiite Islamic Supreme Council of Iraq. But if they have provincial elections, their chief ally, the Islamic Supreme Council, might well lose southern provinces to the Sadr Movement. In turn, the Sadrists are demanding a timetable for US withdrawal, whereas ISCI wants US troops to remain. So the setting of October, 2008, as the date for provincial elections provoked this crisis. I think Cheney probably told ISCI and Prime Minister al-Maliki that the way to fix this problem and forestall the Sadrists coming to power in Iraq, was to destroy the Mahdi Army, the Sadrists' paramilitary. Without that coercive power, the Sadrists might not remain so important, is probably their thinking. I believe them to be wrong, and suspect that if the elections are fair, the Sadrists will sweep to power and may even get a sympathy vote. It is admittedly a big 'if.'
Al-Hayat reports in Arabic that Iraqi Prime Minister Nuri al-Maliki continues to refuse to negotiate with the Mahdi Army militiamen, and said, "They have no other choice but to surrender." He did extend the deadline for them to surrender heavy arms from 3 days to 10, and promised monetary rewards to those who complied. Al-Maliki said he was unconcerned with political parties, but that he could not abide armed gangs that interfered with the work of the government. He was referring to the Mahdi Army.
Clashes continued between government troops and the Mahdi Army on Thursday in Basra and other cities in the south for the third straight day. Some 45 are said to be dead in Kut, the capital of Wasit province, and US helicopter gunships are said to have killed 60 in Hilla south of Baghdad.
On Friday morning, there are reports of clashes in Nasiriya and Mahmudiya.
The LA Times says of the fighting in Basra on Thursday, when its downtown was a ghost town:
' Residents said food prices were soaring because it was difficult to get goods into the city, where clashes continued Thursday. In a Sadr stronghold in west Basra, hundreds of people led by tribal sheiks held a protest demanding that the government halt the military operation and restore electricity and water, which they said had been cut three days earlier. '
McClatchy reports that so far the 30,000 Iraqi government troops in Basra have proven unable to dislodge the Mahdi Army from its strongholds:
' In Basra, the Mahdi Army retained control of its four main strongholds of al Hayaniyah, al Qibla, al Timimiyah and Khamsa Mil. Al Timimiyah is in the center of the city, and the three other areas are on the main road from Baghdad to Basra. '
Water, electricity and medicine were said to be lacking for people in Basra.
BBC reports that on Friday morning, there was a lull in the fighting and people were coming out:
' "Today since early morning it's quiet. No shooting. And the people in Basra are going out of their houses for shopping. The buses have started working. And the cars are also working on the streets," the councillor said. '
In Baghdad, al-Hayat says, thousands of protesters came out to rally against Prime Minister Nuri al-Maliki, demanding that he resign and threatening him with a trial worse than that of Saddam Hussein.
Clashes broke out between Mahdi Army militiamen and government security forces in 10 Baghdad districts, but appear to have subsided when a curfew was imposed, which forbids vehicles to circulate until Sunday.
The Green Zone, where the US embassy and other US facilities are, took more heavy mortar fire on Thursday. An American earlier wounded in that sort of bombardment later died.
Al-Sharq al-Awsat reports in Arabic that various parties in parliament are responding differently to al-Maliki's military campaign in Basra. The Shiite United Iraqi Alliance, with 85 members in parliament, strongly supported the operation. The major component of the UIA is the Islamic Supreme Council of Iraq, led by Abdul Aziz al-Hakim, a rival of the Sadrists of Muqtada al-Sadr. Ironically, ISCI is denouncing the maintaining of a paramilitary by a party; yet it has its own militia, the Badr Corps.
In contrast, the Sunni fundamentalist Iraqi Accord Front is opposed to the attack on the Mahdi Army, with its leader Adnan Dulaimi, saying that it does not work to the benefit of Iraq.
A member of Iyad Allawi's National Iraqi List, which has 22 seats in parliament, said it was necessary to stop the activities of lawless gunmen. But Izzat al-Shahbandar warned that if the campaign went on very long, it could derail the political process in Iraq.
McClatchy reports civil war violence in Iraq for Thursday:
' Baghdad
12 mortars hit the Green Zone starting at 10 am until this report was prepared at 2 pm, Thursday, said Iraqi Police. The U.S. Embassy said no one was injured.
2 mortar rounds fell on Ur neighbourhood, east Baghdad near an open air marketplace killing one civilian, injuring two.
2 mortar rounds hit Karrada Kharij Street, central Baghdad injuring 1 civilian.
17 wounded Iraqi Army soldiers from Basra were taken to al-Yarmouk Hospital for treatment.
Clashes in al-Mansour district, from Iskan neighbourhood to Abu Jafar al-Mansour began this morning between Mahdi Army members and security forces. 3 Iraqi Army soldiers were injured and the clashes continued at the time of publication.
A parked car bomb exploded near the Red Crescent office, Andalus Square, in central Baghdad causing some material damages to its outer wall.
Clashes between Mahdi Army members and National Police in al-Amin neighbourhood started this morning and continue until the preparation of this report at 2 pm. Casualties have not been reported until this time.
The office of al-Da'wa Party in al-Shaab neighbourhood has been torched, causing only material damages.
3 mortars hit al-Alawi bus station, central Baghdad, killing 2 civilians, injuring 15.
Updating Sadr City news, since the fighting started on Monday until now, the toll has reached 38 killed and 47 wounded, Iraqi police said.
Gunmen kidnapped the civil spokesman of the Baghdad Security Plan, Tahseen al-Shaikhli. An armed group attacked his home, took him captive, let his family go and torched his house. They also took a government pick up truck, loaded it with 26 pieces of weaponry belonging to his security detail.
8 Iraqi soldiers were wounded in clashes between Iraqi Army and members of the Mahdi Army in Talbiyah, north Baghdad at around 3 pm Thursday.
Random fire by gunmen passing in a speeding car killed a father and his son, 13 years old in Talbiyah, north Baghdad at 5 this afternoon.
1 civilian injured when gunmen opened fire randomly across Sabah al-Khayat Square in Shaab area in north Baghdad at around 5 pm.
1 mortar round fell in Battawin neighbourhood, which is a largely commercial area in central Baghdad, injuring 2 civilians at 5 pm.
Clashes between gunmen and Iraqi Army in Zafaraniyah, southeast Baghdad at around 5.30 pm left 2 soldiers seriously injured.
2 mortar rounds hit the Ministry of Interior, al-Tasfeerat compound in central Baghdad at 6 pm killing 1 employee and injuring 4.
A mortar shell hit a residential building in Karrada Dakhil, central Baghdad at 6.15 pm, injuring 2 residents and causing material damage.
Clashes broke out between National Police and gunmen in Husseiniyah neighbourhood at around 6.30 pm and the clashes continued at the time of publication.
4 mortar rounds hit the US military base in Rustamiyah at 6.30 pm. No casualties were reported and no comment was available from the US military at the time of publication.
Gunmen target a police patrol at the entrance of al-Hurriyah neighbourhood at 8 pm injuring 1 policeman.
Thursday at 8 pm the Shoala Police Station fell in the control of an armed group.
5 unidentified bodies were found in Baghdad by Iraqi Police today. 1 in Ur, 1 in Zayuna, 1 in Husseiniyah, 1 in Mansour, 1 in Alawi al-Hilla, Sheikh Ma'roof.
Basra
Fighting in Basra between the Mahdi Army and the security forces has been ongoing since early Tuesday, and the toll of the fighting is at least 97 killed and around 300 injured, a medical source in the Directorate of Health in Basra said.
Hilla
Clashes have resumed in the city centre of Hilla city causing the injury of 30 people, 22 of whom were police and army, 8 civilians amongst who was a woman and the death of 1 soldier and 2 policemen.
Clashes in Chiffel neibourhood inside Hilla city continue, and the offices of al-Da'wa Party and the Supreme Council were torched by members of al-Mahdi Army causing the death of 3 policemen and the injury of 4.
Maysan
Gunmen torch Badr Organization Bureau located in Hitteen Square, in the centre of Amara city. They launched 4 RPGs at the bureau, three of which hit the bureau and burned the building to the ground. The fourth hit an adjacent house, injuring one of its inhabitants.
Clashes between Iraqi Army and Mahdi Army members as the regular army was crossing what is commonly known as the Yugoslav Bridge, north Amara. 2 civilians were killed and 7 injured by cross fire.
Salahuddin
Gunmen attack a Sahwa, US sponsored militia, member's house in al-Khadhraa neighbourhood, downtown Samara and kill both him and his son and injured his wife and one of his daughters. Joint forces, Iraqi army and US military announce a curfew in order to search for the armed group, said First Lieutenant Muthanna Shakir. US military did not include this report in their release.
A roadside bomb exploded yesterday, Wednesday targeting a Support Force, CLC, checkpoint on the main road near Awja city injuring 7 Sahwa members and 2 civilians.
A mortar shell fell on Tel al-Jarad, Baiji city, yesterday evening killing a woman Mona Ajaj, injuring 5 civilians, amongst whom were 3 children and a woman.
IED exploded targeting a soldier as he left his home going to work, in Malha neighbourhood, north Baiji, causing his death.
Diyala
5 unidentified bodies were found in a mass grave by security forces in al-Zor area, Muqdadiyah district, 25 km to the east of Baquba.
Local police found 4 bodies in al-Asaiba village, Shahraban district, 8 km south of the town of Baladruz. . .
A roadside bomb exploded targeting a civilian car in the town of Khanaqin injuring 2 civilians.
The District Commissioner's office in Khan Beni Saad was targeted with mortar fire by the Mahdi Army today. The security forces announced a curfew in the town in order to track the armed group.
Anbar . . .
5 Iraqi Army soldiers from Anbar were killed in the fighting in Basra. Their bodies were returned to their families today.
Kirkuk
A suicide car bomb targeted an Asayesh, a Kurd security intelligence agency, vehicle killing an officer, Captain Tayib Mahmoud, and injuring 2 of his security detail and 5 civilians in the proximity of the explosion. The incident took place in al-Quds Street, Tiseen neighbourhood, downtown Kirkuk city early Thursday morning.
Gunmen assassinated the Commander of Garmian Peshmerga Forces, of the KDP. The gunmen opened fire upon his motorcade in a town near Daqooq, south Kirkuk, killing him and 4 of his security detail. '
Labels: Iraq
posted by Juan Cole @ 3/28/2008 01:30:00 AM
|
Facebook
23 Comments:
The Sadrists are also saying that the attacks aim to clear the way for an al-Hakim victory in the October provincial elections.
I agree that the attacks cannot help Hakim, but I think that the Americans in Iraq know that too.
Hakim is now a liability to the US, and so is Maliki. Also, the visit of the Iranian President to Baghdad was a major insult to the USA and will not go unpunished.
It is early days yet, but it seems to me that the Americans want to shuffle their Shi'a cards in Iraq and this is the start of something that they cannot fully determine in advance, but are feeling their way around it.
It seems to me astounding that Cheyney, if it is indeed he (and I believe it), could have so misjudged the situation in Iraq, as to provoke the hostility of the largest Shi'ite grouping, when the cooperation of the Shi'a is 100% necessary for the well-being of the United States forces.
The present situation is not beyond putting the US position in Iraq at risk. If the Maliki government falls, or is discredited as the lackey of the US, large numbers of Shi'a could go over to the Sadrists. The consequences of such an event could be quite difficult.
Isn't this eaxctly what Bush and Cheney said would happen if we withdrew from Iraq?
Oh yeah, we're still there.
The other kicker here, Juan, is timing. I read a quote from one of the Kurd leaders,Othman I believe, who wondered "why now?"
I can only think at the risk of blind Ameri-centrism, that the US elections may have had something to do with this.
A big potentially messy operation that is likely to extend for some time needs to be resolved before the Conventions begin this summer
Interesting that all southern routes out of Iraq are embroiled in hostilities just as our military is attempting a moderate drawdown of troops. Is this really just a political battle, or is it an effort to get us stuck?
This sounds more and more like the 'vietnamization follies' every day. Operations that are planned and supported by the US that go nowhere and bellicose statements from the puppet government. It is only a matter of time before some local hero tunnels into the Green Zone and there will be REAL hell to pay.
Prof Cole and community -
all very confusing vis-a-vis Iran
there are anecdotal reports in the Arabic language press of US/Tehran deals sealed by al-Hakim but put forth by Najad in his visit - purportedly with US Military Mullen and Crocker
as I do not speak arabic, it is tough to parse, let alone nuance -for all I know, I am reading the Arab Glen Reynolds
one of the links - out of London
http://www.alarabonline.org/index.asp?fname=%5C2008%5C03%5C03-21%5C988.htm&dismode=cx&ts=21/03/2008%2006:11:07%20%D5
like everyone else, just trying to see where this all leads
Prof. Cole is the first commentator I've seen to raise Cheney's role. I think Cole is correct to speculate that Cheney gave Maliki the go-ahead to attack the Mahdi Army in the south. There is plenty of supporting circumstantial evidence. First, Cheney made a surprise visit to Baghdad Monday March 17. Two days later, the Iraqi presidential council approved the new provincial elections law that it had previously blocked. The key change, according the Washington Post, was that the SCIRI VP Adel Abdul Mahdi dropped his opposition.
Recall that the elections law was a US priority because it promises to improve stability in Anbar and other Sunni regions, by putting Sunni's in charge of their own local governments. But SCIRI (and Dawa) opposed new elections because they feared the electoral strength of the Sadrists, who like the Sunnis had boycotted the last local elections. So, it seems probably that Cheney offered Adbul Mahdi and Maliki a quid pro quo: approve the election law, and you have permission to attack Sadr in Basra.
Note that the Washington Post reported today that "Maliki decided to launch the offensive without consulting his U.S. allies, according to administration officials." This is not credible, but what is believable is that Cheney gave Maliki the go-ahead, and perhaps informed Gen. Petreus in Iraq, without notifying the National Security Council or Defense Secretary Gates.
I do not think one can overestimate the militancy and attention to detail of Cheney, the neoconservatives and their operatives. One of their strategies is to destabilize volatile situations in a very methodical way. The course of the military actions in Iraq is a case in point. While opportunities, weather, logistics and immediate outcomes are always a factor in decisions and plans, public perceptions and, more importantly, the US electoral cycle is also a key factor.
A careful examination of the US military fatality record strongly suggests that, to the degree possible, the war is taken in and out of play based on concerns about immediate public reactions to military deaths. One of the lessons of the Vietnam War was that military losses affected voting patterns. Research and papers in political science journals have been written about this and the authors have given presentations at military colleges.
The degree to which these particular concerns have shaped this conflict, like many other factors, is murky at best and there is no evidence of candor on the part of those making high-level decisions. As most know, there is plenty of evidence of deception, evasion and unwarranted secrecy.
Outcomes of specific operations are not predictable or there would be no US military fatalities. Instead, the actions are exquisitely planned and involve overwhelming force, particularly air power, to minimize the potential for coalition fatalities on the ground. Still, the need to keep line of communication open (meaning roads and highways) and to deal with what cannot be done from the air, results in fatalities and other casualties. There is also the exercise of "showing presence," as if the Iraqis are not aware that they are occupied. What is being shown and tested is our troops capacity to move freely in various areas. This is not meant to be a list of all the types of operations. The point is that it is primarily the coalition forces that determine the general course of the conflict simply because they have the wherewithal to do so.
What we have seen recently are: 1) a drastic drop in US military fatalities during a very active phase of the primary, 2) some very recent high profile visits by Cheney, McCain and Lieberman and then, 3) during a lull between primary dates, the commencement of this action in Basra. This seems typical of the oscillation between the "there are some problems and they are being dealt with appropriately" and "things are improving greatly" poles.
One could also make the case that there was a concerted attempt to keep total fatalities below 4,000 on the 5th anniversary so that the two "milestone" type of events could be dealt with in a particular order. The thinking may have been that exceeding 4,000 prior to the anniversary would have increased negative comment on the anniversary while exceeding 4,000 after the anniversary would cause less of a stir given that the course of the war had just been rehashed in the media. There is nothing magical about 4,000, of course, but round numbers are typically treated as being particularly significant, e.g., $9.99 is "less than" $10.00.
"Rudd's troop withdrawal leaves Bush alone on Iraq
"Phillip Coorey Chief Political Correspondent in Washington
March 29, 2008
"KEVIN RUDD was to formally tell the US President, George Bush, yesterday that Australia would withdraw its combat troops from Iraq and compensate by increasing financial and humanitarian help and by training Iraqi security forces outside the country."
http://www.smh.com.au/news/national/bush-alone-on-iraq/2008/03/28/1206207407916.html
At 4:33 PM, Anonymous said...
It is only a matter of time before some local hero tunnels into the Green Zone and there will be REAL hell to pay.
always wondered why this has not been accomplished already. i would have been digging from Day One.
The one question I have regarding the ISCI offensive against the Mahdi Army is why has it not raised the spectre of a vote of no-confidence against al-Maliki? My understanding was that many factions had splintered from the original coalition, and that the support from the Sadrists was the only thing keeping a majority from being reached against the current government. Could Muqtada not simply respond with threats to reform the government as it is now, instead of waiting for a round of elections that in all likelihood will not be conducted in an environment capable of reflecting the majority's true will?
Maliki is responding to the expulsion of Dawa from Basra.
He's losing the South to Muqtada.
Bush has tricked him into turning against his own people. No matter what happens, he's toast.
Unfortunately, he's the Chief of State.
Bush considers the situation 'very promising'.
ref : “[Maliki] did extend the deadline for them to surrender heavy arms from 3 days to 10, and promised monetary rewards to those who complied.”
IMHO reminiscent of U.S. General Mark Clark, after establishing a beachead at Anzio during WWII, then stalled and failed to engage the Germans...
. . .about which, Churchill is reported to have said: “I had hoped that we were hurling a wildcat onto the shore, but all we got was a stranded whale.”
The folly of General Petraeus simply hunkering down in defensive posture in Baghdad, not only rendering his own forces largely irrelevant in the Sunni -v- Shi'ite Civil War, but also leaving naked ‘The Prize’ that is the southern oil field and port terminal conduit of Basra ~ is now painfully obvious. Perhaps because TheSurge = the General's "success" was measured only by the metrics of: (1) the number of insurgent / offensive attacks against his defense; and, (2) the KIA attrition rate of American forces ~ the idea of General Petraeus and the American Army serving any strategic purpose other than "reporting ‘good-news’ metrics" and "sacrificing blood and treasure to provide time for political progress" ~ that process, itself being some fantastically imagined reformation, an archaic notion of nation ‘IRAQ’...
. . .which, incredibly in retrospect ~ would have been the de facto Iranian Shi'ite Occupation of ‘IRAQ’ sharing its power with the (now Sunni allied) American Occupation of ‘IRAQ’, as well as with the independent Kurdish peoples' Occupation of ‘IRAQ’.
And so there we sit, surrounded; literally driven underground, operating from bunkers within the confines of our own largely meaningless Green Zone ~ while our defender, the Shi'ite proxy militia of IRAN that is the Maliki ‘government forces’ apparent of ‘IRAQ’, hurls bags of dough over the top of the trench-wall in which we find ourselves stuck, hoping that Mr. Sadr et al belligerents can be bought off or bombed out before the folks back home realize that something has gone terribly wrong, Over There.
Today George Bush declared the Shiite civil war a "necessary part" of Iraq's development and cast his lot squarely with Maliki/al-Hakim and IRAN
None dare call it treason
Bout time someone did - at least by Bush-Cheney-McCain-Lieberman lights, for that is exactly what it is
The Comment At 6:23 PM, Anonymous said... is Spot On. Most excellent.
Petraeus and Crocker make a return engagement in April in front of our mute Congress, to sell an updated version of their carefully-disguised-behind-concealing-rhetoric American redesign for Iraq. As I noted in a digby/dday comment thread thanks to ck4829 at DU, this convenient 'harmonic convergence' around April 8th speaks volumes about the self-interested U.S. role in the newly-instigated violence in Iraq:
["BAGHDAD, March 28 (Xinhua) -- Iraqi government extended a deadline for Shiite militiamen in southern Basra to hand over their weapons from Saturday to April 8, the Prime Minister Nuri al-Maliki said in a statement Friday."]
http://news.xinhuanet.com/ englis...ent_7876242.htm
["Bush is not expected to nominate a successor to Fallon until after Petraeus reports to Congress April 8-9 on his assessment of conditions in Iraq and his recommendations for how to proceed."]
http://www.iht.com/articles/ap/2...ntcom- Chief.php
One more cakewalk through Congress, and by mid-April the administration and its proxies in Iraq will be 'home free,' with the blessings of (or at least another blank check from) both major political parties safely in hand.
[The upcoming Iraqi election also happens to be a key step in the implementation of the separatist agenda for Iraq - where the leaders of newly-powerful regions would challenge the authority of a central government, and be in a position to cut their own deals - oil-based and otherwise - with foreigners, with only minimal national oversight. Of course, Congress will only pay attention to the Pentagon spin about the meaning of the elections, and gullibly or duplicitously accept their assertions that these regional elections are "progress" for (the American version of) Iraq.]
Alex wrote: "If the Maliki government falls, or is discredited as the lackey of the US..."
You're living in a radically different time zone if you think Maliki's discredit lies in the future...
To the people of Iraq, he is already worse than Saddam Hussein.
He is only held standing by American armed force.
Too bad the American people never find out what is actually happening there.
I'm surprised at this, because the obvious response is to start targeting American fuel and food convoys on the southern roads. Maybe the Americans figure the Mahdi Army has learned nothing since 2004, but I think it's clear that they have.
Blowing up the oil pipeline was not a bad play, because driving up petroleum prices drives up the price of the war, and hence the pain to the American economy. I expect more of that now in the south.
In the meantime, I expect Maliki top be blamed, and rightly so, for the added misery around Basra. It's hard to see how the Americans could have thought this was a good play for them.
The endless political analysis of what is in reality a multi-party civil war, is no more useful than the neocons' original naive assessments. The bottom line is this: the minority Sunnis and Kurds are not safe from either of the Shiite factions and no form of government except totalitarianism can keep the peace in Iraq. The Sunnis will not be allowed to lose by the rest of the Arab countries, and Iran isn't going to let their Shiite brethren lose either. Regardless what government the US leaves behind, Iraq will devolve into a chaos that will be resolved militarily, not politically.
If you want to understand what will happen, learn what the Iraqis believe about Allah, themselves and each other. Iraq under Saddam was the ultimate Pandora's box, and the neocons opened it.
When I realized - back in 2002 - that the US really was going to attack Iraq, I had the most disorienting out-of-body experience imaginable. How do you unscramble an omelet? All the king's horses and all the king's men would never be able to put Iraq - or the Middle East - back together again.
Maybe I'm wrong about all this - it wouldn't be the first time - but the opportunity seems real.
Now that many professionals and technocrats have been driven out - as well as the business class and everyone else wealthy enough to escape, probably the best future for Iraq is to consolidate under someone like Sadr. At least in another 30 years, there will be some hope for the Iraqi people who remain - otherwise, they are all going to die in the worst genocide in 300 years.
Iran is not such a bad place now -at least they have a future (if the US doesn't nuke them) - and it was destroyed by the Americans in much the same manner, although by a different method.
Sadr has no reason to back off - he really does hold all the cards now, what with the decapitation of Iraqi leadership. And he can't decimate the Sunnis, even if he wanted to, because of the strong Sunni neighbors that Iraq must live with, or subordinate to Iran - which I doubt if Sadr would do.
An uneasy, but workable, plan could evolve if the more reasonable Sadrists and Sunnis work towards rebuilding Iraqi nationalism, which seems to still be stronger than most people think. It's also the only way they will rid themselves of the occupation, which plans to stay until the US gets control of the oil.
It seems to me that Sadr and the 'Awakening Councils' have been undermining the power of more radical extermists during the idiotic 'surge' - escalation. Most Americans are not aware of the heavy bombing campaign that has gone on unabated - but that has to have an effect on the remaining Iraqis. They will have to face the reality, sooner or later, that there can be no rebuilding of Iraq until the invaders are ousted. No jobs, no food, no clean water, no working sewers, no electricity - nothing positive, as long as the US (and its puppet government) remains.
If they play their cards right, this could be the beginning of the end of the Iraq occupation - we'll see whether nationalism can pull Iraqis out of this quagmire - remember, they're in much worse shape than the US military - which has food, water, fuel, electricity, medical services, and everything else. Iraq was a modern Arab country before the US set up Saddam (just like the Shah) and it can recover - if they set aside their squabbles for a later date. That's not unheard of - they can wait decades to settle tribal slights among themselves. But they can't do anything until they rid themselves of the occupation - and they do have to unite to do that. The Kurds will never be able to stand up to a unified Iraq - they couldn't before, and now both Turkey and Iran have an interest in cutting them back down to size.
There is a real opportunity here now - we'll see whether Sadr is smart enough to take advantage of the situation.
What anonymous at 10.35 points to is this: The Iraqis are better off without the invaders, the invaders use poverty and destruction to get their ways.
Parts of Baghdad and Basra as Gaza? Not a hypothetical question, a "fact on the ground". It is the modus operandi of the "new" Middle East.
But look at this presentation from Reuters:
"By Dominic Evans LONDON, March 30 (Reuters) - Iraq's crackdown on the Mehdi Army in Basra poses a dilemma for the United States, which wants Iraqi forces to take a lead on security but risks getting sucked into their violent Shi'ite feud."
Its all the fault of the violent Sh'ite feud! Has nothing to do with the American led policies of decentralization of Iraq and private control of the oil. Nothing at all. Just about those ancient Muslim blood feuds.
amazing lack of reality on Sadr here....lol
The guy has continually LOST influence...his "army" (thugs) are getting their asses handed to them. He has NEVER been popular among anybody but the mainstream media and a few thousand radicals. Most Iraqi's think this guy's a complete moron...he'll NEVER have popular support. Iraqi's in Basra have been complaining for a while about Sadrs' thugs.
Now the government is capable enough, with our support, to do something. Now, after a few days of losing, Sadr wants to stop - lol. But according to you guys he's the "big, bad, boogie man" - who'll now expose all of our "gains" as another "Bush lie". OK...if you say so. It's kinda sad that you seem to exude some type of glee from this prospect anyway.
Al-Qaeda In Iraq is finished, sure a few can still kill people but it'll be continually diminishing. Now Sadr and Co. must go - yet none of you here can contemplate that this is progress.
Your singular view is nothing more than an echo chamber. Stop reading Newsweak and watching CNN, it's bad for you.
Go and read Michael Yon or Michael Totten's work. We're doing *much* for them and it is recognized by the Iraqi's. All this "neoncon" name calling crap is becoming very old - very childish. Most can't even give a concise definition of what one is! lol!
Hope you enjoyed my post :) Let the flaming begin.
Pete
Post a Comment
<< Home