Oct 20 2006

Shiite Militia Establishes Itself As Target

Published by at 1:00 pm under All General Discussions,Iraq

Well, it seems one of Sadr’s militia’s have attempted to take over an Iraq city. This shows things are coming to a head in Iraq. It seems the Sadr’s Mahdi army is feeling put upon and so took over the city. I expect to see some effort to negotiate the Mahdi militia to stand aside, and then probably a strong show of force. The Iraqi government must treat these militia as if they were criminals (which they are). It will be interesting to see how this plays out. Sadr is outgunned (as usual) and will have to step back to survive. The insurgents tried this time and time again, only to get smacked hard when the US and Iraqi forces came to clean things up. I expect this will end the same way.

6 responses so far

6 Responses to “Shiite Militia Establishes Itself As Target”

  1. kathie says:

    I think this is a turning point in that if the government doesn’t do something to stop Sadr, we can not continue to support Maliki.

  2. Will We Become A Paper Tiger?…

    You gotta love these kind of articles in which the lefty reporters try to spin a story that involves Bush having no choice but withdrawal from Iraq. The only problem is that the storytellers these reporters use are these kind of “anonymous&#8221…

  3. Ken says:

    Flopping Aces:

    Under the terms of Geneva, an occupying power is charged with
    restoring stability and safety quickly. This means at worst in a few
    months, in 2003. The US has failed miserably. Now, these
    militias were vowed to have been dismantled by Bremer and other
    US officials promptly in 2003. WE not Maliki, who owes his
    safety,indeed, to a Shia militia are charged under Geneva to
    disarm them -and indeed WE vowed to do so long ago.

    And still you regard with indignation a newspaper article which
    you believe, rightly or wrongly, militates for US departure.
    You have been “spun” by your faith in transparently
    incompetent war administrators, and ,probably, a good dose
    of hubris as Mike Scheuer would put it.

  4. Ken says:

    I read your linked piece, FA and it predictably distorts the Iraqi reality. Actually only two provinces of 18 in Iraq are stable-
    and it is because the insurgency has less interest in them. Ask yourself why Bush would be retreating if your idyllic description
    were even in the ballpark, claiming he will examine alternative
    strategies. On the other hand if the insurgency were so
    stymied as you wishfully depict, why has it immediately broken
    into lethal effectiveness in areas vacated by US troops for
    Baghdad–and why has the Baghdad enterprise been a flop?

    Why do you fail to mention the Sunni tribes which have agreed to
    drive al Qaeda out have also said they can do so without
    lessening the attacks on American troops?

    Finally,why do you believe you have more accurate estimation of
    Iraqi conditions than all the GOP politicians you suggest are
    unduly retreating? Obviously, if you’re right, they are either
    cowardly or ill-informed..meaning they have marginal ability
    to govern at any rate.

  5. Ken says:

    As for the critiques on myself in the previous post above:

    1. I am not to blame for the Iraqis not trusting the Americans
    and therefore approving of insurgent attacks on US troops.
    The bases we are building there are enough to convince them
    we do not wish to leave. Moreover the Shias haven’t trusted
    us since Bush the First bailed on them after encouraging
    them to revolt against Saddam in 1993. Further,very very few
    Arabs and Moslems are going to be pro-America as long as
    it supports Israel’s oppression of Palestinians, a fact of which
    the commenters appear to be blissfully ignorant.

    2. Even if the false interpretations of the poll in question
    were true and the average Iraq approved of the current
    Maliki regime, the US would be in bad position, as shown by
    Maliki’s praise of the “terrorist” Hezbollah’s attack on
    Israel (which the commentors, not myself, find abhorrent)
    and by Maliki’s friendship with “axis of evil” member Iran.

  6. Ken says:


    Readers should check the actual Iraqi poll results discussed in the previous post linked above. 3/4 of Iraqis say because the US is building bases it plans to stay. Which means they will go on approving of attacks on US troops, according to my critics’ own logic. My critics say people like me are to blame for Iraqis not trusting America, rather than accepting Bush policy itself eg base-building causes the mistrust.

    NOTE-The secret State Department poll cited above , reveals the overwhelming majority of Iraqis want the US out immediately,
    which dovetails with previous polls since 2004.