May 20 2008

NY Times Admits Iraq A Success – So Far

Published by at 10:59 pm under All General Discussions,Iraq,Sadr/Mahdi Army

The successes in Iraq keep mounting to the point even the die-hard liberal SurrederMedia has had to admit defeat – for the terrorists and extremists.  Check out this NY Times article, which addresses Sadr City, but reflects the reality of the entire Iraq war:

Operation in Sadr City Is an Iraqi Success, So Far

Iraqi forces rolled unopposed through the huge Shiite enclave of Sadr City on Tuesday, a dramatic turnaround from the bitter fighting that has plagued the Baghdad neighborhood for two months, and a qualified success for Prime Minister Nuri Kamal al-Maliki.

Actually the only ‘qualification’ is the NY Times lame claim made later that the Mahdi thugs could rise up again. In reality that will not happen – the Sadrist block in the Iraqi government cannot afford it politically. Right now the Sadrists are going to lose a lot of seats in Parliament this October because they gave political cover to the thugs and violent criminals which made up the Mahdi Army.  There have been all sorts of stories covering the pillaging, extortion, beatings, etc against Iraqi voters at the hands of the Mahdi Army.   These same Iraqi citizens are going to vote in October, and many will not be voting for the Sadrists as it is.

If the Mahdi Army were to try a violent uprising the Sadrists would be run out of Iraq at gun point.  Arab Shiites don’t take orders or bow homage to Persian Iranian Shiites.   Underestimate the centuries long cultural conflicts between the Persians (of European descent) and the indigenous Arabs of Mesopotamia (Iraq) and you would come to seriously screwed up conclusions.

The Mahdi may have melted away into the general population, but they are not going to make a comeback with the amount of Iraqi fire power now in place:

The operation comes in the wake of the government’s offensive in Basra, in southern Iraq, which for the time being seems to have pacified that city and restored government control.

The Iraqi forces met no significant resistance. By midday, they had driven to a key thoroughfare that bisects Sadr City and taken up positions near hospitals and police stations, institutions that the Iraqi government is seeking to put under its control.

By early afternoon, Iraqi troops were stationed in large numbers in many parts of the district. Numerous Iraqi tanks and armored personnel carriers were parked on street corners, with relaxed-looking soldiers sleeping in their vehicles or looking out to the street through steel hatches. Other soldiers manned checkpoints, some of them chatting with children.

The soldiers were also deployed near the political headquarters of Mr. Sadr. There were no visible signs of the Mahdi Army, the militia controlled by Mr. Sadr, although many walls bore posters of him that seemed to have been put up in the last few days.

The Mahdi Fighters are bit stunned by the amount of muscle being applied by the government, some to the point of whining:

Already, al-Sadr supporters were complaining of the heavy deployment.

“We were surprised by the size of the force,” Sheik Salman al-Freiji, director of the Sadr Movement office in the district, told The Associated Press. “But their entry in such size has sparked fears that there could be violations of mosques and homes. There must be respect.”

“We are attempting to maintain restraint, so there is no retaliation,” al-Freiji said. “This force is bigger than we expected, with tanks, and it could be a provocation.”

It’s also a clear signal Maliki means business when he says his government is the law of the land.  The size of the force is more than a provocation, it is a show of force which will cause the Mahdi to think twice before they try and start something, especially since they will not have the numbers to bring a large force to bear against the government.

Can the Sadrists screw up royally and do something dumb?  Yep – but they know they are beaten.  That is why they sued for peace and gave into all the government demands in the first place.  The Sadrist know they were losing the support of the people.  Tomorrow, if the Mahdi were run out of town, the people would rejoice.  All the rest is PR spin for the gullible liberal western media.  

I would expect more news of stability in Sadr City in the coming days, just as more and more of Iraq has stabilized since The Surge of last year.  The suggestion by the liberal SurrenderMedia defeat could break out any time now (a running prediction since last March) is becoming comical.

The Mahdi Militia were the last, large, armed group able to threaten Iraqi security from the inside of Iraq. With Maliki’s government in control, and the Mahdi Militia now openly surrendering to Iraqi government control, with al-Qaeda being purged from its last strongholds around Mosul in the North, with political reconciliation picking up speed, Iraq is on the path to victory.  Few want to go back to the bloodshed, the majority are ready to move on, and willing to fight those who try and stop them.

Which is good for Iraq, good for America and good for the world.  It is bad news for al-Qaeda, Iran and the far left.  But few really could care less if that cadre of malcontents got a big dose of bad news right now.  Pessimism lost the day, optimism and determinism won out – big surprise there.

10 responses so far

10 Responses to “NY Times Admits Iraq A Success – So Far”

  1. WWS says:

    It’s astounding to see that the people running these media stories have no idea of the value of actual control, and thus say idiotic things like “they could rise up anytime, though!” If they could have, they would have. No fighting force has ever surrendered its home base unless they had no choice. Likewise the complaints about the size of the deployment: which is more likely to engender respect, a force that is too small or a force that is eye-poppingly big? The Mahdi’s complaints about the size comes down to: damn, this force is so big we ain’t never gettin’ this one back. Does it need to be pointed out that before today, it would have been the Iraqi Army attacking civilian areas, but after today that is the only way the Mahdi’s can “take back control”? Did anyone editing this silly story ever think more than 5 minutes into the future to see what the actual consequences of this change in control will be???

    The Mahdi’s have the problem that all gangs and thugs have once law and order finally come to town – citizens who cooperated out of fear – which was pretty much everyone in the area they controlled, be because that was the tool they used to keep control – are going to find out what a life without fear is like, and are never going to go back. They’ll be the ones who turn in the weapons stashes and the Mahdi ringleaders, for revenge as much as their own future.

    Another comical complaint is the worry that “Mosques will be violated!” These aren’t American’s going in – these are Shiite Iranian Army soldiers. So how are Shiite mosques going to be violated by faithful Shiite soldiers?

    And that is Sadr’s problem in a nutshell. He ain’t fighting the furriners any more. He tried to fight his own, and he lost.

    And remind me, New York Times, just how is that situation going to reverse itself again?

  2. Terrye says:

    Doncha just love that So far little thingee they put on the end of the sentence?

  3. […] Friedrich Braun wrote an interesting post today onHere’s a quick excerptNY Times Admits Iraq A Success – So Far The successes in Iraq keep mounting to the point even the die-hard liberal SurrederMedia has had to admit defeat – for the terrorists and extremists.  Check out this NY Times article, which addresses Sadr City, but reflects the reality of the entire Iraq war: Operation in Sadr City Is an Iraqi Succ… Read the full post from The Strata-Sphere Tags: Iraq, Sadr/Mahdi Army via Blogdigger blog search for group home. […]

  4. gwood says:

    The media will now attempt to impugn the (Bush) victory in Iraq by exaggerating and harping on the financial strain the war has put on the economy. This will backfire too, because the Iraq war could in the end become the most financially profitable war we ever fought.

    With crude at $127 a barrel, the “Iraq Peace Dividend” could come in the form of downward pressure on prices due to the not-insignificant potential impact that the ramp up in Iraq oil exports could have.

    In addition the Great Satan is now ensconced within a functioning Democracy, smack-dab in the middle of the region, no small factor for our future safety. Twenty six million Iraqis have had their necks removed from the boot heel of a murderous thug, and welcomed to the twenty first century; libs should be constantly reminded that this was done “not in their name”.

    I certainly don’t wish to demean the deaths of so many of our best and bravest, the pain will last for years to come. But these are not only financial benefits, they are strategic ones, helping to guarantee our future safety and freedom.

    Thank you, soldiers.

  5. MerlinOS2 says:

    Yet Obama is already starting to campaign on gutting the military budget to finance his entitlement programs he wants to create or expand.

    We did that before with Clinton and were treated like a paper tiger with years of attacks by AQ and Iran inspired groups.

    Yeah that sounds like a plan doesn’t it.

    Remember the ‘peace dividend’?

    That sure worked out well didn’t it?

  6. WWS says:

    /Obama advisor’s voice ON/

    But Clinton was right! There were no terrorists before Bush created them all just to scare us! As soon as Bush is gone there will be no more terrorists and we won’t need all that military hoo ha!!!

    Hamas, Hezbollah, and the Iranians just need a little dialogue and respect, and we can all be BFF. See? Problem solved!!!

    /Obama advisor’s voide OFF/

  7. Neo says:

    This garbage about Iraq is the same bill of goods that we have been sold by the Bush administration since we invaded that country. We will be greeted as liberators. We will set up a functioning democracy. All good will come to the Middle East. They will pay for the war with their oil.

    It’s garbage. It hasn’t happened. It ain’t going to happen. The tribal animosities that fuel the violence in that part of the world date back centuries. They are not going to adopt a Western- style democracy next year or in 2013 or 100 years from now. So, it’s just more political crap.

    They’ve already take the ball off the field, so now the goalpost are meaningless.

  8. The Macker says:

    One man’s garbage is another man’s ice cream.

    • Iraq does have a functioning democracy now.

    • The Kurds did greet us as liberators. And where were you when the statues of Saddam were pulled down?

    • Bush has introduced self government for the first time ever in that region.

    This is not a game. So lose the ball and goalpost analogies.

  9. Boghie says:


    You use Cafferty as a source???

    Why not quote a ‘CommonDreams’ post or one of Leopold’s TruthOut articles.

    Cafferty is best ignored.

  10. robert verdi says:

    Even Time magazine is getting into the act, although the story attempts to find a silver lining for Sadr. the story argues that by allowing the militiamen to keep ak-47s Sadr maintains his muscle. Of course by Iraqi law every household is allowed to have at least on weapon in the home, a fact the author does not mention.

    Has Maliki Conquered Sadr City?
    Wednesday, May. 21, 2008 By MARK KUKIS/BAGHDAD,8599,1808236,00.html