BS: Battle of Basra

Subject: BS: Battle of Basra
From: GUEST,Guest
Date: 29 Mar 08 - 05:56 PM

Sigh...

Predictably, the US bombing of Basra has begun in earnest.

I'd provide a link, but the news, depressingly, is everywhere.

Subject: RE: BS: Battle of Basra
From: GUEST,lox
Date: 29 Mar 08 - 06:42 PM

That's it - show us how to keep the peace bush.

And in the process make absolutely sure that Iraqi's really understand how worthless they are and how they are only really good for one thing ... etc...etc...etc

It's like watching a gang of rich varsity jocks kicking an old alcoholic to death.

Subject: RE: BS: Battle of Basra
From: GUEST,Guest
Date: 29 Mar 08 - 06:58 PM

The anti-US, anti-al-Maliki battles are spreading across southern Iraq.

Battles over the racketeering & oil smuggling in both the al-Maliki and al-Sadr camp has at last boiled over, and is at the center of the

By RYAN LENZ
Associated Press Writer

BAGHDAD (AP) - A U.S. warplane strafed a house in the southern town of Basra, killing eight civilians, including two women and a child, Iraqi police said Saturday.

The U.S. military had no immediate comment on the report, which came a day after the first American airstrikes were launched in Basra during a week-old offensive against militant followers of radical Shiite cleric Muqtada al-Sadr.

Seven other people were wounded when the plane fired on a house in Basra's Hananiyah neighborhood overnight, a local policeman said on condition of anonymity because of security concerns.

Although the Iraqi police officer claimed it was a U.S. plane, British jets also have been providing air support in the area and it could not be immediately confirmed whether the plane was British or American. The British Ministry of Defense had no immediate information but said it also was looking into the reports.

Subject: RE: BS: Battle of Basra
From: Amos
Date: 29 Mar 08 - 07:10 PM

Ole Bush sure is proud oif his Iraq gummint. Mought as much as his own right hyar in the good ole US of Ay.

'Course a few wimmin and chiullun are gonna get int he way, but they weren't freedom lovers, anyway, like us are. It leaves me with one question: are our government learning?




A

Subject: RE: BS: Battle of Basra
From: GUEST,Guest
Date: 29 Mar 08 - 07:12 PM

Shut up, Amos. Your callous disregard for Iraqi lives is so palpable, as you rub your hands together in glee at being able to use the occassion for Bush hate-mongering, and "prove" the rightness of your opinions about Obama.

You make me sick.

Subject: RE: BS: Battle of Basra
From: GUEST,Guest
Date: 29 Mar 08 - 07:26 PM

From Reuters:

"By Dominic Evans LONDON, March 29 (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.

Security forces have battled the Mehdi Army militia loyal to Shi'ite cleric Moqtada al-Sadr in Iraq's southern oil city for days, targeting what Prime Minister Nuri al-Maliki has called "outlaws".

But there is little prospect of a swift victory. The fighting has spread through southern regions, drew the U.S. forces and led to protests in Baghdad by followers of Sadr, who say Maliki is using force to weaken his political rivals...

..."The key question now is what the United States is going to do," said Joost Hiltermann, of the International Crisis Group think tank. "If it allows (the crackdown) to go forward the ceasefire will unravel and the U.S. will face the Sadr movement in its full power."

Subject: RE: BS: Battle of Basra
From: Rapparee
Date: 29 Mar 08 - 07:35 PM

My, Gigi, you certainly are self-important.

Subject: RE: BS: Battle of Basra
From: Amos
Date: 29 Mar 08 - 07:37 PM

Seems to me, Gigi, that you have no idea who you're talking to. My disdain for this war has nothing to do with my opinions about Obama. It was firmly in place long before I ever heard Barack Obama's name.

I think your rancor is deeper than anything to do with me, dear lady, and that its source lies much earlier than our brief, uncomfortable acquaintance. ANd although I take the piss out of Bush on every opportunity, it is not because I hate him, but his policies and his stupidities -- much the way you seem to feel about me, except that my anger with his policies is specific and has referents. My making you sick because I think Bush's stupidity is despicable does not make much sense to me.

I have to suspect you are adding your own long-past baggage to the equation.

Maybe we fought each other the to very death on the plains of Baghrat or under the toppling towers of Illium, who knows. Sorry if I stepped on your toes, or plunged a vorpal blade somewhere I shouldn't have. No harm intended.


A

Subject: RE: BS: Battle of Basra
From: GUEST,Guest
Date: 29 Mar 08 - 07:38 PM

Continuing from the above article:

:POLITICAL AGENDA?

Analysts say Maliki's decision to launch the Basra crackdown, instead of carrying through with a promised offensive against Sunni Islamist militants in the northern city of Mosul, lends weight to the Sadrist accusations of a political agenda.

The attacks have targeted the Mehdi Army while leaving two other powers in Basra, the Fadhila party and the militant Badr Organisation of the Supreme Islamic Iraqi Council (SIIC) -- which supports Maliki's Dawa Party -- largely untouched.

"If Maliki had been serious about ending militia rule in Basra he should also have dealt with the militias of Fadhila and the Badr brigades," said Reidar Visser, an expert on southern Iraq who edits the Web site www.historiae.org.

Iraq's Shi'ite Muslim power struggles have been heightened by political rivalry ahead of provincial elections in October.

The showdown in Basra involved competition for control of oil resources, rivalries ahead of the October elections and disagreement over whether Basra should become part of a Shi'ite federal region in southern Iraq, Visser said...

..."(The United States) should carefully think through the dangers of uncritically accepting Maliki's definition of who is an unlawful militiaman and who is not," Visser said.

Vali Nasr, a Middle East expert at the Council on Foreign Relations in Washington, said the fighting pitted Sadr's Mehdi Army against the SIIC's Badr Organisation fighters -- many of whom have joined the regular Iraqi security forces.

"Maliki is not in control of Shi'ite politics in the south, and that is the real prize right now that Sadr and (SIIC leader Abdul-Aziz) Hakim are fighting for," Nasr said...

...If the ceasefire were to collapse entirely, U.S. talk of greater stability in Iraq created by the recent troop reinforcements will have proved to be hollow, Nasr said.

"It will make the outcome of the surge look completely different from the way in which it has been interpreted in the United States right now as an unmitigated success in bringing stability to Iraq, reducing the number of casualties for the Americans, and the number of deaths for Iraqis."

Subject: RE: BS: Battle of Basra
From: GUEST,Guest
Date: 29 Mar 08 - 07:40 PM

The topic is the battle of Basra, Amos. Not you and your shining suit of armor.

Subject: RE: BS: Battle of Basra
From: Rapparee
Date: 29 Mar 08 - 07:44 PM

Gigi, just what the bloody hell do think happens when bits of metal are flung explosively in every direction? Those bits of metal do not discriminate between fighter and civilian, between good and bad.

I don't think this battle was necessary; in fact I don't think the whole Iraq thing was necessary. But YOUR repeated condemnation of what I suspect most here ALREADY condemn is getting very, very old.

Neither Amos nor I nor others need to have our "consciousness raised" about Basra or any other thing from the news. More, I suggest that in the future you provide links to articles instead of cut 'n' paste -- that is what the minimal "rules" here request.

Subject: RE: BS: Battle of Basra
From: GUEST,Guest
Date: 29 Mar 08 - 08:02 PM

The explosion of violence surrounding the racketeering by al-Maliki & US aligned oil security forces in Basra has occured in the immediate wake of Cheney & McCain's visits to Iraq.

Coincidence? No, methinks not.

Subject: RE: BS: Battle of Basra
From: Amos
Date: 29 Mar 08 - 10:51 PM

Actually, the article you posted above was informative, thanks for it.

And if you don't like my wearing armor, stop throwing spitballs.


A

Subject: RE: BS: Battle of Basra
From: GUEST,Guest
Date: 30 Mar 08 - 12:14 AM

Just can't let go of your "I know you are but what am I" game, Amos?

Subject: RE: BS: Battle of Basra
From: Amos
Date: 30 Mar 08 - 12:27 AM

I confess-I have been trolled.

Mea culpa.


A

Subject: RE: BS: Battle of Basra
From: Jack the Sailor
Date: 30 Mar 08 - 12:58 AM

I have mixed feelings about it.

I have no doubt that Al-Sadr is a murdering thug. I have no doubt that Runsfeld's lack of planning and Bush's lack of resolve and Bush's pure plain cowardice created Al-Sadr as a major force in Iraq.

I don't think it would be responsible for us to leave the country for him to take. On the other hand. I don't want any more civilian deaths on our hands. And if we do manage to take him down before November I don't want the yahoos in Bush's base thinking the war was justified just because we solved a problem that WE created.

Subject: RE: BS: Battle of Basra
From: GUEST,Guest
Date: 30 Mar 08 - 09:14 AM

The US is now also bombing Baghdad. UPI reports at least 23 Iraqis killed by US bombings today. US has also imposed a strict curfew, and the streets are, according to reports, virtually empty.

The conservative estimate says that in the last several days of fighting, over 300 people have been killed, mostly civilians.

According to Reuters, US special forces are now fighting "along side" (ahem) the IA in Basra. From the Reuters report:

"A U.S. military statement described a joint raid by Iraqi and U.S. special forces units which killed 22 suspected militants, including "16 criminal fighters" strafed in an air strike on three houses.

The raid showed U.S. forces are being drawn deeper into the Iraqi-led crackdown, launched on Tuesday by Prime Minister Nuri al-Maliki in Basra, Iraq's second-biggest city."

Subject: RE: BS: Battle of Basra
From: GUEST,Guest
Date: 30 Mar 08 - 09:16 AM

An "Iraqi-led crackdown"?

Sure. And if you buy that, we have undeveloped land just outside the Green Zone available for sale....

Subject: RE: BS: Battle of Basra
From: Bobert
Date: 30 Mar 08 - 09:47 AM

How do you spell "civil war" (which of course no war is)...

Many of us have been predicting what we have seen and continue to see going back to the mad-dash-to-Iraq days...

Time to get the heck out and let the Iraqis fight it out... This has been inevitable since the day that Bush decided to to invade Iraq...

The US doesn't have enough money to pay enough Iraqis to get along...

Iraq would be much better off with Saddam still in power and a less militaristic US foriegn policy built aorund carrots and diplomacy... Saddam always was a sucker for trinkets... A sward here and an gold plated M-16 there... But the Bush/Pearle/Wolfy/Cheney/Rumsy/Rice war machine was blinded by their own ignorance and narrow views...

This isn't just about Bush... He had lots of company...

And for the record, GG... You owe Amos an apology... You don't know him or his circumstances to sit in judgement of him...

B~

Subject: RE: BS: Battle of Basra
From: GUEST,Guest
Date: 30 Mar 08 - 09:52 AM

Any more than you know my circumstances to sit in judgment of me, which y'all do on a regular basis, bobert. I'm always suspicious of that sort of righteous indignation your boys are so good at using as a club.

So how about you boys lay off coming in to all these threads and hijacking them just to confront me personally, eh? Get over yourselves, and your personal vendetta with me, and let people actually discuss the topic of the threads you boys keep crashing with your petty, personal, vindictive agenda?

Subject: RE: BS: Battle of Basra
From: Bobert
Date: 30 Mar 08 - 10:26 AM

You have the merket cornered here invictimhood, GG... Get off your high horse... Your needy self is growing rather tiresome...

There was a guy who used to hang out here who just wore people out with his constant interjections of self worth and put-downs of others... His name was Martin Gibson and he eventually just wore everyone out with his ego and love to hear himself talk...

At the rate that you are going you will soon marginalize yourself here in Mudville... Changing yer name won't change that either because folks know who is who around here...

This is being offered as a judegment of you personally... Just critique and observation...

But I know you won't see it that way and you'll do your best to shoot the messenger... That's okay... People that come here know me and they are getting to know you as well...

Just some food for thoought...

B~

Subject: RE: BS: Battle of Basra
From: GUEST,Guest
Date: 30 Mar 08 - 10:26 AM

The Beeb is now reporting this:

Iraqi cleric calls off militias

Iraqi Shia cleric Moqtada Sadr has ordered his fighters off the streets of Basra and other cities in an effort to end clashes with security forces.

He said in a statement that his movement wanted the Iraqi people to stop the bloodshed and maintain the nation's independence and stability.

The government, which had set a deadline to hand over weapons in return for cash, called the move "positive"...

...'Not one of us'

Iraqi Prime Minister Nouri Maliki has given militias until 8 April to surrender their weapons in return for cash.

Moqtada Sadr's statement said: "Because of the religious responsibility, and to stop Iraqi blood being shed, and to maintain the unity of Iraq and to put an end to this sedition that the occupiers and their followers want to spread among the Iraqi people, we call for an end to armed appearances in Basra and all other provinces.

"Anyone carrying a weapon and targeting government institutions will not be one of us."

The cleric also demanded that the government apply the general amnesty law, release detainees and stop what he called illegal raids.

Moqtada Sadr also told his followers to "work with Iraqi government offices to achieve security and to file charges against those who have committed crimes".

Subject: RE: BS: Battle of Basra
From: Amos
Date: 30 Mar 08 - 10:38 AM

How many cliques and factions are in play here? Sadr's side, the Supreme Council's side, aaaaaast one other large armed militia... We thought we had a tough time with the Blue and the Gray. This is a cat-and-dogfight with hens thrown in and squirrels refereeing.


A

Subject: RE: BS: Battle of Basra
From: GUEST,Guest
Date: 30 Mar 08 - 10:53 AM

There are 3 main factions in Basra, all of whom have been implicated in criminal activities, oil smuggling mostly. Don't forget, al Qaida is Sunni, and loosely aligned with Iran, al-Sadr & al-Maliki are Shia--and the two other factions are described in posts above.

This "crackdown" is ordered from Washington, likely put into play during Cheney's "surprise" visit to Iraq on the 5th anniversary.

It is all about securing the oil fields for the neocons before the US elections.

Subject: RE: BS: Battle of Basra
From: GUEST,Guest
Date: 30 Mar 08 - 10:58 AM

And that the government propaganda campaign waged alongside this "crackdown" has now begun to demonize al-Sadr as "worse than al Qaida".

This is a definite strategy shift being orchestrated by the Americans. They are setting themselves up more for the US elections than the upcoming Iraqi elections, which the whole world knows to be a cruel joke.

Subject: RE: BS: Battle of Basra
From: Bobert
Date: 30 Mar 08 - 11:15 AM

Yup!!!

100 more years of war...

Subject: RE: BS: Battle of Basra
From: GUEST,Jack the Sailor
Date: 30 Mar 08 - 12:24 PM

>>This is a cat-and-dogfight with hens thrown in and squirrels refereein<<

Are you callin the United States Marine Corps squirrels? ;-)

Subject: RE: BS: Battle of Basra
From: Bobert
Date: 30 Mar 08 - 01:26 PM

The way I see it is that al-Sadr looked around and saw all these Sunnis up norht with budging pockets of $$$ that Bush has given them to quit shootin' at US and figured...

..."what the Hell??? I'm gonna get some of that dough fir the Mahdi Boys..."

"Sooner or later it all comes down to money..." Bruce Springstein form his song "Big Muddy"

So I reckon that if Bush was real nice to the Chinese they might lend him another $3B a week to put Sadr's folks on the payroll...

B;~)

Subject: RE: BS: Battle of Basra
From: GUEST,dianavan
Date: 30 Mar 08 - 02:04 PM

"Don't forget, al Qaida is Sunni, and loosely aligned with Iran" - GG

Al Qaeda is Sunni but their connection with Iran is highly speculative.

Sadr. on the other hand, is much closer to Iran. Sadr comes from a long line of Shia clerics. Maliki, too, is Shia but more secular.

It is becoming increasingly obvious that the Iraqis want a clerical leader; which is not surprising. When all is lost, people turn to religion.

Sadr may be a murdering thug but he is their murdering thug. I have no doubt that Sadr (with the help of Iran) can help the Iraqi people more than anyone else. The U.S. should get out and give Iraqis the right to self determination.

Subject: RE: BS: Battle of Basra
From: GUEST,Guest
Date: 30 Mar 08 - 02:17 PM

Which is why I said 'loosely'. I wouldn't say 'highly speculative' though.

The whole sect thing is far more complex, and the history far older than any of us Westerners (and I include myself in that category) know.

Which begs the question: why are we there again?

Oh yeah--the oil.

Which is why we refuse to get out. We can't just take it all with us when we leave.

Subject: RE: BS: Battle of Basra
From: Bobert
Date: 30 Mar 08 - 02:31 PM

Messsed that one up, too, GG...

All these folks during the mad-dash-to-Iraq were tellin' US that with all the oil revenues that Iraq would be able to reconstruct itself quite nicely...

Another case of Bushite/neocon wishfull thinking...

Word on the street is that Halliburton is busy tunneling uder Iraq from Kuwait and once the tunnel is conmplete and the oil rerouted to Kuwait then the neocons will throw up their arms and say "Time to leave..These folks are nuts..."

Of course, as is then case with most Halliburton contracts, the tunnel will never quite get completed and MCWar will get his "100 Year War"...

B;~)

Subject: RE: BS: Battle of Basra
From: GUEST,Jack the Sailor
Date: 30 Mar 08 - 02:39 PM

Bobert,

al-Sadr's base is in Baghdad, and the US has tried to buy him off with 330 million dollars in "rebuilding" funds for Sadr city, which he promptly used to build up an army which he is now trying to use to take over the south.

>>Which is why I said 'loosely'. I wouldn't say 'highly speculative' though.

The whole sect thing is far more complex, and the history far older than any of us Westerners (and I include myself in that category) know.<<

Guest,
Would you please try to educate yourself just a little instead of making silly statements? The only people in authority who are saying that Al-Qaeda and Iran are aligned are the ones that brought you the war. They are saying that they are aligned so that they can blame 9/11 on Iran and start another bloody war.

It is complicated but it is not that damned complicated. The Shiite Mullahs in Iran are convinced that they are right and every one else on Earth is wrong. The Wahabi Sunnis are the same way. Sadr is partially sponsored by Iran, Al Qaeda is sponsored by Bush's buddies in Saudi Arabia. Al Qaeda blew up the holiest site in Shia Islam to foment violence between Sunnis and Shia in Iraq. Do you really think that the Mullahs in Iran sanctioned the destruction of their holiest shrine for any reason? If anyone on Earth hates Al Qaeda in Iraq more than we do it is the leadership of Iran.   The only thing they have in common is a hatred for the West.

George W Bush has closer, more demonstrable, ties to Al Qaeda than the government of Iran does.

Subject: RE: BS: Battle of Basra
From: GUEST,dianavan
Date: 30 Mar 08 - 03:07 PM

You got that right, Jack.

Al Qaeda and the U.S. govt. are hated by Sunni and Shia alike. If the U.S. govt. would leave Iraq, Al Qaeda wouldn't have a chance. Yes, there would be a battle for power between Shia and Sunni but, with the help of Iran, the Shia would win. Since the Shia are the majority in the region, that would seem to be the most democratic solution.

The U.S. does not want this to happen and thats why they keep pointing to Iran as the enemy. Iran may be an enemy to the U.S. and Israel but Iran is not the enemy of the Iraqi people.

Saddam was a secular thug and Sadr is a clerical thug but nothing can compare to the thuggery exhibited by the U.S. in the Middle East.

Subject: RE: BS: Battle of Basra
From: beardedbruce
Date: 30 Mar 08 - 03:33 PM

Al-Sadr calls off fighting amid airstrikes, crackdownStory Highlights
NEW: Baghdad curfew to be lifted 6 a.m. Monday local time (11 p.m. Sunday ET)

Mehdi Army says it met with Iraqi government; the government denies claim

Muqtada al-Sadr demands amnesty for followers, release for those captured

Nine-point statement followed U.S. airstrikes in Baghdad that left 15 people dead
   
BAGHDAD, Iraq (CNN) -- Shiite cleric Muqtada al-Sadr told his followers to stop fighting and to cooperate with Iraqi security forces Sunday, as U.S. and Iraqi forces targeted his Mehdi Army in Basra and Baghdad.

Meanwhile, a curfew that was imposed on Basra was lifted Saturday, and a curfew for Baghdad will be lifted at 6 a.m. Monday, said Iraqi military spokesman Gen. Qassim Atta.

In exchange for brokering the cease-fire, al-Sadr demanded that the government give his supporters amnesty and release any of his followers that are being held.

The nine-point statement was issued by his headquarters in Najaf and came a day after al-Sadr told his fighters not to surrender their weapons.

"We announce our disavowal from anyone who carries weapons and targets government institutions, charities and political party offices," said the Sunday statement that was distributed across the country and posted on Web sites linked to al-Sadr's movement.

The government welcomes al-Sadr's statement and views it as "positive and responsive," spokesman Ali al-Dabbagh said. Watch men fire guns in the air as a vehicle burns »

"A large number of people will listen to Muqtada al-Sadr's call. Life will return to all of Iraq as before," the spokesman said. "We as the government of Iraq believe this effort will be in the common interest and help the security efforts that the government is working to achieve."

Prime Minister Nuri al-Maliki called it a "step in the right direction."

"We renew our assurance that the process of enforcement [of] the law in Basra does not target any political or religious group, including the Sadr movement," al-Maliki said in a prepared statement.

Al-Sadr's headquarters in Najaf released the nine-point statement, which was distributed across the country to quell the deadly violence that broke out on Tuesday. The statement was also posted on Web sites linked to his movement.

Whether the two sides negotiated the cease-fire is disputed.

Al-Dabbagh said the Iraqi government did not meet with Mehdi Army representatives.

However, Sheikh Salah al-Obaidi, a top aide to al-Sadr, said representatives of the militia met with the government in Najaf on Saturday night, the first negotiations since the government announced a crackdown on "outlaws" in Basra last week.

U.S. forces targeted the cleric's Shiite militia in Baghdad as well, launching airstrikes that killed 15 people Sunday in neighborhoods known to be Mehdi Army strongholds, an Interior Ministry official said.

Two airstrikes in the Sadr City neighborhood killed nine people and wounded 14 others, and another strike in the al-Zuhor neighborhood, in northeastern Baghdad, killed six people and wounded 14 others, an Interior Ministry official said.

The U.S. military said it killed 11 militants in those same areas Saturday.

The Baghdad bombings came as Iraqi authorities extended indefinitely a strict curfew on the capital and as fighting between government troops and Shiite militants stretched into its sixth day, leaving about 400 people dead, according to reports from U.S. and Iraqi officials.

Although the curfew will be lifted in Baghdad, a vehicle ban will stay in place in three Shiite militia stronghold neighborhoods in the capital -- Sadr City, Kadhimiya and Shulaa -- and Iraqi security troops and checkpoints will remain in Baghdad's streets, Atta said.

In Basra, part of southern Iraq's Shiite heartland, at least 200 people have been killed and 500 wounded in battles since Tuesday, a high-ranking security official said.

Authorities there extended a ban on pedestrian and vehicle traffic just hours before the curfew was to expire Sunday morning.

Before al-Sadr issued the call to halt fighting, Al-Maliki compared the outlaws, on whom the government is cracking down, to al Qaeda and said troops would not leave Basra "until security is restored."

"We will continue to stand up to these gangs in every inch of Iraq," he said. "It is unfortunate that we used to use say these very words about al Qaeda, when all the while, there were people among us who are worse than al Qaeda."

Al-Maliki met Saturday in Basra with area tribal leaders and other prominent figures, who expressed support for the government's effort to "save Basra from criminal gangs," according to a statement from the prime minister's office.

The prime minister further said that militants had until April 8 to surrender their weapons in a guns-for-cash program.

On Saturday, supporters of al-Sadr said they were being unfairly singled out in the crackdown, and the cleric told his followers not to hand over their arms "except to a state that can throw out the occupation," al-Obaidi said.

Other developments

• In northern Iraq, five Iraqi police officers were killed and two bystanders were wounded when gunmen attacked a police patrol in the town of Dhuluiyah Sunday, Samarra police said.

• The U.S. military said Sunday it found a mass grave with 14 bodies near Muqdadiya. The bodies, which showed signs of torture, appeared to have been in the grave for two to six months. They were found just 100 yards from where 37 bodies were found buried Thursday, the military said.

• Ten people were killed Sunday when a suicide car bomb struck a checkpoint manned by members of the Awakening Council, Baiji police said. Four members of the council were among the dead. Awakening Councils are largely Sunni security groups that have been recruited by the U.S. military.

• Also in Baiji, a child was killed and seven civilians were wounded when a mortar landed in a residential area Saturday afternoon, Baiji police said Sunday.

• In Samarra, gunmen stormed the home of an Awakening Council member, killing him and his son. His wife and daughter were wounded in the Saturday morning attack, Samarra police said Sunday.

• The International Zone -- where where many Iraqi government buildings and embassies are located -- was targeted Sunday by rockets or mortars, a U.S. Embassy official said, but no injuries or damage were immediately reported.

Subject: RE: BS: Battle of Basra
From: Lonesome EJ
Date: 30 Mar 08 - 03:35 PM

It never ceases to amaze me how some people can simplify the complexity of the entire Iraq situation into "George Bush is a dumbass". The manipulation of Iraqi internal affairs by Muqtada al Sadr and his Mahdi Army are at the heart of the current battle in Basra. The concept of the pulling out of coalition troops enabling al Sadr and the Sunnis to make nice and settle their differences equitably would be laughable if not tragic, Bush's stupidity aside.

Subject: RE: BS: Battle of Basra
From: Folkiedave
Date: 30 Mar 08 - 03:46 PM

Do you believe everything you read in the newspapers?

Have you any opnions of your own?

Subject: RE: BS: Battle of Basra
From: Q (Frank Staplin)
Date: 30 Mar 08 - 03:48 PM

The BBC in a little later report says the Sadr militias will be 'permitted' to keep their arms and that there will be no prosecutions by the al-Maliki government.
Sounds like the government feels the cost will be too high and the Sadr militias, on their part, feel the time is not yet ripe.

As pointed out in another thread, Iraq is not a country with a history, like Iran. It was cobbled together by combining the Ottoman provinces of Mosul, Baghdad and Basra after WW1 as the Allies carved up the Ottoman Empire. Boundaries suited the major powers (England and France) but paid little regard to religious and cultural divisions. These boundaries were not settled completely until 1937.
For many years, the Ottomans had treated these areas with what might be called 'neglect,' only making an effort to control trade and, to some extent, collecting taxes. Conditions were moderately stable, but as Arab nationalism rose in the areas of what are now Syria and Lebanon, and the rise of dissent in what is now Iran, and the gradual release of British control as protests grew, Iraqis gained local power by 1929. British control essentially continued into the 1930s.
Iraqis looked toward the Germans and the Axis at the beginning of WW2, but the British forced them to permit troop movements, and, as Iraqis were drawn into the war, foodstuffs and goods were requisitioned, much sent to the USSR, and the internal economy was upset, with resulting 'unrest.'
The Sunni Arab group became dominant in government. In 1947, elections were held as a ban on political parties was lifted, a Shia became prime minister, but lasted only a year under nationalist and outside pressures.
Cooperation with the Arab league led to Iraqi troops in Palestine in 1949. Many Sunnis favored union with Syria. In 1950, Jews were permitted to renounce their nationality and the exodus took most of them to Israel and elsewhere. Governments came and failed, Communists and others were deprived of citizenship, and times were ripe for the rise of a strong man.
Saddan Hussain ruled by deliberate repression of opponents, Shia and Kurd, as well as the 'marsh Arabs' in the Delta.

The rise of Kurd, Shia and Sunni nationalism has dominated the past 40-50 years. Many Shias became more and more militantly Islamic, with the development of armed militias.

Militant Shias in Iran, with many of the Shias most holy places in Iraq territory, undoubtedly aid their religious brothers in Iraq. Sunnis have many ties with Syrian counterparts; Both Syria and Iran may have their hands forced by militants at home into more and more active rolls in Iraq. Meanwhile, the Kurds hope to remain free of both Sunni and Shia domination, and dream of eventual union with Kurds in Turkey and elsewhere to join in an independent nation.

What is the future? As noted above, the U. S. tries to 'demonize' the radical Shias, but only prolonged control and supression, with consequent slaughter, will put them down; Iran may be forced to intervene.
Sooner or later, the contending groups will have to settle their own problems; I am afraid that the U. S. has lost any influence it had in the region. The UN might be of some help. I don't think our troops can prevail, and they should be moved out. Saner heads in Syria and Palestine may prevail and prevent large-scale slaughter

I don't believe that al-Qaida is involved with the Iranian government; they have developed into a force of militant Islam, and ally with whatever militant groups are developing in Pakistan, Thailand's south, Indonesia, etc., as well as in Afganistan and Iraq. The longer the US (and UK) stay, the stronger they will become.

Iran has hopes of becoming a strong Middle Eastern power, al Qaida is a disruptive force that will not aid them in this plan.

Subject: RE: BS: Battle of Basra
From: McGrath of Harlow
Date: 30 Mar 08 - 08:26 PM

The irony is that it appears that al-Sadr is strongly nationalist, and is a lot more resistant to the extension of Iranian influence within Iran, particularly the notion of an effective ethnic/religious partition which would be likely to make a large part of Iraq an Iranian protectorate, than the people in the Iraqi government who sent in the troops.

Subject: RE: BS: Battle of Basra
From: Lonesome EJ
Date: 30 Mar 08 - 09:03 PM

Interesting point, McGrath. And to a great extent the traditional enmity between ethnic Arab populations, such as the Shia in Iraq and the ethnic Persians makes collusion with Iran by al Sadr seem more doubtful. Perhaps his alliance with Iran is a rather uneasy one, but one that is vital to him right now.

Oh, and Folkiedave...were you talking to me in your post above?

Subject: RE: BS: Battle of Basra
From: GUEST,Guest
Date: 30 Mar 08 - 09:25 PM

I was talking about the change in focus of the propaganda war, that was labeling al-Sadr as "worse than al Qaida". Not that it was reality! Come on people, read a little more carefully. This campaign isn't about Sunni/Shia conflicts, nor is it about Al Qaida.

What the US can't afford is for al-Sadr to pull a repeat along the lines of the occupation of the Imman Ali Mosque in Najaf, in Basra...and this campaign is directed dead on to him, and nobody else.

And one more crucial point here: Basra was just turned over to the IA by the Brits in December. The Shiite factions in the city have been battling for turf along the oil smuggling routes, which the Mahdi Army has mostly controlled for over a year now, and was largely responsible for the siege of the British bases in Basra. When the Brits pulled out of the city center of Basra, and moved all their forces to the airport base last September, the city was overrun and taken over by the militias.

So it isn't like there is a sudden problem cropping up here. This mess has been festering for a long time.

But that crackdown was hardly successful--Muqtada al-Sadr called out his loyalists to protest across the country, and come out and protest they did. He told them not to surrender their weapons, and they didn't. He told them to stop fighting, and it appears they have.

So what concessions have the Americans/IA won at this point? Besides saving face & being able to pull back? They haven't won a single street corner back from the Mahdi army.


And today, militia fighters stormed a state TV facility in Basra forcing Iraqi military guards surrounding the building to flee and setting armoured vehicles on fire. A mortar attack against the palace that houses the military operations center killed one of al-Maliki's top security officials.

THEN (after taking the TV station) al-Sadr ordered his followers to cease fighting.

The New York Times reported that as of today, Shiite militiamen still controlled large parts of Basra and were continuing to stage raids on Iraqi government forces.

Not exactly the success the occupiers were hoping for, I'm sure.

Subject: RE: BS: Battle of Basra
From: GUEST,Jack the Sailor
Date: 30 Mar 08 - 10:27 PM

Guest, Guest you are constantly acting like you have discovered something that nobody else knows. Perhaps you should consider the likelihood of discovering something so novel, so many times a day. Maybe you should consider that there is a flaw in your reasoning.

Subject: RE: BS: Battle of Basra
From: Q (Frank Staplin)
Date: 30 Mar 08 - 11:00 PM

According to Iraqi lawmakers, "Iranian officials helped broker a cease-fire agreement Sunday between Iraq's government and radical Shiite cleric Muqtada al-Sadr." .............
"It may also signal the growing regional influence of Iran, a country the Bush administration accuses of providing support to terrorists in Iraq and elswewhere." .....
Iraqi Prime Minister Nouri al-Maliki hailed al-Sadr's action as "a step in the right direction." ...........
"...representatives from al-Maliki's Dawa Party and another Shiite Party traveled to Iran to finalize talks with al-Sadr."
"Iran has close ties with al-Sadr's movement and al-Maliki, who spent several years in exile there. ...agreement brokered by the commander of Iran's al-Quds Brigade, which is considered a terrorist organization by Washington."

A pullout by the US-UK just might spur Iran (and Syria) to broker some kind of reorganization in the region and avoid major bloody confrontations.
Continued unrest, and the continued inflationary pressures engendered in the region are to no one's benefit. It is obvious, to me at least, that Washington's efforts are adding to the conflict, as it blames Iran, el-Sadr and other leaders, and Syria for U. S. miscues and U. S. lack of understanding of regional forces.

Quotes from USA Today: Iranians help reach Iraqi ceasefire

Subject: RE: BS: Battle of Basra
From: GUEST,Guest
Date: 30 Mar 08 - 11:05 PM

I am REALLY suspicious of that story, Q. Not saying it isn't true, but I am considering the source.

The losers of the Battle of Basra. The USA Today article also demonstrates this story fits in nicely with their current propaganda campaign against Sadr...

"ran has close ties with both al-Sadr's movement and al-Maliki, who spent several years in exile there. Al-Nujaifi said the agreement was brokered by the commander of Iran's al-Quds Brigade, which is considered a terrorist organization by Washington.

Haidar al-Abadi, a Dawa legislator who is close to al-Maliki, confirmed that Iranians played a role in the negotiations. Sadiq al-Rikabi, a senior adviser to al-Maliki, said he could not confirm or deny Iranian involvement in the deal.

"The government proved once again that Iran is a central player in Iraq," said Iraqi political analyst and former intelligence officer Ibrahim Sumydai."

Subject: RE: BS: Battle of Basra
From: GUEST,Guest
Date: 30 Mar 08 - 11:07 PM

Sorry, by "their propaganda campaign" I mean the al-Maliki govt's & the US' propaganda campaign against al-Sadr.

Subject: RE: BS: Battle of Basra
From: Q (Frank Staplin)
Date: 31 Mar 08 - 12:06 AM

I haven't been following comment in Al jazeera for some time. Don't really know what the Arabic presses are saying.

http://english.aljazeera.net
A brief article on the Shia Mahdi army has a few points of interest. A while back, the Baker-Hamilton Commission estimated their forces as 60,000, but others say it is much larger, with units in every city and town. Because the fighters pursue normal occupations as well as engage in Mahdi operations, it is very difficult to estimate their numbers. They are popular with many non-involved Shia, because they help with food and fuel distribution, police work, medical support, etc. They are the sole force in Baghdad's Sadr City district and some others.

An article on the ceasefire declared by al-Sadr has this statement from the Iraqi government spokesman, Ali al-Dabbagh, saying al-Sadr's order would help restore peace.
"A large number of people will listen to Muqtada al-Sadr's call. Life will return to all of Iraq as before," he said on Al-Iraqiya state television.
He said the Iraqi government was against "criminals." He told the Reuters News agency that Iraqi troops would continue military operations against "criminals" in Basra.
"The operation in Basra will continue and will not stop until it achieves its goals. It is not targeting the Sadrists but criminals," he said. The bold print is mine- it indicates a divergence from what we see in our press.

http://english.aljazeera.net/NR/exeres/7EAEE8D8-0C39-44FC-813E-05580AAE192E.htm

Subject: RE: BS: Battle of Basra
From: GUEST,Guest
Date: 31 Mar 08 - 12:19 AM

You might get better analysis from the Christian Science Monitor's story, the best I've read today:

http://www.csmonitor.com/2008/0331/p01s09-wome.html

Be forewarned, it's a long article.