Al-Maliki Freezes anti-Militia Operations;
Al-Sadr Calls Million Man March
Prime Minister Nuri al-Maliki suddenly reversed himself on Friday, pledging a freeze on attacks on militias. Just a day before he had been saying that he would send the Iraqi military in after the Mahdi Army in Baghdad. Given what happened to the army in Basra, where the Sadr Movement isn't all that strong, I wouldn't have advised him to do that. Apparently someone with some sense got al-Maliki's ear.
Meanwhile, Sayyid Muqtada al-Sadr is pursuing his plans to hold a million-man march on next Wednesday, the anniversary of the fall of the ancien regime and the beginning of the American military occupation.
Al-Zaman writing in Arabic says that there were Sadrist demonstrations in Basra on Friday against the al-Maliki government. In Baghdad, the Mahdi Army was holed up in Sadr City, Shulah and Kadhimiya districts. The newspaper also alleges that Jalal al-Din Saghir, a prominent Shiite cleric who preaches in northern Baghdad, is suspected of secretly running a militia called the "Vanguard of Islam."
Political violence killed at least 30 persons on Friday. A guerrilla with a bomb belt blew up a funeral in Sadiya in Diyala Province east of Baghdad, killing 20 persons. Another guerrilla attack, this one a roadside bomb, killed 3 policemen and wounded several others in Musayyab south of Baghdad. The US bombed Basra again at the request of the al-Maliki government.
Ned Parker of the LAT looks at the increasing Arab/ Kurdish tensions in and around Mosul. He comes back saying that the situation is a powderkeg with a fuse burning.
Muhsin al-Hakim, son of the leader of the Islamic Supreme Council in Iraq, `Abdul `Aziz al-Hakim, said Friday what we all know but Bush, Cheney and McCain won't acknowledge: "Tehran, by using its positive influence on the Iraqi nation, paved the way for the return of peace to Iraq and the new situation is the result of Iran's efforts. . ."
89% of Americans see Iraq as bad for the US economy, at least to some degree.
Americans who fly on passenger planes know that we now have to limit liquids we bring aboard and take them out of our luggage in a plastic bag. This is because a cell of British Muslim jihadis wanted to blow up trans-Atlantic flights originating in Heathrow by mixing up an explosive brew and sitting next to a window, using the small explosion to blow out the window and start the airplane's external skin to peeling off, causing a catastrophic event. It turns out that they say on martyrdom videos discovered when they were arrested and the plot broken up, that they were motivated to avenge US and British killing of Muslims in Iraq; some also mention Israeli actions against the Palestinians. The opinion polling shows that British Muslims, while they overwhelmingly see themselves as loyal to the UK, are absolutely furious about Britain's military involvement in Iraq, which they view as a form of oppressive neo-colonialism.
A good examination of Tony Snow's black and white narrative about Basra being a victory for the Iraqi government. Say what?
Labels: Iraq
posted by Juan Cole @ 4/05/2008 12:31:00 AM
|
Facebook
6 Comments:
' Meanwhile, Sayyid Muqtada al-Sadr is pursuing his plans to hold a million-man march on next Wednesday, the anniversary of the fall of the ancien regime and the beginning of the American military occupation. '
We need a million man, woman, and child march here in the United States of America to " ...express our rejection and raise our voices against the tyrant occupier."
We, too, should "Carry Iraqi flags that show our unity with the people of Iraq."
I would hope that 89% of Americans are as strongly against the murderous occupation on Iraq for its very self as are against its profligate expense!
Here's a photo:
"Noor Muntasir Qassem, 3, lies dead on a stretcher as her uncle weeps beside her after she was killed in an alleged US airstrike in the southern Iraqi city of Basra on April 4, 2008."
Just think about that. We're murdering 3-year olds in Iraq to grab a piece of the oilpatch there for Dick Cheney and George W Bush.
Proud to be an American, aren't you?
Well, hit the streets. With your children. With an Iraqi flag right side up and an American flag upside down.
It's us humans against the Neocons. Americans against the war criminals in Washington. No one else is going to stop the murder of babies and little children in Iraq. Certainly not Barack Obama or Hillary Clinton!
We're the only ones here!
The linked Mosul article is one of many that began circulating in the US press after the attention Mosul received recently. They are all attempts by people who know very little.
First we must look at the numbers. The CIA World Factbook estimates the Iraqi population at 27.5M, of whom 15% to 20% are Kurds, or 4.1 to 5.5 million. Most of them live in the three Kurdish provinces.
About 1.5 million Kurds live in mixed or largely Arab areas outside Kurdistan. These are still proud of their heritage but most of them do not speak Kurdish and enjoy a purely Arab culture, with many in mixed marriages. They are instinctly anti-Barazani/Talabani, but after the invasion they were seduced by the big promises of riches and power. These are the people who are now suffering some ethnic cleansing, including the widely reported 50 to 60 thousands from Mosul. So, the Kurds are the ones who are being driven out, not the reverse.
The Kurish leaders, profoundly tribal and simple, want to use these Kurds to annex huge areas populated with millions of Arabs! There is no way the Kurds can control Mosul for example. Only about 200 thousand Kurds live in Ninevah province in total. The population of Mosul is 1.7M.
The American Zionists want the Kurds to annex as much as possible of Iraq because they are their allies and give them free access. The senior US Army in the north at least is strongly pro-Zionist and want to help the Kurds. When Petraeus ruled the north in the second half of 2004, he literally turned thousands of mainly Barzani party members from Duhok into an "Iraqi Army" division and gave them the City. They now confine themselves to their barracks and only venture out under American protection or by driving at speed. These will vanish a day before the US leaves to avoid annihilation by the Moslawis (who are allowed to keep an AK47 in each home, and certainly know how to use them.)
The big Kurd-Arab fight in Mosul will, therefore, never happen. The imbalance in numbers is enormous and the Arabs would be fighting to defend their freedom while the Kurds are only driven by greed.
Kirkuk is about half the size of Mosul, and there are more Kurds as a percentage. But the Peshmerga would run for it all the same.
In both case, the rest of Iraq would be on the side of the Arabs too. And so would Turkey, Saudi Arabia, Syria, and even Iran. So the odds against the Kurds even considering a fight are very slim.
The Peshmerga also talk big, and their Western supportes describe them as tough and battle hardened. This is all crap. They are good at hiding in the mountains but have never won battles. During the 1991 "uprising" they just ran when the Army responded, and drove nearly a million Kurdish civilians with them to avoid attacks. A Western journalist with the Peshmerga at the time was shocked when they celebrated the Talabanis love-fest with Saddam in Baghdad on TV. He went there days after the "uprising" asking forgiveness and promoting national unity.
The other Kurdish hope is to win control by referenda while the US is still in Iraq. Even if they win, these can be reversed or just ignored after the USA leaves.
The Kurds had enjoyed the sympathy of the vast majority of the Iraqi people. But they ruined it all with their naked agression and ridiculous imperial dreams.
Prime Minister Nuri al-Maliki changes his mind more often than he changes his underwear. He seems to alternate between placating the US and placating his domestic constituency. If I follow this blog correctly, most Iraqi's see the US as an occupier. Inevitably then, many will tend to see al-Maliki as a collaborator. The fate of collaborators is often unpleasant. Certainly Maliki knows this, hence his endless ambivilance and mind changing. He merely wants to placate both sides. So if you don't agree with his current position, be a little patient, it will problably change tommorrow.
Whether immature or evil, Tony and his boys will continue to self-justify their ideology and actions well into their irrelevant retirements.
.
so what is the position of the Ayatullah Ali al-Sistani ?
or does his opinion not matter so much anymore ?
avid student
.
The real story, Juan, is this one:
"In remarks interpreted as signalling a change in his approach to Iran, Gen Petraeus last week hit out at the Iranian leadership. "The rockets that were launched at the Green Zone were Iranian-provided, Iranian-made rockets," he said. "All of this in complete violation of promises made by President Ahmadinejad and the other most senior Iranian leaders to their Iraqi counterparts."
The humiliation of the Iraqi prime minister Nouri al-Maliki by the Iranian-backed cleric Moqtada al-Sadr in fighting in Basra last week triggered top-level warnings over Iran's strength in Iraq.
Gen Petraeus and Ryan Crocker, the US ambassador to Baghdad, will answer questions from American political leaders at the US Congress on Tuesday and Wednesday before travelling to London to brief Gordon Brown.
The Wall Street Journal said last week that the US war effort in Iraq must have a double goal.
"The US must recognise that Iran is engaged in a full-up proxy war against it in Iraq," wrote the military analyst Kimberly Kagan.
There are signs that targeting Iran would unite American politicians across the bitter divide on Iraq. "Iran is the bull in the china shop," said Ike Skelton, the Democrat chairman of the Armed Services Committee. "In all of this, they seem to have links to all of the Shi'ite groups, whether they be political or military.""
http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/main.jhtml?xml=/news/2008/04/05/wiran105.xml
Juan, whether you choose to acknowledge it or not, the train is leaving the station. The attack on Iran, already underway on a financial level (=blockade=act of war) is on its way and soon. Please read Tom Englehardt's brilliant piece on the delusions of occupation.
Imperial occupation is based on the unstated and delusional premise that the occupiers are more legitimately at home in the occupied land than the folks that actually live there. Thus, every opponent = Al Quaeda or Iran (no matter that the number of outsiders is tiny and most are from Saudi Arabia).
The US 'High Command' has reached the point Nixon did with Vietnam. To maintain the occupiers delusion in Vietnam, Nixon had to (delusionally and disastrously) spread the war to Cambodia. The consequences of that were as horrendous as one can imagine. The US 'High Command' MUST attack Iran now. IT ISN'T ABOUT ANYTHING RATIONAL!!!! It's about delusion.
Again, please read Englehardt's brilliant piece. And note this paragraph from the Telegraph article:
"The humiliation of the Iraqi prime minister Nouri al-Maliki by the Iranian-backed cleric Moqtada al-Sadr in fighting in Basra last week triggered top-level warnings over Iran's strength in Iraq."
That paragraph says it all. It is a statement of delusion as if delusion were logic.
Re. Kimberly Kagan: " She is currently writing a book entitled Grand Strategy in the Later Roman Empire.."
http://www.nationalwarcollege.org/EMPIRES/Speakers/KKagan/Kagan.html
I'd say that makes her particularly qualified to trumpet delusional policy, doesn't it, as the late Roman Empire had no grand strategy beyond lurching, delusionally, from crisis to crisis.
And then there's the Yale connection and the Kagan connection. Our foreign policy is in good hands, as long as "good" is defined as nepotistic and neoconnish.
Post a Comment
<< Home