Posted on 02/10/2007 12:28:39 PM PST by NormsRevenge
BAGHDAD, Iraq - Their rhetoric is still stridently anti-American, but Mahdi Army militiamen are tucking away their weapons and blending into civilian life. Their leaders are keeping out of sight.
In the streets of Sadr City, the strategy of Muqtada al-Sadr, the Shiite militia leader, is clear: Lie low, avoid a showdown and hope to emerge even stronger after the Americans leave.
Gathered for prayers this week, at least 10,000 al-Sadr supporters raised clenched fists and chanted "No, No to America." Later, a black-turbaned cleric addressed them, dressed in a white shroud to signal readiness for martyrdom.
"They claim that the Mahdi Army is made up of terrorists," Mohanad al-Moussawi said mockingly before delivering a tirade against Sunni political groups he accused of sponsoring terrorism.
Religious ceremonies charged with fiery rhetoric are common among al-Sadr loyalists. But with a massive U.S.-Iraqi security operation getting under way to pacify Baghdad, the Mahdi Army and its political masters are sending out assurances that it has no wish to fight.
A ragtag but highly motivated militia that fought U.S. forces twice in 2004, the Mahdi Army is blamed for much of the sectarian strife shaking Iraq since a Shiite shrine was bombed by Sunni militants a year ago. U.S. officials have for months pressed Shiite Prime Minister Nouri al-Maliki to move against the militia, but he has so far done little to comply, largely because he does not want to lose al-Sadr's support.
Suggesting that al-Maliki's reluctance to act against Shiite militiamen endures, U.S. military officers told The Associated Press that their Iraqi counterparts were urging them to go after Sunni targets as the first focus of the military push to secure Baghdad.
They said the Iraqis, especially representatives of the Shiite-run Interior Ministry, played down the threat posed by the Mahdi Army, the biggest Shiite militia, blamed for much of the violence against Sunnis. The American officers spoke on condition of anonymity because the subject is sensitive.
Salam al-Zubaie, one of two al-Maliki deputies and a Sunni, told the U.S.-funded Alhurra television Saturday that he would prefer to see the military sweep in Baghdad simultaneously target Shiite and Sunni neighborhoods. "This will reinforce confidence in the government by all sects of the Iraqi people," he said.
Hundreds of Mahdi Army militiamen were killed in the 2004 fighting, but al-Sadr bounced back, joining the political process, rebuilding his militia but not softening his anti-American rhetoric.
With his militia now widely seen as the main threat to Iraq's unity and high on the list of targets for the Baghdad security operation, al-Sadr is likely to do all he can to dodge a crippling blow to his militia, analysts say.
Residents of Sadr City, a sprawling district of some 2 million Shiites in eastern Baghdad, say militiamen opting to remain in the area have moved in with relatives and friends to avoid arrest.
According to residents familiar with the militia's tactics, and speaking anonymously for fear of reprisals, weapons are hidden in places like grocery stores, ice cream and soda kiosks, or underground.
At Friday prayers, al-Sadr's aides in Sadr City were not in their usual front row spots, and the handful who came swapped their clerical robes and turbans for casual wear.
Mahdi Army militiamen dressed in civilian clothes were out in force, with hundreds searching cars and frisking worshippers headed to the prayers. None openly carried weapons. At checkpoints into the entrance of Sadr City, militiamen in track suits and running shoes stood shoulder to shoulder with police commandos.
Security around Sadr City has been tightened in recent days. Access to the district, once known as Saddam City, is now controlled by Iraqi Army checkpoints where soldiers randomly search cars and check the identity of drivers and passengers.
Much is at stake for al-Sadr and his militia in this third attempt by U.S. and Iraqi forces to calm the capital since al-Maliki came to office last May.
Al-Sadr loyalists occupy 30 of parliament's 275 seats and fill six Cabinet posts. Surviving the latest security sweep while it weakens Sunni rivals would enable al-Sadr to project his power more assertively in Baghdad.
"I expect it to be 12 months or less before the Americans withdraw from the cities and stay in bases outside," said Joost Hiltermann of the International Crisis Group, or ICG, a Brussels-based think tank. "Whoever survives this Baghdad security plan will have a better place in the vacuum that follows a reduced American presence."
Tribal chiefs from Sadr City known to be loyal to al-Sadr sought to assure U.S. and Iraqi army commanders in a meeting Thursday of their support for the Baghdad security plan. They argued that they too wanted rogue militiamen brought to justice, according Abdul-Hassan al-Kaabi, the head of the local Sadr City government who attended the meeting.
"We support the security plan," he said in an interview. "We told them that we will help them find them."
Nassar al-Rubaie, who leads the Al-Sadr loyalists in parliament, argued in an interview with Iraqiyah, an Iraqi TV station, that the militia is an ideological organization, and he sought to shift the blame for the sectarian violence to outside powers and Sunni rivals.
"Foreign hands are stoking sectarian strife," he said.
But the analysts say clashes are almost inevitable in an all-out military operation to detain or kill the Mahdi Army militiamen in Sadr City.
Those fighting back would be seeking martyrdom or provoked by perceived transgressions like raiding homes or humiliating men in front of their families, said Peter Harling, an Iraq expert based in neighboring Syria.
"But the overall strategy will be restraint," said Harling, also with ICG. "Mahdi Army fighters can redeploy in southern Iraq and return to Sadr City when it's all over to avoid arrest."
US Black hawk helicopters circle over Baghdad during a patrol at sunset, 9 February. General David Petraeus, a 54-year-old scholar and paratrooper, has taken charge of US-led forces in Iraq with a brief to push forward with fresh ideas to save a struggling mission.(AFP/Joseph Eid)
10,000 all in one oplace. One JDAM might have solved the greatest part of our Iraqui problem.
What a missed opportunity.
Iraqis attend the Friday prayers in Baghdad's Shiite enclave of Sadr City, Iraq, Friday, Feb. 9, 2007. Their rhetoric is still stridently anti-American, but Mahdi Army militiamen are tucking away their weapons and going into hiding, and their leaders also are keeping out of sight. In the streets of Sadr City, the strategy of Muqtada al-Sadr, the Shiite militia leader, is clear: Lie low, avoid a showdown and hope to emerge even stronger after the Americans leave. (AP Photo/Karim Kadim)
They shouldn't be worried about the US, but if we pull out, the Kurds will flex their power.
Missed a prime opportunity to kill over 10,000 terrorists at once.
Artillery shells that were used to make a car bomb lay gathered by Iraqi police near the scene of a car bomb blast in central Baghdad, Iraq, Saturday, Feb. 10, 2007. Serial numbers and other markings on bombs suggest that Iranians are linked to deadly explosives used by Iraqi militants, Defense Secretary Robert Gates said Friday in some of the administration's first public assertions on evidence the military has collected. While the Bush administration and military officials have repeatedly said Iranians have been tied to terrorist bombings in Iraq, they have said little about evidence to bolster such claims, including any documents and other items collected in recent raids in Iraq. (AP Photo/Khalid Mohammed)
His plan may backfire. The "insurgents" and democrats are feeding off each other right now. The more attacks against the Americans the louder the Democrats call for withdrawal. The more democrats call for withdrawal the more emboldened the terrorists become. They need each other. If al Sadr and the terrorists go quiet, public support may turn in favor of staying.
5.56mm
Mookie must be getting advice from his handlers in Teheran.
Therein lies the key - and our fatal flaw. Tuck in with who? Innocent civilians? Hardly. If they're tucking in with knowing civilians - they then forfeit their innocence, are complicit and should be treated as terrorists themselves.
And I find it hard to believe that the civilians these terrorist scumbags melt into are totally unaware. They've just never been held responsible for harboring them.
Too brutal? Fine. We lose and take the high road of honorable failure. Or maybe we should just get out now and avoid the whole silly charade of actually trying to win a war.
And Hamza Hendawi is famous for always getting the terrorist's story out. I wonder how he does that.
"Their rhetoric is still stridently anti-American, but Mahdi Army militiamen are tucking away their weapons and blending into civilian life. Their leaders are keeping out of sight."
Gee, how strange that is...I mean we only announced to the world we were going to ramp up operations against them...and gave them a 5 week warning. I wonder where they went?
I may get in trouble saying it,, but that sure was a pretty ceremony they had , changing of command and all..
Just get to work and get the job done or pull the hell out and let them slaughter each other..
Diplomacy is a concept most of the Middle East has never been real hip much less receptive too.
At some point, we have to make a decision and either go
All In or fold and move on. Iran beckons and has been for over 30 years.
.Smart strategy. Mookie knows that Bush will probably pull most of our troops out before Fall of 2008 in order to help the Pubbie nominee not lose to the Dems and the MSM. Letting our enemy dictate the terms of battle to their advantage is not the way to win a war.
Iran is backing Mookie and his men. It's just like Vietnam where the North was aiding the Vietcong. Nixon did a number on the North with Operation Linebacker. It may be time for a reinactment of that strategy, or maybe Mookie needs to go away, permanently.
I see al Sadr will be voting Democrat in 2008.
So will 90% of the MSM.
Petraeus needs to make it thousands this time.
8 posted on 01/19/2007 12:48:00 PM PST by SolidWood (Sadr lives. Kill him.)
That's me. ;o)
So, let me get this straight. The AP can find this gathering of terrorists at their prayers, but the Iraqi security forces and our military can't? This was a target rich environment that needed only a few MOABs or a few dozen cluster bombs to give them their sought after martyrdom.
> Lie low, avoid a showdown and hope to emerge even
> stronger after the Americans leave.
If these cutthroat cultists could have contained their
mythological and tribal hatred for even a few months
back when, we'd be outta there by now, and they'd have
an easy time of it. Took 'em a while to figure that out.
Of course, if the Pali schism is any indicator, hatred
containment is not the strong suit of cutthroat cultists.
>>So, let me get this straight. The AP can find this gathering of terrorists at their prayers, but the Iraqi security forces and our military can't? This was a target rich environment that needed only a few MOABs or a few dozen cluster bombs to give them their sought after martyrdom.<<
The problem as I understand it is that the population of Sadr city is between 750,000 and a million - or up to a fifth (and some sources say even more) of Baghdad.
So finding 10,000 Sadre supporters isn't that hard - dealing a million of them and seperating the fighters from the merely supportive population is apparently a real pain in the ass, made more difficult by the Iraqi government's reluctance to confront them or let us confront them.
>>If these cutthroat cultists could have contained their
mythological and tribal hatred for even a few months
back when, we'd be outta there by now, and they'd have
an easy time of it. Took 'em a while to figure that out. <<
There is real truth to your post.
A counterpoint, though, is that remnants of Saddam's secret police starting provocative bombings fairly early and then Al Quaidians started arriving and blowing up both infrastructure and Shiites making it easier for the radical Shiite elements to "justify" kill Sunnis.
>>
Yeah it's easy to stay motivated when you're high on methamphetamines as were most of the Medhi Militia the last go around.<<
Well then eventually they should all have no teeth... I wonder if the U.N would object to a blockade on soft foods? :)
"Or maybe we should just get out now and avoid the whole silly charade of actually trying to win a war.'
They pretend to go away.
We pretend to win and leave.
Victory all around.
Then it's the Iraq version of root, hog, or die.
We should have done this years ago.
Mookie must die.
Mookie delenda est.
Mark
I agree with you completely. Dan Senor, of the CPA, said that Bremer wanted Mooqie's head but someone in the Pentagon said no because they didn't want to make al-Sadr a martyr. Bremer said at the time al-Sadr had our friend, ayatollah al-Khoe murdered, at the shrine of Ali in Najaf, Mooqie had a hundred or so supporters, and we let him go. A year later, al-Sadr's blackshirts had grown to a few thousand, and this time they attacked and occupied the Ali shrine in Najaf. We sent in our heroes and they mauled the Sadrites, forcing Mooqie to go into hiding. Once again, we let him off the hook, and his blackshirts continued to attract more shia recruits. Three months ago, Mooqie called for a demonstration in Sadr City against American occupation and he attracted hundreds-of-thousands in the march. Senor's point is he was attracting more supporters because of America's inability to extinguish this threat. I think this was one of Rummy's biggest mistakes. There was no way pacify the country with Mooqie flaunting the law with his blackshirted militias. You're right, it's time to off Mookie.
Target-rich Environment: AC-130 fodder.
~~~~~~~~~~~~
Muckhead can't hide forever...
Just do it!
Mookie needs to have an "accident" .
Your analysis is goood.
It needs to encompass the broader picture however. That is we must leave Iraq in a position that does not offer problems for the neighboring Gulf States and Jordan.
The situation in Iraq is now overshadowed by Iran. When developing the Iraqi endgame, provision must be made to prevent Iranian dominaation of the region.
A two year timetable is off by about 18 years.
Worked great in Oradour-sur-Glane.
Art. 33 of the Fourth Geneva Convention specifically forbids collective punishment. Our refusal to use such tactics are what make our men soldiers, not terrorists.
Where does one draw the line? For example, what's your opinion on Hiroshima, Nagasaki and Dresden? What was that, if not collective punishment? These cities had little or no military targets.
IIRC, all of the above were selected precisely because they were military targets. Even so, compelling arguments can be made that Dresden, Hiroshima, and Nagasaki were war crimes. The Fourth Geneva Convention, however, was adopted in 1949 after the lessons learned from WWII.
Is Al-Sadr actually in Iran now along with some of the Mahdi Army?
>>Your analysis is goood.
It needs to encompass the broader picture however. That is we must leave Iraq in a position that does not offer problems for the neighboring Gulf States and Jordan.
The situation in Iraq is now overshadowed by Iran. When developing the Iraqi endgame, provision must be made to prevent Iranian dominaation of the region.
A two year timetable is off by about 18 years. <<
Excellent, if painful, addendums.
I respectfully disagree that the bombing of those cities had military targets as their objective. Even if that were the case, the massive civilian casualties could have been avoided if they had specifically targeted the isolated minor military targets that may have existed in those areas. The fact that pinpoint bombing was a well-developed technique in use by the US Army Air Corps prior to the bombings of these cities, and that area bombing on these primarily civilian areas was used instead - offers powerful finality to this view.
The objective was the demoralization of the civilian population in order to force an end to the war. Alternatively, one could argue that these areas had military value in that they supplied a support infrastructure for armed combatants. Either rationale returns us to the current question of punishing enabling civilians who support terrorists, both of which aren't abiding by the fourth convention themselves.
It is insanity to treat these enabling civilians as exempt from the war, while they harbor terrorists, supply them with housing, cover, weapons/ammo storage locations, lookouts and a communications network.
Our troop surge is not a very large one, and if they are hamstrung by the requirement to fight and/or detain only the people that are actually shooting at them, then I don't think we have a serious chance of winning. The support infrastructure must be given strong disincentives to enabling terrorists. One can argue over the finesse of such measures, but the wholesale exoneration of knowing and enabling civilians is a fatally flawed policy.
However, it sounds that you believe that one or all of the Hiroshima, Nagasaki and Dresden bombings may have been war crimes. If this is the case, then I think there's no further point in arguing this issue, as you and I would be fundamentally apart on the brutal requirements of winning a war.
Appears this lardass skipped town to challenge Michael Moore to a cous cous eating contest in Tehran
Although this news is kind of old and tired on FR, it is fresh and newborn this morning on the MSM and is now Officially Important.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.