Posted on 04/07/2006 10:21:05 AM PDT by jmc1969
This is a clear message from Sadr and Iran to the SCIRI that if they don't support Jaafari for PM they will be killed. Those that have said al-Qaeda in Iraq have become a handmaiden of Iran are correct.
pong
I'll try to resist the urge to feel smug. ;-)
More evidence that Iran is scared sh*tless of a strong, free Iraq. I think part of the reason Iran got involved was to retaliate Saddam's invasion of Iran in the 80s, misdirected as it is. But now that it's common knowledge that Iran is behind the insurgency, they should be even more afraid of a strong, free Iraq.
The Middle East has alot of growing up to do. There won't be peace as long as one country bombs another country's innocent civilians just to keep them in a state of turmoil and fear.
It is clear that al-Qaeda did do the bombings as I said before Shia just don't do suicide bombings. That said it is also clear Iran and al-Qaeda are working together and Iran wanted al-Qaeda to send a message to the SCIRI for them.
Ping
And Sadr is in bed with Iran and has been all along.
I stand by what I said and so do most of the Iraqis I know here.
But, what do we know?
These aren't mutally exclusive things we are saying. Its clear that Sadr, al-Qaeda, and Iran all have the same vision for Iraq (a destabilized wasteland). And, I have said it is quite possible and even likely that Sadr's boys are working with al-Qaeda to get these guys into position in order to attack targets that will send a message politically.
But, I remember the last time a large number of people here and Bill Roggio blamed Sadr for the suicide attacks in Sadr city as a ruse to discredit the ISF and make himself look like the victim. The problem with the idea that Sadr's boys were the ones that blew themselves up was the fact children were using the head of one of the suicide bombers as a kick ball after the attack and the head was that from an African.
Clearly it is not Sadr's boys blowing themselves up, but that said the real question one should be asking is how an African got though Madhi Army check points in Sadr city.
That is where the focus should be on. If Sadr is helping the Waahibis get certain places in Iraq to cause mass casulity attacks that will help Sadr and Iran.
Sadr has a militia, but no great role in the new Iraqi government. Now he wants such a role.
But like the man with only a hammer, everything looks like a nail to Sadr. I.E. he only knows to use his militia to further his aims.
It's even possible (though much less likely) that Iran approves of this sort of thing.
I doubt that this is a very successful process for Sadr, though. If he had the votes for Jafari, then he wouldn't have needed this attack...and without killing the local imam in this attack, he's unlikely to gain any new support, either.
As for "civil war" or other such possibilities, Iraq's militias and Mullahs are generally tied to a particular mosque. Thus, we know where they live.
This is an entirely different scenario than what we dealt with when Al Qaeda was itself the bigger threat in Iraq. We didn't know where to find Zarqawi. Not so for Sadr.
So we have different dynamics going on now.
Of course, the communist news media will focus on the violence and the negatives...neglecting to note the different dynamics (probably wouldn't grasp such distinctions even if they cared, anyway).
But dealing with a Mullah and Militia tied to a Mosque (a 3M problem) is a very different thing from that of dealing with a foreign financed terror organization that has no visible headquarters/leadership.
And perhaps the mullahs/militias are acting up *because* Al Qaeda has withered so much in Iraq. Al Qaeda's time has mostly passed now in Iraq. The Mullahs are going to give it a go next, but they have different goals than Al Qaeda.
This is a less dangerous game now. It is different. Beware the newscasters who tell you more of the same.
It's not the same now. The dynamics have changed.
The dynamics have changed. I was heartened to hear or read here, that Iraqi's are thinking of themselves as Iraqis first, and Shiite, Sunni or Kurd, second.
Thanks for the ping, Southack.
So does Zarqawi, but he is smart enough to do that he won't get that so he wants the next best thing a fractured militant Iraq. If Sadr can't get it all he will go for the Zarqawi method of a destabilized Iraq that he can carve a part off for himself.
I am not disagreeing with her, I think Sadr is in part behind it.
Zarqawi is AQ. He knows he won't EVER be a leader of anything other than his roving bands of terrorists.
He wants to be a kingmaker, not the king.
Sadr has already tried that two times and gotten his arse kicked two times.
His own men fragged him the second time. Don't overestimate his pull because he has some hardcore followers. He doesn't resonate with most Iraqis.
Back in Fallujah when he had a city and thousands of fighters and his own Shira council he did think he could be king, that changed after the second battle of Fallujah.
Our mistake with Sadr was never kicking him and the Madhi Army out of Sadr city for good.
Secondly, after the FIRST Battle of Fallujah, Z-man has effectively been on the run since.
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.