Posted on 11/26/2006 9:07:54 AM PST by Lunatic Fringe
BAGHDAD (Reuters) - Angry fellow Shi'ites stoned Iraqi Prime Minister Nuri al-Maliki's motorcade in a Shi'ite stronghold of Baghdad on Sunday in a display of fury over a devastating car bomb that tore through their area.
Maliki was visiting the Sadr City slum to pay respects to some of the 202 victims of last week's devastating bombing.
"It's all your fault!" one man shouted as, in unprecedented scenes, a hostile crowd began to surge around the premier and then jeered as his armored convoy edged through the throng away from a mourning ceremony.
The area is a base for the Mehdi Army militia led by Maliki's fellow Shi'ite leader Moqtada al-Sadr.
Though the violence was limited, it was a dramatic demonstration of the popular passions Maliki and his national unity government are trying to calm following Thursday's multiple car bombs in Sadr City -- the worst since the U.S. invasion -- and later revenge attacks.
On Sunday, a car bomb killed at least 6 people and wounded more than 20 in a market just south of Baghdad, police said.
On the third full day of a curfew on the capital, mortar bombs crashed down in various parts of Baghdad and residents reported isolated and mostly unexplained clashes.
The government has said traffic can circulate again from Monday morning but, after a series of high-level meetings, it again appealed for calm.
Yeah, that'll solve everything. :eyeroll:
I have a newsflash for you: Americans in Iraq don't want to be evacuated and we don't want to surrender to the terrorists by cutting and running.
So, you armchair generals just go back to playing video games in the basement or whatever it is you do and we'll stay here and get this done.
It was cleaned out once, it can be again. It's just a question of political will which I don't think we have.
Amen, woodbutcher! I would add the simple truth that there are many forces vying to knock us off Superpower status. A cut and run from Iraq would give those forces the opportunity to pounce on weakness.
God ...I hate stupid people...please forgive me.
From all of the historical descriptions I read about wars long before this, yes, this pretty much is a "war."
The very fact that the terrorists are mortaring our positions and our troops are wasting terrorists pretty clearly defines a "war."
Oh....the media doesn't tell you about the terrorists that get wasted pretty regularly by U.S. and Iraqi forces? Disgraceful.
***Why is Sadr alive?***
You don't care about the answer to that question. I've answered it on other threads, and NOBODY of your ILK cares a fig what the truth is. It's just a one liner talking point like "nuke the Muslims". But the answer to why is NOT because President Bush ordered him not killed. Educate yourself on the Military Doctrine of Counterinsurgency Warfare, and educate yourself on WHO al-Sadr is in that society over there (not who he is to you, or to me, or to America), then use your own one brain cell to reason it out. No, wait, it might be too much of a strain...
I feel the same way. I have no patience for stupid people. I know I should be more patient and I've asked God for forgiveness and understanding, but it's one of the hardest battles I have to fight. ;-)
What a charming ancient custom. That democracy thing with the Islamic constitution is working out really really well.
The regional powers want to decide more than the fate of "the region." But at minimum they want us out of the picture, and want us to agree not to back Israel unconditionally. For thirty years we have used the IDF as a forward position. No way could we maintain a first rate 250,000 man force in that area. The Shia got a taste of blood last summer when the IDF performed so poorly. If they can push us out, then their appetite will increase.
How does that become our problem, exactly? Palestinains can walk to Israel. It's a little trickier to get here from there. For that matter, what's the motivation for them to attack us, if we're off their land? Suicide bombers in Gaza have a distinct territorial goal; kill Jews, take back Palestine. What does a guy from Ramadi care about Americans, once we're out of Ramadi?
Certain Sunni extremist groups (known as apocalyptics), most noteably al-Qa'ida, want to attack us whether or not we're in Iraq. They'll be our enemy no matter what we do, because their aims are political ones that transcend boundries. Most of our enemies, however, don't think like that. They are intelligent, thinking opponents who are trying to accomplish concrete, localized goals.
I am curious - if this has been discussed on another thread, I apologize, I missed it.
I keep reading that Al-Maliki needs Sadr's folks in parliament to stay on as prime minister. This is supposedly why Al-Maliki is reluctant to really come down hard on Sadr.
If Sadr is put out of business or boycotts the government and pulls his folks out of parliament and Al-Maliki falls out of power, who's likely to take over? Would it be someone more likely to co-operate with us in a strong and unambiguous way?
As I've said many times, PC is eventually gonna cause a cataclysmic loss of American life. It now controls every facet of this society, ESPECIALLY its leadership, and that control runs the gamut from boards of tiny towns to the White House. In the immediate aftermath of 9/11, we changed the name of our retaliatory operation so as not to offend our enemies, and everything since then has taken on the same flavor of appeasement.
Until we shake off the PC constraints, we have no realistic shot at defeating the enemy. To be clear, we have no realistic chance of defeating an enemy we don't even have the courage to NAME.
MM
Do you really believe that our being in Iraq is keeping the Islamofascist from coming here? Hell man, they're already here, by the thousands. Just look what 19 men did on 9/11.
With our troops in Iraq, the southern border open, these murderous Muslims can operate at will "behind the lines". We'd be a lot safer with those 150,000 troops on our borders than being in Iraq!!!
Over 600 people a year in the US alone die from.......
falling out of bed.
Countless others are crippled.
When you talk numbers, our casualty rate in Iraq is astoundingly small and is no way wasting the "current generation."
Please don't try to imply the U.S. military was in any way in favor of letting al-Sadr live. I was in Iraq when he first started acting up, and have more than a passing knowledge of the Special Operations and intelligence opinions of the subject. The decision to let him live, as you indicated, came from echelons above the military. Across the board, we knew it was a dire mistake, and history is clearly proving us right, but that's how it goes.
Well, it has been in place for less than a year. Revolutions often don't work out well. France took eighty years to work out a democratic system; Mexico, more than 90, and we see how unstable that is. I think that what we really hoped for was something like what the British established in Iraq after the First World War.
And the 'War' was won long ago. Saddam's army was crushed, his son's capped and soon he'll be hanged. A new democratic government was formed, a Constitution written and elections held.
But now we're playing police (and politically correct police at that). That is NOT the MOS of 99% of the US Army or Marines.
And the ROE do suck. Our guys can't fight back, when they DO they get arrested for murder. There's more restrictions on returning fire than the average city cop has. They're even MORE restricted than in the 'quagmire' of Vietnam. At least there - there were Free Fire Zones (and Black Flag Missions).
We also KNOW the terrorists use Mosques, schools, hospitals, etc as bases of operations and to store their weapons and make IEDs. BUT WE CAN'T GO IN THEM as we might offend someone - that is B-U-L-L-S-H-I-T.
There was an article a couple days ago about Marine Snipers. Sniper teams consist of Two Men, that IS sop. BUT due to some complaint from the muzzies, it's now One Man. For a Sniper that ain't good - it's almost a death sentence.
The bottom line is that per 'general' Bush and Condi we are now 'fighting' not to lose - and not to lose in a politically correct way, that's nonsense.
If we followed HALF the rules of engagement used in WWII we would have wiped out every terrorist in year two. There were no 'sanctuary's'. Churches, hospitals, schools - wherever the enemy was we attacked and destroyed it. And we didn't worry about collateral damage. That was the enemy's problem NOT ours.
I want us to WIN dammit, to kick ass. To break things and kill the enemy, but the politicians DON'T - That means Dubya and the State Dept. As such, our guys are now dying for NOTHING. And yeah, Bush is now lying about it. His firing of Rummy, the only guy with the balls to win, REALLY WIN, was sacrificed for political correctness and he lied about that.
Dubya has already surrendered.
An Aside: remember that Al-Qaeda funeral a while back where our Predator Drone 'could' have taken all of them (about 30) out with one rocket? We didn't, and why - because the State Dept said it wouldn't be 'nice'. Well who the hell gives the State Dept orders - Condi, per Dubya.
Don't lecture me on historical numbers. It's only worth it if a positive outcome is the result.
Otherwise the deaths and the woulded are in fact, in vain.
Were the 6,000 deaths during D-day "worth" it?Damned right
Were the 56,000 deaths in Vietnam worth it. No.
I agree that the mistake was made, and that the military wanted to take him out (My son was there). But the Sdar then was not the Sadr now. Starting from now, it would greatly inflame the Shia population. It is up to the Iraqis to deal with him, and if they are smart, then they would let fatso leave the government and form another. Outside, he would become a freebooter who is easier to deal with. Provided, that is, if the government can muster enough loyal regiments to take on his forces. By that I mean infantry. We would supply the rest. Another thing should happen. The Iraqi government should establish a censorship office and while battle is happening should be reported that doe not clear the office not until some decisive action occurs. The government is in much the same position that Laincoln found himself in in May, 1861. Break the constitution to save the government and by saving the government save the constitution.
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.