Mahdi Army makes a final push to control southwest Baghdad

McClatchy Newspapers ^ | June 9 2007 | Leila Fadel, Sahar Issa and Mohammed al Dulaimy

[ASC2006]

In the past 10 days, the fiery Shiite cleric Muqtada al-Sadr's militia has resurfaced in force, making a push to roust Sunnis from Baghdad and to isolate Sunni enclaves in the west of the capital from their brethren in the south.

Mahdi Army militiamen in the Shiite dominated neighborhood of Bayaa were reinforced by other Shiite fighters and men in civilian clothes with weapons have cordoned off the area. In the past 10 days Mahdi Army activity has escalated, intensifying in the past two days with the capture of two Sunni mosques, residents and police said.

The push appears to be part of a strategy by the Mahdi Army to control swaths of the once Sunni-dominated west bank of the Tigris River.

Two Sunni men reached by phone had fled Bayaa in the last five days because of the rising violence. Neither of the men would give their names or new places of residence for fear of retribution.

Five days ago one of the Sunni men was warned by his Shiite neighbors and friends. "The Mahdi Army is asking about you, they are watching you," he was told. So he packed up his things, his family and left.

Last week his cousin was dragged from his car at a Mahdi Army checkpoint and shot.

"The army is fighting along side the Mahdi Army," he said. "We cannot trust a security plan that doesn't protect the people. . . . They come to you as a state of government with power. . . . If you defend yourself, the interior commandoes will arrest you as a terrorist the next day."

Two Shiite men in Bayaa also described an escalation of violence but were happy to see the Mahdi Army return to protect them, they said.

[jedward]

“I strongly disagree with that approach”

I kinda sorta feel the same way...basically. Of course I understand the inability for some to know when to come out of the rain, so they might need a little help, generally speaking a person should simply lose a debate in such a way that they no longer feel like debating the point.

[pissant]

Well, he posted the good with the bad, but I never thought he was a troll. Some strong opinions, as most here have.

[jveritas]

I have no idea pissant why “jmc1969” was banned. I was very surprised and disappointed when I knew about his ban when I searched for his name over a month ago and he was gone. Now I am very disappointed that freeper “ASC2006” just got banned.

[jedward]

And no-one can figure out why?

[pissant]

Musta been a Rudy guy?

[pissant]

Can you tell us why ASC2006 and/or jmc1969 got the boot?

[jedward]

This is weird...it’s like waiting for an autopsy report...

[Obie Wan]

Well ask Jim Robinson,it’s his site.Hey Jim why did jmc 1969 and ASC2006 get banned ???

[jveritas]

He may be a Rudy Guy which may got him banned but he usually avoided these type of political threads and focused mostly on the war threads.

PS: I strongly disagree with the banning of the Giuliani supporters on FR, we lost some good folks because of this.

[pissant]

I never say jmc post outside the topic of military and foreign affairs.

Many of them (not all) were asking for it. They were flaming libs and hated staunch conservative positions. Just go to that neverending thread and check out Katie O’s opus for a prime example. Yet she pretended she was a conservative for a long time. You have to keep in mind a couple of things: THis is a conservative, not a GOP website. ANd Jim does not want his site used to promote a liberal republican. He warned them a month before the bannings that it would get uncomfortable for them if they kept it up. Still, some good folks got caught up in it.

[jedward]

“we lost some good folks because of this.”

I miss a couple of them, but I look at it more like this “they decided to leave the best conservative forum on the internet, while also in many cases acknowledging that they would sacrifice their priciples for a false hope”.

To me, that’s very sad. What little I know about one of the sites, I’m going to say that the way they are doing things puts them directly in the cross-hairs of those liberal who want to shut down Political Forums. That really makes me sad. As for the over-all “bannings”, no such thing. Hundreds jumped ship groups of 20 intentially crossed all lines, and the remaining “tens” simply requested that they be banned. They don’t count, and neither do the one’s that cowardly jumped ship. So it comes to a very small number that could be perceived as “purged”, but even then...it was purge by choice.

[ArmstedFragg]

Sheesh! Talk about predictable.... This is precisely what we said was going to happen on the day he released the announcement that he was telling his boys to stop fighting and play nice.

If Mookie ever says he’s ordered his ‘army’ to confront our troops and fight to the death, we’ll know they’re running for the hills.

[jedward]

We’re sorry. He is unable to hear you.

[REDWOOD99]

He can hear. He just can’t talk.

[Wiz]

jmc1969 banned? I didn’t know. Why?

[Wiz]

What did jmc 1969 do to get banned?

[Gum Shoe]

“Muqtada al-Sadr’s militia has resurfaced in force.”

OK. So why are our “Surge’ forces not engaging and killing them? Once again, I see our political leaders are not serious about the war. It’s no wonder nothing ever gets resolved there. Iraq has become EXACTLY like Vietnam. Political sensitivities take precedence over actions on the battlefield.

[SJackson]

If you'd like to be on this middle east/political ping list, please FR mail me.

High Volume. Articles on Israel can also be found by clicking on the Topic or Keyword Israel. or WOT [War on Terror]

----------------------------

[Marine_Uncle]

"jmc1969 was a tool who was more than willing to run down the war just because the Sunnis he favored weren’t being treated the way he wanted them to."
How strange my hundreds of intercourses with jcmc1969 never left me with that impression, and if anything quite the contrary. He more often then not, brought out kinks in how things where being ran, but never condemed in full anyone in particular. He had some strong things to say about say Bremmer, but in retrospect, Bremmer screwed up a lot of things early on, that say Jay Garner would not have considered doing, and he did not allow his level of criticism to go much beyond the Bremmer lead State Department lackys that should not have been given so much power to run things with no checks in place.
The allowance to let the UN and Europeans in essence pursuade the Iraqi to accept a voting systems whereby one votes for a list, not an individual should be a case in point.
In addition he along with some others, including myself had over a period of time admonished our readership to consider reading Blog sites such as Iraq the Model (ITM) in order to garner some early on inside perspectives from the view of a few Iraqi professional types.
Is it a sin to post articles one may feel contain some real BS, but post them so that others can see how a given media perceives or in some cases, attempts to hoodwink the masses.

[Marine_Uncle]

Not only the fat one must be halted at this point, but by all indications Iraq would be better off in the long run, if Allawi and his associated parties joined together and demanded a interim elections to vote for a new PM.
Maliki is allowing the country to go down as fast as his predessor, Jaffari did. They are not getting important things done such as legislating an equitable oil law.
They are going to spoil the good will being generated by the many Sunni Tribes who now work with the Iraqi forces and US forces.
A guy like Allawi would probably say. The BS must stop and all Iraqi political parties had better stop screwing off and come together to get them over the hump.
Maliki claims he wants to stop sectarian violence, then goes out of this way, by doing little or nothing to bring all quarters of Iraqi under one fold.
Everyone must feel they will get a slice of the pie, under the law. It simply is not happening at this point.