Maliki demands Sadr disband militia: It's up to the Clerics
Tensions are very high in Iraq since the Maliki government decided to attack the oil rich city of Basra. Now he's issued an ultimatum to Sadr:
In an interview broadcast on Monday, Maliki singled out the Mehdi Army by name for the first time and ordered it to disband. "Solving the problem comes in no other way than dissolving the Mehdi Army," Maliki told U.S. network CNN. "They no longer have a right to participate in the political process or take part in the upcoming elections unless they end the Mehdi Army."
Sadr has said he'll leave the decision up to the clerics:
Iraqi cleric Moqtada al-Sadr offered on Monday to disband his militia if the highest Shi'ite religious authority demands it, a shock announcement at a time when the group is the focus of an upsurge in fighting.
The news came after Shi'ite Prime Minister Nuri al-Maliki, who launched a crackdown on Sadr's Mehdi Army late last month, ordered the cleric to disband his militia or face exclusion from the Iraqi political process.
It was the first time Sadr has evoked dissolving the Mehdi Army, whose black-masked fighters have been principle actors throughout Iraq's five-year-old war and the main foes of U.S. and Iraqi forces in widespread battles over recent weeks.
This is pretty wild to say the least. If Sadr disbands the militia it will splinter off into many different violent factions. Sadr has played the situation pretty well up to this point and has many thousands of soldiers at his fingertips so I kind of agree with KDrum.
But if I had to guess, I'd say that Sadr would be doing this only if he felt pretty confident that no order to disband will be forthcoming. That would be a tacit approval of keeping JAM armed and intact, which in turn would be a pretty effective answer to Prime Minister Nouri al-Maliki's calls for Sadr to disband his militia and lay down his arms. Maliki said yesterday that political parties maintaining militias wouldn't be allowed to take part in October's elections — an announcement pretty clearly aimed solely at Sadr — but he'll be unable to make that stick if Sistani doesn't take his side. Sadr and JAM could easily come out of this stronger than before.
Or maybe this is all a big nothing. Maybe no ruling is seriously being pursued, and maybe the clerics will continue to stay out of internal Iraqi politics. But it's an interesting game of cat and mouse being played out right now.
This is not a good spot for Petraeus to walk into Congress with. This situation is ready to explode.
More likely the Iraqi army will disband.
Where are you now that we need you, Steve Gilliard?
According to this news source there has been a call for a million Iraqi's to demonstrate against the U.S. led occupation this Wednesday while Petraeus is testifying before Congress:
http://therealnews.com/web/index.php?thisdataswitch=0&thisid=1289&thisvi...
It will be very interesting to see how much power Sadr has in light of Maliki's latest challenge to Sadr's influence.
I wonder how McCain/Bush and the MSM will spin the demonstration if there are a million plus Iraqi's calling for the U.S. to leave Iraq...or if the MSM will even cover it at all??
Watching Petraeus tomorrow will be very interesting. McCain will be still feeling the fizz from what Kerry has said in this interview. McCain will get more than his share of time to waste petting the General, but Hillary will get a few chances also. I think Obama will be far down the list of who gets to ask questions and when because of his short tenure. Meanwhile the violence continues in spite of the bubbly rainbow talk coming from Capital Hill.
Another reminder that the US invasion has empowered the clerics in a previously secular Iraq...
And another thing...
whose black-masked fighters have been principle actors
that should be PRINCIPAL
Abbybwood @ 3:
I read on Al Jazeera America that over 1 million people will be in that demonstration.
Tomorrow will be a newsday.
This is the last throes. They are getting the candy out to start tossing.
Maliki made the same demands 4 yrs ago when Al SADAR and his gang of poons, fought the US in the battle for,, ??
Now suddenly Maliki is demanding that Al dipshit end the war otherwise face the wrath?
Wow how much money changed hands since then and now, where Al sadar will probably end up like his daddy, dead and forgotten?
Its like the worlds worst game of HOLD EM HIGH BLUFF! WTF is going on over there where our troops,, and others are killed for what again???????????? oil??????? hardly,, the oil cannot flow without the help from neighboring countries.
Fuck it,let Iran have it,, Let Jordon have it,, etc,, just dont let our american troops there have it every day after day!!!
Thank you and good night,,
Best regards
this is all being done under neocon instruction.
BaScOmBe whose saying “NO REPUGS” @ 9:
find every way possible to manufacture conflict, justify the need for the surge, keep troops there and make trillions on all that wonderful contracting, right blackwater?
Petraeus May Be In A Preferred Position
Against standing armies, the US army has faired well. We beat the socks off Saddam's army before he could finish saying "this will be the mother of all wars." So far, the civil unrest has been hard to fight because the US has not been the best position to release its technological advantages. The so-called smart bomb has delivered mixed results at best. The explosive power of that weapon is responsible for the loss of many innocent Iraqi lives.
When you start to hear a call to fight a Iranian backed militia, Sadr's army is in trouble. The US is very capable of "shutting the door" on believed Sadr's strongholds and killing the whole lot of them in true smart bomb fashion. Of course that would call for imposing a media blackout. You can't have camera's snooping around telling the truth about what is happening. We prefer our denial with lies and WWII patriotism.
By point is this: American Generals, like Petraeus, may be trying to situate our army in the position to fight a conventional style war. Sadr's army fits that bill. This would bring about the kind of victory John McCain was denied in Vietnam. This will satisfy is sense of needing a victory. I have noticed this president and his supporters come at you in many ways; they will work hard and long to keep this war ongoing. Don't be fooled by the hype.
Joseph
My comment is not about the subject at hand, but I was looking for a John Yoo torture memo...
anyway, take a look at this write up if you have time.
Just Following Orders? DOJ Opinions and War Crimes Liability
JURIST Contributing Editor Jordan Paust of the University of Houston Law Center says that opinions of the US Department of Justice Office of Legal Counsel that are manifestly inconsistent with or violative of the laws of war provide no legal cover for any member of the executive branch seeking impunity for alleged war crimes and other international crimes committed by civilians during the Administration’s unlawful program of secret detention and “coercive interrogation"...
http://jurist.law.pitt.edu/forumy/2008/02/just-following-orders-doj-opin...
Jesus, Nothing is going right! Young men and women dying. Violence escalating. What the hell! And Betrayus? He's just going to shovel more Bull-shit on this and white-wash everything. What a mess! This is America's shame. We have got to right this country before it is to late. I'm voting for Obama.
Neo-Cons love explosions. Keep vigilant, America, the evil force acting within our government will take a great deal to be defeated. I hope tomorrow is a chink to the Neo-Con armor, but I am justifiably skeptical.
Abbybwood @ 3:
The MSM won't cover it, that's how. So it doesn't exist.
A million Iraqis in the streets Wednesday? I thought it was for the 8th?? If it does happen, I hope it will pre-empt Glenn Beck's fugly mug so we can get some REAL news for once.
Drum drummed the tom-toms for this war going in. I honestly don't know, but has he ever spilled his guts about his war guilt? Because sure as hell, he will ever remain neck deep in its spilt blood and shattered lives. That's damn uncharitable, but there it is. Who is he to now be spouting off about the Butcher's Bill? By my lights, there's very little difference between his sort and the obnoxious "we were misled" crowd.
I wouldn't put it past Shrub and Condi to cookup a little back door deal with Sadr, to keep things quiet until after November, so that "the American people can see that we are winning". Somehow, I smell a rat, and like most of us here, all of my darkest suspicions about this administration has been spot on so far. This unexplained reaction by Sadr, and not to mention his flex of fighting muscle last week, seems to have the mal-administration's clandestine fingerprints all over it.
P.D. @ 13:
yaaa were saved!
In other words. I can't win the election.
This is snark, right? Generul 'Betrayus' will march into Congress, sit down, tell the CNN cameraman to be sure and light his medal just right and then make every Senator there give him a blow job.
I mean what are they gonna do?
They've signed on on every dollar, tank, gun, bullet, blown of arm, leg, lacerated dick, fractured mind that Our Dear Leader has asked for and the General is there to report....
'Victory Senator, that's what we are looking at. Victory in Iraq, Victor in Iran, Victory around the world. We are Victorious!'
And...what Senator 'Limp Dick' Leahy is gonna say.... No? He's gonna argue with the great general in order to convince the American people we are losing when he won't even vote to stop this clusterfuck! I think me not pal.
Nope, we will be winning in Iraq until the day Sadr and his allies overrun the 'Green Zone' and then it will be President Clinton/Obama's fault.
Just watch those Senators slobber all over Betrayus for his heroism.
Sadr knows exactly what he is doing- he basically defeated the Iraqi army because they couldn't take the main strongholds without a massive bombardment campaign which would be political suicide. I'll make a prediction here; when the demonstration happens on Wed., the barriers of the green zone will be breached and the government will fall by thursday. The US will still have their bases as strongholds, but they will be faced with a major political upset. They will either have to make a deal with the devil for a shiite led government or be faced with basically taking the country over again in a very messy, bloody manner.
Curious...
Did Maliki, who is a puppet of Iran and al-Hakim pro-Iran Shia faction, ask al-Hakim to disarm HIS (expletive deleted) militia?
Yahoo:
McCain: Democrats' stance on Iraq flawed
""To promise a withdrawal of our forces from Iraq, regardless of the calamitous consequences to the Iraqi people, our most vital interests, and the future of the Middle East, is the height of irresponsibility," he said. "It is a failure of leadership."
He took a brief tour of the National World War I Museum afterward."
LOL
Joseph @ 11:
I agree with you in saying that a push for a unified army/militia would make "victory" attainable (again), but these fighters have proven that they are not a conventional, organized force. They drive around in the back of trucks and fire rockets at the Green Zone? Either that's some organized psy-ops tactic to lower American/Iraqi morale or it's a sign of how fluid/unorganized this militia is (let's fire rockets and hope it hits something, anything).
Instead of a collective, regimented army, it seems to be at the local/individual level with a distant Sadr giving general guidelines or directions. Like Kevin Drum says in the quote above, there are two options here: either Sadr is pretty intelligent in manipulating the direction of the country or he's not. I tend to believe the latter but then again, I guess we'll just have to see.
I know a few people who have connections to Sistani's camp, and they've given me a very interesting read of this kind of situation: Sistani wants, more than anything else, to avoid becoming embroiled--to remain "above politics" when it comes to struggles between the government and the militias. Sadr and Maliki have now made it virtually impossible, by commission or omission, for him to do that. Naturally he will not demand that Sadr disband the Mahdi Army, and that is the only way forward--to remain silent, and thus tacitly approving of Sadr. It's a politically brilliant move for Sadr to do this, but it will not make him friends among the Shi'a conciliators. Then again, in Iraq today, conciliation's not a good way to ensure one's survival.
This will be the end for al-Maliki, I think. He's a Shiite and friendly with Iran and Ahmadinejad, so why would he issue an "ultimatum" to the most popular Shiite cleric in Iraq? Kind of stinks of imperialist intervention, doesn't it?
Sistani said years ago (or his people did) that he removed himself from the situation because his word wasnt carrying much weight. He decided to save himself the embarrassment of being made irrevelvant.
I dont know what the outcome will be but I wouldnt predict the sky is going fall. Those predictions are getting about as tired as "mission accomplished".
.
Why doesn't Maliki listen to the Generals on the ground?
Bush does.
.
I think I only see many many tragedies in Iraq. Many innocent Iraq residents were killed there, let alone the US soldiers. I think through the news, everybody know it. And recently I even found a book 'The Three Trillion Dollar War' by Joseph E. Stiglitz seems to give us another information, You know how billions of dollars were wasted in Iraq. Here is the book that I found: http://dealstudio.com/searchdeals.php?deal_id=93000&ru=279 , I think those who want to know the truth can have a look.
I think I only see many many tragedies in Iraq. Many innocent Iraq residents were killed there, let alone the US soldiers. I think through the news, everybody know it. And recently I even found a book 'The Three Trillion Dollar War' by Joseph E. Stiglitz seems to give us another information, You know how billions of dollars were wasted in Iraq. Here is the book that I found: dealstudio.com/searchdeals.php?deal_id=93000&ru=279 , I think those who want to know the truth can have a look.
this is why maliki formally "inducted" the badr militia into the army over the weekend. voila! no more badr "militia"! so he could issue his latest ultimatum for all (read: sadr's) "militias" to disarm.
meanwhile, just in from the always-reliable juan cole: "ayatollahs decline to ban militia"
score: sadr, 2; maliki, 0 ...
I gather Iraq is missing a second amendment?
FreeDUMB @ 32:
apparently, iraqis can have "one ak-47 and one full magazine per household as long as it's registered": u.s. troops, iraqi police find illegal weapons, other items
which makes one wonder offhandedly, why an ak-47 specifically, as opposed to "one firearm"? who's profiting from that deal?
Max-Hussein-1 @ 29:
That would entail having generals who won't desert.
Maliki demands Sadr disband militia: It’s up to the Clerics
Al Sadr laughs - Film at 11.
Saddam Hussein was right when he said this would be the mother of all wars.
Look at all we have lost, GW wanted to go after Hussein because "he tried to kill my daddy". What a jerk he is!!
In Islamic countries, when they get the other side to disarm they really mean it.
The Wanderer @ 34:
ysbaddaden @ 38:
That would also entail not pulling out entrails.
Oh no, not another group disbanding.
I remember how broken up I was when these guys did:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=VciNPhRPVbI
Maliki has already lost and lost it all, and he doesn't know it.
Comments are closed on this entry