gjohns01@[EMAIL PROTECTED]
wrote:
> On Mar 29, 10:37 am, Jeffrey Turner <jtur...@[EMAIL PROTECTED]
> wrote:
>
>>Stevie Nichts wrote:
>>
>>>On Mar 26, 10:41�pm, Jeffrey Turner <jtur...@[EMAIL PROTECTED]
> wrote:
>>
>>>>The surge started working when Muqtada al Sadr declared a ceasefire.
>>>>Now that it looks like that ceasefire is crumbling, I suspect the
surge
>>>>will go with it. �
>>
>>>It is quite plausible, as per this CNN re****t, that Sadr is not still
>>>calling the shots, but has been reduced to a figurehead:
>>
>>>---
>>>http://edition.cnn.com/2008/WORLD/meast/03/27/basra.analysis/?iref=mp...
>>
>>>"Al-Sadr is involved in a very complicated relation****p with the
>>>Iranians," said CNN Baghdad correspondent Michael Ware. "The
>>>Iranians do provide funding and sup****t for his militia, yet at
>>>the same time they're trying to rein him in and get him to adopt a
>>>certain political agenda, which from time to time he resists."
>>
>>That doesn't sound like a figurehead. Sadr has always been an Iraqi
>>nationalist. That doesn't make for a good Iranian puppet.
>
> Not only that, Prime Minister Maliki is a leader of the Badr Brigade
> - a creation of Iran during the 80's with much stronger ties to Iran
> than the Mehdi army.
True. But I don't think Maliki is an Iranian puppet either.
>>>Iran has weakened al-Sadr by encouraging dissension within his
>>>Mehdi Army and backing hardliners -- known as the Special Groups
>>>-- who break away and keep up the fight against the U.S.
>>>occupation, Ware said.
>>
>>This may be true. It doesn't seem to help the surge, and it doesn't
>>say how many - what percent - of Sadr's followers have splintered.
>>And Sadr, not Iran, still controls the bulk of the Mehdi Army.
>
> actually the biggest split in the Mehdi army has happened BECAUSE of
> Sadr's cease fire. A lot of his followers never sup****ted it.
There seems to be agreement on that with what Nichts cited. The only
question is whether Iran played a part as instigator or merely picked up
and sup****ted some of the disaffected (former) followers.
>>>Note that Sadr has not been heard from; nor has he
>>>declared an end to the cease-fire.
>>
>>He hasn't been heard from? You're not listening.
>
> He's listening, but only to right-wing sources.
> That's why usenet Republicans can be so consistently wrong and still
> maintain that they are correct.
I guess they can read/listen to CNN to, as long as they misunderstand
it. I would think the recent "Bush's War" on pbs would be safe too. It
wasn't hard right, but I think Colin Powell's undersecretary, Richard
Armitage, was about as far left as the analysis got.
>> He hasn't ended the
>>cease-fire yet, but that could easily change if al Maliki keeps pressing
>>the issue.
>
> That isn't the only problem with the cease fire. The Sunni Awakening
> groups are growing restless too.
> They only stopped shooting at us because we put them on our payroll.
> But the ****ite Iraqi government doesn't want to pay them anymore, or
> employ them.
> The only question is when they start shooting at us again?
If fighting recommences before November it could have very serious
political consequences. It would be a minor miracle, or require lots of
payola, to prevent that.
--Jeff
--
"The power of the Executive to cast a man into prison without
formulating any charge known to the law, and particularly to
deny him the judgment of his peers, is in the highest degree
odious and is the foundation of all totalitarian government
whether Nazi or Communist."
- Winston Churchill, Nov. 21, 1943
|
