Is it just me, or is getting praised by Petraeus likely to work against Sadr with his own followers?

ReubenJCogburn on December 7, 2007 at 6:06 PM

Petraeus is the Shiek that is winning. So he is top dog right now.

In reality, that large figure and label (”Mahdi Army”) is a splintered organization of various groups nominally under the banner, only a portion of which are under his control.

Not all of the elements not under Sadr’s control are “bad,” in that they are nationalists who hate Iran and disrespect Sadr’s relationship with Iran, and aren’t necessarily running death squads.

1) He feels compelled to do so for his own benefit.
2) Clark’s point that the better things get in the short run, the more the Iraqis will expect in the long run. So the longer Sadr behaves, the less he can successfully misbehave in the future.

As a wise man once said, “Be careful who you pretend to be, because one day you may wake up to find that’s who you are”.

I didn’t know there was a ‘good’ Mahdi Army.

An itemized list of the types of Mahdi Army is within this piece.

Or maybe I’m wrong and Sadr’s influence is much less significant than thought. Bill Ardolino tells me that all the time; this, at least, is a small point in his favor.

What I tell you regarding limited influence is usually the way the press describes him vs. his real influence, which works like this: when press accounts lazily talk about “the Mahdi Army,” they often depict it as an organization of 100k (at its peak) under the control of Sadr. In reality, that large figure and label (”Mahdi Army”) is a splintered organization of various groups nominally under the banner, only a portion of which are under his control.

So he’s a prominent local and to some extent national player, but he’s not close to being “the Most Important Man in Iraq,” as CBS asked, nor “The Man Who Now Holds
Iraq’s Future In His Hands,” as the Independent opined, nor “The Most Dangerous Man in Iraq” as Newsweek had on its cover.

You were bemoaning a few months ago that Sadr laying low was bad in the long term, now his cleaning thugs from his organization is bad in the long term.

I’ll say it again: the longer Iraq is safer, calmer, less thuggish, the better for us – regardless of whether groups we might not like are “repositioning”. Once people get used to a certain level of security, they are not going to be well disposed to those that bring back the violence.

Looks to me that Sadr has bet on the long-term stability of Iraq, and is trying to position himself as a great nationalist political leader.

I didn’t know there was a ‘good’ Mahdi Army. This bunch is like kids in a school ground. If fact, I wonder if the whole Iraqi culture is in their teenage years.

countywolf on December 7, 2007 at 4:41 PM

Yes, Bryan can tell you more about good and bad Jam.

Iraq:
Median age: total: 20 years
male: 19.9 years
female: 20 years (2007 est.)
http://www.indexmundi.com/iraq/median_age.html