Everyone who seems to know what he’s saying tells us that it will take five to ten years to build the base of noncoms that make a modern army work.

What is the security situation like?

No one is under any illusions that the security situation in parts of Iraq is extremely serious, but levels of violence fell throughout 2007 and vary across the country.

Baghdad and its environs account for the majority of the violence in Iraq, but following action by Iraqis and coalition forces, security has been enhanced there. The security situation is better, particularly in the north and south where the situation remains relatively stable. In the four provinces within the UK’s area of operations – Maysan, Basra, Dhi Qar, and Al Muthanna – there is no anti-government insurgency or inter-sectarian conflict; the challenges are criminality, infighting between Shia factions, and the corrosive influence of the militias.

It’s not that the Brits aren’t there, it’s the definition of their role.

For better or worse, the issues that Steven Vincent wrote about back in 2005 were mostly criminality and the Sadr’s goons enforcing his religious courts. That’s why the Brits didn’t see their role in getting involved in it, re: policing and cultural infighting. Then AQ slipped in under the radar and set up shop and to the Brits credit they took off the gloves and kicked their ass! Now they are gone and the situation is pretty much back to the place it was when the Brits got there. I agree with Romeo and others, this is a good sign and test for the IA and will give Maliki some street cred with the Sunnis to take on the Shia.

U.S. Marines, who else?

How hard does the fighting have to get before he formally blesses it in order to avoid the appearance of his troops operating against his wishes?

If/when he publicly endorses the fighting: Predator/Hellfire on the way.

rockhauler on March 26, 2008 at 3:17 PM

LOL, had a great mental image of a Trebuchet, with a V8 in the sling…. and some Arab going…

“he did say bombard them with Motors…”

As Romeo13 said above, if you want a stable country, these militias have to be dealt with conclusively.

This appears to have been too much for Maliki who has now sent in the Iraqi Army to clean up the neighborhoods. If this conclusion is accurate, then it is the Iraqi Government, and the Iraqi Army who have chosen to visit violence upon the militias, not the other way around.

This could be the beginning of the end, with the Brits reduced to observers.

The news reports being published are less than helpful as there doesn’t seem to be much detail, beyond ‘the sounds of gunfire’. Nothing about who is shooting at whom, nor why. Other reports indicate internecine warfare between militias; if true, what is the Iraqi Army doing?

I suspect it is the Iraqi Army, with US support that is putting the hurt on the militias.

but the Brits are nowhere to be found. Why?

Look at it as a test case or a “clinical trial” as to what happens whenever the adult supervision is removed from Iraq.

Isn’t this an extremely bad omen for an American troop withdrawal, under a would-be President Obama or Clinton?

Exceedingly bad. We need to stay there for at least fifty a hundred a thousand years until time itself comes to an end.

How would a country-wide draw-down be different than this local one?

Well let’s just step back and analyze this. Commander Guy said that the purpose of the surge was to provide the political breathing space needed for the Iraqi leadership to achieve a unified, peaceful Iraq. If “The Surge” has been very successful at all then it should be very different. Of course, on the other hand, if the Iraqis are just incorrigible.

These Militias either have to submit to the government, or be destroyed, you can’t leave them in place.

This is also a good sign as apparently the Iraqi Army is leading this… with American support. This is EXACTLY what we have been trying to do for the last 5 years… make it so the Iraqi ARMY can control its own country.

Yes, there will continue to be violence, and there will be an upswing in violence just prior to the American Election. The Islamists KNOW they can’t beat us militarily, but we can defeat ourselves at the polls… by allowing either of the Dems to win.

IF a Dem wins, the current Iraqi governments ONLY hope is to have an effective military force of its own in place, and have disarmed that majority of the militias…

Clock is ticking… for both sides.

From the MoD website.

Operations in Iraq: About the UK mission in Iraq

Thats the best it could be. What it winds up is yet to be seen.

I do hope that the Iraqi forces are able to prevail and clear out the militant thugs who run the South but simply blaming the British for their handover to local politicians is a little simple-minded.

Shrewed

Possibly, but not by Sadr.

In reality, the continued presence of his Iranian masters pushed him to isolate himself.

…

As such, the militarily incompetent Muqtada al-Sadr has been yanked from control of the Mahdi Army.

Sadr’s defense of Najaf made Stalingrad look like patty cake makes the Salvation Army look like the Spartans. You don’t reward success of that magnitude. Instead, “rogue groups” were simply the first test of direct Iranian control until they could make a move like this.