Remind me again — who’s losing in Basra?

posted at 9:48 am on March 30, 2008 by Ed Morrissey

When the Iraqi government finally took the long-expected action to establish control of Basra after the British pullback left it in the hands of militias and gangsters, suddenly the media declared that the country had reached the brink of collapse. They highlighted stories of defections from the Iraqi military and opined that the surge had failed. Moqtada al-Sadr would finally achieve his goal of controlling the South and would expose the Baghdad government as a house of cards.

Guess which side just sued for peace?

Shiite cleric Muqtada al-Sadr offered Sunday to pull his fighters off the streets of Basra and other cities if the government halts raids against his followers and releases prisoners held without charge.

The offer was contained in a nine-point statement issued by his headquarters in Najaf.

An Iraqi government spokesman welcomed al-Sadr’s order, saying it was “positive and responsive.”

Al-Sadr demanded that the government issue a general amnesty and release all detainees. The statement said he also “disavows” anyone who carries weapons and targets government institutions, charities and political party offices.

Anyone who follows the news closely in Iraq knew this day would come. The British left a power vacuum behind in the south that the Baghdad government could not fill at the time, and Sadr and the Supreme Islamic Iraqi Council’s Badr Brigades filled it instead. They have fought each other and some smaller Shi’ite groups for control of the streets ever since 2005, as Steven Vincent tried to warn people just before they murdered him in Basra. The Iraqi government had no choice but to challenge the militias for control of Basra and the surrounding areas, but they waited until the Iraqi Army had enough strength to succeed.

Did our media give anyone this context? No. They reported it as some kind of spontaneous eruption of rebellion without noting at all that a nation can hardly be considered sovereign while its own security forces cannot enter a large swath of its own territory. And in the usual defeatist tone, they reported that our mission in Iraq had failed without waiting to see what the outcome of the battle would be.

Sadr now wants to disavow anyone with a gun. The Mahdis, which found themselves on the short end of the stick, have just watched their Fearless Leader surrender — again — and this time leaving them twisting in the wind. That isn’t the action of a victor. Perhaps our media would like to explain that in the context of their clueless reporting so far.

Update: Unilateral retreat:

 Shiite cleric Muqtada al-Sadr said Sunday that he was pulling his fighters off the streets nationwide and called on the government to stop raids against his followers and free them from prison.

And Nouri al-Maliki remains in Basra.  Buh-bye, Sadr.

Breaking on Hot Air

Blowback

Note from Hot Air management: This section is for comments from Hot Air's community of registered readers. Please don't assume that Hot Air management agrees with or otherwise endorses any particular comment just because we let it stand. A reminder: Anyone who fails to comply with our terms of use may lose their posting privilege.

Trackbacks/Pings

Trackback URL

Comments

Comment pages: 1 2

LOL, called this one…

Both Mookys surrender, and the media circus… and I use the term circus, because they apparently sent in the clowns.

They constantly published enemy propoganda as fact, and showed pictures not of OUR side, but the enemy.

Can I question their patriotism yet? Oh, wait, they will be the first to tell you they are NOT patriotic, they are just “telling the story”….

Romeo13 on March 30, 2008 at 9:55 AM

I am getting more fond of stealing Charles Johnson’s “Imagine my surprise”….

It’s Mookie’s overall MO. Engage, get butt sort of kicked, then either declare a truce or “withdraw” in order to keep the Mahdi Army Gang intact…

darkpixel on March 30, 2008 at 9:56 AM

And hmmm….

72 hours was just up…

Interesting.

Romeo13 on March 30, 2008 at 10:02 AM

This is certainly bad news for the main stream media’s leftist propaganda machines. I’m surprised that the New York Times, Washington Post, CNN and the other left wing rags could bring themselves to even mention a truce.

rplat on March 30, 2008 at 10:07 AM

Why hasn’t someone shot this guy yet?

Kahuna on March 30, 2008 at 10:07 AM

Mookie’s power is evaporating. This is the only way he can stay a player. I doubt he can control all his followers. Those will have to be killed.

a capella on March 30, 2008 at 10:11 AM

Sadr’s had enough of the fighting. He wants quality dental care, and the only way that happens is if his militia members stop shooting the dentists.

Nethicus on March 30, 2008 at 10:11 AM

If you follow Bill Roggio’s excellent Long War Journal, you could smell this coming.

Patrick S on March 30, 2008 at 10:12 AM

MSM has supported the Iranian backed Mehdi Army in this since the beginning…even cheering them on. Dafydd of Big Lizards and Bill Roggio of the Long War Journal have been giving a totally different picture than the MSM, and it appears that MSM is wrong once again.

Seaberry on March 30, 2008 at 10:15 AM

Maybe they were reluctant to mention the word truce and Al-Sadr in the same sentence. After all, they have journalistic standards to uphold.

/sarcasm

tsagen on March 30, 2008 at 10:18 AM

This defeat of Mookie in this battle is no surprise. The oil must flow if Iraq is to survive. And the oil flows thru Basra. This wasn’t too bad for the Iraqi army, in the end, they stood their ground (with our help). Keep in mind NATO stands it’s ground in Afghanistan with our help as well.

As for the old media.

…and I use the term circus, because they apparently sent in the clowns.

I always think of Algore with the word clown comes up!

Zorro on March 30, 2008 at 10:19 AM

5 days of battle and Mookie is negotiating terms of surrender. Well played, Mr. Maliki.

About damned time, too, but better late than never.

Pablo on March 30, 2008 at 10:25 AM

I’m with Kahuna on this one. This guy’s whole neighborhood needs a cruise missile…

adamsmith on March 30, 2008 at 10:26 AM

That isn’t all the media leaves out of its collective narrative. Sadr lives in Iran, in fear for his life, and is widely perceived as a Tehran puppet. He is also known to be a a drug addict, probably of the opium that sedates nearly a quarter of the Iranian population.Maliki would have never moved into Basra without prior assurances obtained during Ahmadinejad’s recent Iraq visit; however the revolutionary Guards are playing their own hand, seeking to strengthen Hizbollah-in-Iraq; hence the chaotic conflict between rival militias and the Iraqi Army.

Hope P. Muntz on March 30, 2008 at 10:28 AM

Central to any stable government is having the monopoly on the use of force in its borders. The militias had to go.

I won’t claim I knew this would happen, but I expected it, considering that Mookie already signaled he wasn’t ready to challenge the central government when he made the pronouncement of a cease-fire.

Obviously, the fact that American troops stood behind the Iraqi government were a huge factor in Mookie’s pre-capitulation, but it’s still hugely important that these militias and gangs were put down very clearly by Iraqi forces, rather than American troops. If the Iraqi government has clear control, then even the Mookies of the Iraqi world will stick to political maneuvering rather than civil war.

theregoestheneighborhood on March 30, 2008 at 10:37 AM

1) The media will reports this. 2) They`ll ignore this totally. 3) They`ll just spend a fewmore days re-running the first few days of the fighting.

ThePrez on March 30, 2008 at 10:38 AM

I’ll have to disagree with Kahuna. Given the Muslim warped sense of honor, killing him would only turn him into a hero and a rallying point for the insurgents. Embarrassment and shame will do far more harm to Mookie than any bullet. Accomplish it well enough, his own people will eliminate him for us.

.

GT on March 30, 2008 at 10:41 AM

Hoooray!!!

JiangxiDad on March 30, 2008 at 10:48 AM

Fox News Sunday, 03.30.2008-0907-CDST, is reporting

al-Maliki has accepted al-Sadr’s offer for a cease fire.

J_Gocht on March 30, 2008 at 10:54 AM

are those blinds you put on yourself , Ed since Iraq invasion heavy?

Sadr is saying that his militia will stop fighting as long as Maliki and the US don’t attack him, plus some demands for prisoner amnesty. The Mehdi army will hand its weapons over, Sadr, says, but only to a government ready to kick the Americans out of Iraq. If Sadr meant to surrender he would have asked people to hand over their weapons and pleaded for terms. This is Sadr asking Maliki to accept that his mission to cripple the Mehdi army has failed. It says that Sadr and not Maliki has the power to control this fight, and early reports seem to be bearing that out.

The decision for Maliki must be painful. Honoring Sadr’s terms would make him look weak, but as things stood the Iraqi government was on a short path to losing Basra and most of the Shiite south. The choice between losing now or losing later isn’t much of a choice.

Sadr, meanwhile, looks a lot like a guy who would rather win democratically in November than knock the government over and take power as a warlord. For Iraqis it must make an interesting contrast.(Tim F)

sashal on March 30, 2008 at 10:55 AM

It’s probably better to leave al-Sadr an Iraqi joke than make him an Iraqi “martyr.” Behind his back he has a flag in each hand–Jihad Red in one hand and Surrender White in the other, ready to accommodate his own personal interests in any situation.

RBMN on March 30, 2008 at 10:57 AM

It’s certainly possible (I hope I’m dead, flat wrong) that Sadr is negotiating from a position of strength. That is, his forces have stood up to the Iraqi army and delivered a bloody nose. He’s not talking from weakness; but from strength.

He knows he can’t defeat the army; but if his forces are able to show that they can cause a lot of problems, he can make greater demands.

Who knows? We’re all guessing. Perhaps his forces are getting hammered, the army is not going over to his side, and the Iraqi people are starting to turn against him.

Let’s hope so.

SteveMG on March 30, 2008 at 11:00 AM

Sadr and his ilk need to be eradicated.

BallisticBob on March 30, 2008 at 11:00 AM

I find myself these days wishing the Iraqi people well. I hope they see the opportunites that could be theirs as a country. I hope they do.

jeanie on March 30, 2008 at 11:03 AM

sashal on March 30, 2008 at 10:55 AM

why don’t you reread this post and click on Roggio’s link?

Patrick S on March 30, 2008 at 10:12 AM

a capella on March 30, 2008 at 11:04 AM

A couple of weeks ago I saw a moronic Democratic politician on TV. He had a very self satisfied air as he argued against the war. He seemed to feel that, to prove the war wrong he needed only to show that people had died or been injured, period. And I think this is at the core of all of the lefties’ arguments: nothing is worth fighting or dying for so if someone has fought or died their cause is wrong. Most of them dress it up fancier but this is the core. They are antiAmerican only accidently: they would be against anything that would require bother or sacrifice. And they wouldn’t speak against jihadis because that might cause them bother or sacrifice. They are perpetual children trying to act like adults without knowing how.

snaggletoothie on March 30, 2008 at 11:06 AM

“The decision for Maliki must be painful. Honoring Sadr’s terms would make him look weak, but as things stood the Iraqi government was on a short path to losing Basra and most of the Shiite south. The choice between losing now or losing later isn’t much of a choice. sashal on March 30, 2008 at 10:55 AM”

Al-Maliki’s quick decision to accept al-Sadr’s offer; gives one pause to wonder whose arse was getting severely pummeled?

J_Gocht on March 30, 2008 at 11:06 AM

The speed at which the MSM went from ignoring Iraq to proclaiming that we were loosing was actually pretty impressive. I did’t know they could move that fast any more. But when they had to back up their narrative of our loss with facts like “230 people have died in Iraq because of this latest battle” (not saying where those 230 people were or which side they were on) I knew that the good guys were winning.

The Moqkster has been a thorn in Maliki’s side for some time now and this battle was something that had to happen eventually and everyone, except for the MSM aparently, knew that. Now it appears to be, except for the mopping up, over. Al-Sadr is having his fangs removed and the Iraq government will have one less thing to worry about.

29Victor on March 30, 2008 at 11:10 AM

The Mehdi army will hand its weapons over, Sadr, says, but only to a government ready to kick the Americans out of Iraq. If Sadr meant to surrender he would have asked people to hand over their weapons and pleaded for terms.

You actually believe Sadr will honor his word??? That’s so sweet. Newsflash: It’s pure, unadulterated BS. It’s rhetoric. Sadr knows how desperate people are to hear that he wants peace. He only wants peace so far as it allows him to live and to massacre people later on.

Wowza. I can’t believe there are still people who believe that terrorists want peace. Learn something new everyday.

mjk on March 30, 2008 at 11:13 AM

The side note to this that’s being overlooked.

The Iraqi government is doing something about the security of their on country and taking the lead in doing so. Agree or disagree on the points about how they are handling it, but they are handling it. This is another step to a independent Iraq and a step closer to the U.S. finishing up in Iraq and redeployment of our troops.

As far as our MSM reporting things in the improper context, that’s nothing new and not suprising on any level.

Hog Wild on March 30, 2008 at 11:14 AM

The real victory in all this is that Al-Maliki painted these “militias” as gangs at the outset. He did not give them the status of an organized political entity.

Mooky telling his followers to lay down their arms, gives Al-Maliki the cover he needs to finish taking the area, as anyone still on the street bearing arms MUST be a gangster, because the “official” Mahdi army is not fighting….

Its all about cover and politics… but this was a definate win for the Iraqi government…

Romeo13 on March 30, 2008 at 11:18 AM

Eyes and ears on the ground could be very valuable here.
Perhaps, “JetBlast” could weigh in?

J_Gocht on March 30, 2008 at 11:26 AM

You actually believe Sadr will honor his word??? That’s so sweet. Newsflash: It’s pure, unadulterated BS. It’s rhetoric. Sadr knows how desperate people are to hear that he wants peace. He only wants peace so far as it allows him to live and to massacre people later on.

Mookie has been abdicating the field of battle for over a year now. That’s not how you win, especially among Arabs. And Mookie is not a classic terrorist. He’s been fighting for control of territory, which he’s had some success doing, but not lately. He’s lost, he knows it, and he’d like to stay alive. This is surrender, and it concedes to Maliki the right to do as he will to anyone who still wants to fight.

Pablo on March 30, 2008 at 11:26 AM

It ain’t over yet. His goons will continue to carry out attacks to get the coverage and with their willing associates in the media continue to wage a propaganda war that fits the template established by the western media. He isn’t looking for converts among the Iraqis but rather legitimacy from the west. He is following the pattern established by Hamas and Hezbollah and far too many on this side of the globe buy into it.
He will continue to be a thorn in the side of the Iraqis until we can finally use the word martyr in association with him. The sooner the better.

Just A Grunt on March 30, 2008 at 11:27 AM

Hmm… thinking a bit deeper on this…

Why did Iran’s Mooky handlers tell him to surrender?

The Mahdi army was getting its butt kicked, and loosing all the “face” it had… if Maliki could hand a decisive military victory to the Iraqi army, it would really help its overall stability.

So, Iran told Mooky to surrender NOW… because they are betting on a Democrat victory here in the states, followed by a pull out.

Its all about retaining followers for a fight later… and not giving the Iraqi army a tradition of victory (face it, Iraqs army has got its butt kicked since the 70s… hard to get confidence when thats your track record).

Romeo13 on March 30, 2008 at 11:32 AM

It might be a little too early to start crowing over this one.

Sadr is a gangster with Iranian backing and it isn’t beyond the realms of possibility that this is simply a Hudna. He doesn’t seem like the type to just slink back into the shadows or suddenly go legit.

Ares on March 30, 2008 at 11:41 AM

Sadr and his militia survive, he wins.

Perceptions are reality.

Iran is pulling his strings and is just waiting for the right moment. If McCain wins, they’ll try to re-ignite the chaos, destabilize the country. If Obama/Clinton wins, they’ll lay low, wait for an American withdrawal/drawdown and then strike.

They think time is on their side. They may be right.

Boy, I get behind this monitor and I’m just a friggin’ military and geopolitical genius.

Ahem.

SteveMG on March 30, 2008 at 12:04 PM

The speed at which the MSM went from ignoring Iraq to proclaiming that we were loosing was actually pretty impressive

Very easy to move fast when you do not have to verify anything as truth.

Dan Rather was unavailable for comment.

Wade on March 30, 2008 at 12:05 PM

Sadr is on the ropes. He (and the Iranians) have no other good reason for laying low now. That has the effect of making a McCain victory more likely in November. So I beleive that if he could keep fighting, he would. Something else is going on to apply pressure to him, perhaps we have effectivly cut off his supplies from Iran.

conservnut on March 30, 2008 at 12:08 PM

As long as Sadr is alive he can always pull a Frankenstein and reanimate. He needs to join his buddy Saddam in hell.

Mojave Mark on March 30, 2008 at 12:09 PM

The speed at which the MSM went from ignoring Iraq to proclaiming that we were loosing was actually pretty impressive

And Fox is no better than the rest of them on this. I just watched a report where they are spinning this as a Sadr victory.

conservnut on March 30, 2008 at 12:11 PM

As long as Sadr is alive he can always pull a Frankenstein and reanimate. He needs to join his buddy Saddam in hell.

Mojave Mark on March 30, 2008 at 12:09 PM

Yep, that guy needs a MOAB suppository

conservnut on March 30, 2008 at 12:13 PM

If Maliki is smart he will finish the dam thing and start door to door to force disarmament. Kill anyone who attempts to defend and arrest anyone who is on the list.

Strong humiliation of the Mehdi army now even at the cost of a good bit off extra fighting and blood loss will worth the effort.

C-Low on March 30, 2008 at 12:14 PM

How much is his “surrender” going to cost us in $ ?

Why did we not just bomb him when he was hiding in the mosque? they have more just use those instead.

TroubledMonkey on March 30, 2008 at 12:55 PM

If Maliki is smart he will finish the dam thing and start door to door to force disarmament. Kill anyone who attempts to defend and arrest anyone who is on the list.

Strong humiliation of the Mehdi army now even at the cost of a good bit off extra fighting and blood loss will worth the effort.

C-Low on March 30, 2008 at 12:14 PM

Exactly.

Just like that story about the WWII vet.

You’ve kicked them in the balls, now kick their teeth in.

BallisticBob on March 30, 2008 at 1:16 PM

Al-Sadr Offers Peace; Iraq Welcomes Move
Al-Sadr Offers to Stop Fighting if Government Halts Raids, Frees Prisoners; Iraq Welcomes Move.

The Iraqi government has welcomed an order by Shiite cleric Muqtada al-Sadr to pull his fighters off the streets.

Government spokesman Ali al-Dabbagh told Iraqi state TV in an interview that the decision is “positive and responsive.”

That doesn’t sound like Sadr is surrendering.

Sounds like Sadr is saying, I won’t shoot back at you if you call off your offensive against me and Maliki is saying, OK sounds good to me too.

MB4 on March 30, 2008 at 1:26 PM

Government spokesman Ali al-Dabbagh told Iraqi state TV in an interview that the decision is “positive and responsive

.”

That doesn’t sound to me like the government is agreeing to it.

If Sadr had the upper hand, wouldn’t the government jump at the offer?

And if Sadr did indeed have the upper hand, why make the offer?

This is like reading tea leaves from the across the room.

A large room at that.

SteveMG on March 30, 2008 at 1:37 PM

Calling something “positive and responsive” sounds a whole lot closer to agreement than disagreement. The offensive in Basrah was Malikis big idea, not Sadr’s, who seems to have wanted the status quo there, pre Maliki offensive.

MB4 on March 30, 2008 at 1:46 PM

Fuller statement:

Government spokesman Ali al-Dabbagh called the statement [by Sadr calling for his fighters to withdraw] “positive and responsible.” But he also warned in a telephone interview broadcast on Iraqi state TV. that security forces would continue to target those who don’t follow the order.

And:

“We expect a wide response to this call,” he said. “After this announcement, anybody who targets the government and its institutions will be regarded … as outlaws.”

Advantage Maliki?

SteveMG on March 30, 2008 at 1:56 PM

5 days of battle and Mookie is negotiating terms of surrender. Well played, Mr. Maliki.

About damned time, too, but better late than never.

Pablo on March 30, 2008 at 10:25 AM

Holy crap. I never tire of being right every f**king time, but this time I’m just speechless. I can’t even figure out when the recriminations against our sickening media should start.

Pablo, somebody, anybody? Now, or just before the election? And what about Mookie? Should Al-Maliki crush him and his supporters, or disengage?

Jaibones on March 30, 2008 at 2:04 PM

I’d still like to hear from “JetBlast”…!
Come in…”JetBlast”
Say again…say again…JetBlast…?

Our very own intel resource on the ground!

J_Gocht on March 30, 2008 at 2:08 PM

I believe Sadr has told his “fighters” to stop fighting and get off the streets, for now anyway, on the “presumption” that Malki would then give up on going after them, not that his followers would surrender or give up their weapons or withdraw from Basra or any place else.

We will see.

MB4 on March 30, 2008 at 2:10 PM

The last thing we heard from “JetBlast”…!

I’m in Basrah and work training some local Iraqis. They are all frustrated with the British pull-out because the local Iraqi police (in their words) are about as corrupt as Saddam’s police and most have sold their equipment/weapons for cash. Local civilians cannot call the police to report terrorists/insurgents for fear that the police might be militia sympathizers.
IMO, the British draw-down was a bold experiment but it has failed and we need some show of force back in the streets to curb these events ASAP. If the British won’t do it, the US should (and probably will). I just hope it’s sooner instead of later as I’d like to be around to give you guys more updates.
JetBlast on March 29, 2008 at 8:07 PM

J_Gocht on March 30, 2008 at 2:12 PM

Did our media give anyone this context? No.

The last six years in one sentance.

Seven Percent Solution on March 30, 2008 at 2:15 PM

on the “presumption” that Malki would then give up on going after them,

But that statement by the Iraqi government – given on national TV – appears to contradict that.

Again:

We expect a wide response to this call,” he said. “After this announcement, anybody who targets the government and its institutions will be regarded … as outlaws.”

If that is more than just symbolic chest puffing, it seems to me that Maliki is saying to Sadr: “This is it. No more challenges by you and your forces against us.”

Sadr’s response is to pull back or risk annihilation.

Positive spin on my part, to be sure. I’m sure that the backchannel communications are far different than the public ones.

SteveMG on March 30, 2008 at 2:17 PM

Mookie speaking from IRAN “We in Iraq should continue the struggle to remove the occupiers. I will work hard here at the Mullah semenary praying for all the dead martyrs that die trying to make me Mahdi of Iraqi because of my coolness under fire”

William Amos on March 30, 2008 at 2:18 PM

“Those who were deceived into carrying weapons must deliver themselves and make a written pledge to promise they will not repeat such action within 72 hours, otherwise, they will face the most severe penalties.”
- Nouri al-Maliki (March 26, 2008)

MB4 on March 30, 2008 at 2:24 PM

“After this announcement, anybody who targets the government and its institutions will be regarded … as outlaws.”

Isn’t that suppose to have been the policy all along?

MB4 on March 30, 2008 at 2:27 PM

Isn’t that suppose to have been the policy all along?

Don’t know. One thing to say it; another to implement it.

Curious that the government (apparently) hasn’t agreed to any ceasefire. We read about Sadr pulling his fighters back; but nothing from the government on not going after them or ceasing operations.

Sadr’s strategy may be to just survive and claim victory. Maliki knows this and is pressing the issue further.

Complete, total speculation. I’m good at it.

SteveMG on March 30, 2008 at 2:31 PM

MB4 on March 30, 2008 at 2:24 PM

Maliki has no stones. He went down like a rabbit in heat when Sadr made him an offer he couldn’t refuse…!

J_Gocht on March 30, 2008 at 2:32 PM

Really will all come down to whose boots are on the ground in town.

If Al-Maliki holds those towns, and reasserts control? He’s the winner here.

If he backs out of town, Iran/Mooky wins…

It’d be really interesting to know if the battle is still going on.

Romeo13 on March 30, 2008 at 2:36 PM

Maliki has no stones. He went down like a rabbit in heat when Sadr made him an offer he couldn’t refuse…!

J_Gocht on March 30, 2008 at 2:32 PM

Lets see… Mooky says to his fighters stand down, and we’ll get you immunity from past deeds…

Al Mal spokesman says, good offer… because everyone carrying arms will be treated as the bandits they are…

How is this backing down? Its only backing down if Al Mal stops taking back control of those cities.

Romeo13 on March 30, 2008 at 2:39 PM

I must be getting used to the narrative arc of the MSM; I didn’t even read the gloom and doom stories and just waited for the news of Mookie’s defeat.

PattyJ on March 30, 2008 at 2:42 PM

Mookie still needs to end up in the crosshairs of an Army Ranger wielding a Barrett .50 caliber sniper rifle at 100 meters.

Virus-X on March 30, 2008 at 2:43 PM

No piedras and down like a conejo!

al-Maliki accepted Sadr’s terms.
Get it Romeo13…?

J_Gocht on March 30, 2008 at 2:47 PM

al-Maliki accepted Sadr’s terms

He did? The government agreed to pull back?

Government spokesman Ali al-Dabbagh told FOX News that the decision [by Sadr to pull back his fighters] is “positive and responsive.”
Al-Dabbagh said the move would “help the government confront those who are violating the law” and that it would help to “isolate those who are trying to destroy the government effort”.
He said Iraqi security operations in Basra would not end until the “criminal elements” operating there are removed.

SteveMG on March 30, 2008 at 2:52 PM

This is from “Roads to Iraq”. Is it true? Dunno. If it is, Maliki blinked big time.

Sadrists and Iraqi government reached an agreement in Basra…update…Mahdi Army keeps the arms

MB4 on March 30, 2008 at 2:57 PM

Its only backing down if Al Mal stops taking back control of those cities.

Romeo13 on March 30, 2008 at 2:39 PM

Yup.

MB4 on March 30, 2008 at 3:00 PM

al-Maliki accepted Sadr’s terms. Get it Romeo13…?

J_Gocht on March 30, 2008 at 2:47 PM

Citation? Cause I sure don’t see that said by Al Mal anywhere… are you clairvoyant?

Have they stopped the Op?
Have they released all the prisoners?

Interesting, cause the latest Yahoo story says..

“Scattered firing could be heard in central Baghdad hours after al-Sadr’s statement was released, and rockets or mortars were fired toward the U.S.-protected Green Zone.”

Romeo13 on March 30, 2008 at 3:04 PM

MB4 on March 30, 2008 at 2:57 PM

Interesting, is the site credible? Or is this Sadr’s propoganda machine?

Romeo13 on March 30, 2008 at 3:08 PM

What Al-Dabbagh said; was for your consumption, SteveMG on March 30, 2008 at 2:52 PM

What Sadr is allowing Maliki to do; is get his troops out from between a rock and a hard place!

Has the sun come up yet?

Check out!

MB4 on March 30, 2008 at 2:57 PM

J_Gocht on March 30, 2008 at 3:09 PM

Really will all come down to whose boots are on the ground in town.

If Al-Maliki holds those towns, and reasserts control? He’s the winner here.

If he backs out of town, Iran/Mooky wins…

Romeo13 on March 30, 2008 at 2:36 PM

Excellent way to gage it. We may know before that much longer.

MB4 on March 30, 2008 at 3:10 PM

MB4 on March 30, 2008 at 2:57 PM

Interesting… Links below the story go straight to the Daily Kos…

I’ll wait for a few more sources I think…

Romeo13 on March 30, 2008 at 3:11 PM

Interesting, is the site credible? Or is this Sadr’s propoganda machine?

Romeo13 on March 30, 2008 at 3:08 PM

Credible? Dunno.

Sadr’s propaganda machine? Could be. Doubt that though.

MB4 on March 30, 2008 at 3:12 PM

What Al-Dabbagh said; was for your consumption,

He said operations would continue despite the withdrawal by Sadr’s fighters.

According to all the news reports today, no ceasefire has occurred. Additionally, some fighting has reportedly been taking place.

If you can find reports that a ceasefire has occurred, you may have a point.

Otherwise, all evidence I’ve seen buttresses his statement that operations will continue.

SteveMG on March 30, 2008 at 3:14 PM

Interesting… Links below the story go straight to the Daily Kos…

I’ll wait for a few more sources I think…

Romeo13 on March 30, 2008 at 3:11 PM

it also goes “straight” to Hotair now

MB4 on March 30, 2008 at 3:19 PM

“…If you can find reports that a ceasefire has occurred, you may have a point.
Otherwise, all evidence I’ve seen buttresses his statement that operations will continue.
SteveMG on March 30, 2008 at 3:14 PM”

Your right SteveMG, the fighting continues!
http://warnewstoday.blogspot.com/2008/03/news-of-day-for-sunday-march-30-2008.html

J_Gocht on March 30, 2008 at 3:23 PM

DEBKA’s “take”

MB4 on March 30, 2008 at 3:28 PM

Your right SteveMG, the fighting continues!

You do notice that no date is/was given on that picture?

Day 1? 2? Today?

Look, all of us are speculating on vague, sketchy reports.

SteveMG on March 30, 2008 at 3:29 PM

Debka is normally a very reliable source for O&I.
http://debka.com/

J_Gocht on March 30, 2008 at 3:38 PM

You do notice that no date is/was given on that picture?

Day 1? 2? Today?

Look, all of us are speculating on vague, sketchy reports.

SteveMG on March 30, 2008 at 3:29 PM

Especially from a site that has the following at the top of its page:

Contrary to how President George W. Bush has tried to justify the Iraq war in the past, he has now . . . admitted that the invasion and occupation of Iraq was aimed primarily at seizing predominant influence over its oil by establishing permanent . . . military bases. He made this transparently clear by adding a signing statement to the defense appropriation bill, indicating that he would not be bound by the law’s prohibition against expending funds: “(1) To establish any military installation or base for the purpose of providing for the permanent stationing of United States Armed Forces in Iraq,” or “(2) To exercise United States control of the oil resources of Iraq.” — Ray McGovern

It also features a little info box informing us that “Number of Iraqi deaths due to U.S. Invasion: 1,194,935″.

So sources like this is what J_Gocht seeks out as ‘credible’. Explains a lot.

I’m waiting for this to all shake out. Right now there’s no way to know what’s really going on for sure. For the Iraqi people’s sakes, I hope Maliki actually is cracking down on mookie’s minions.

techno_barbarian on March 30, 2008 at 3:39 PM

Deja Vu anyone? Fat boy did the same thing in 2004.
How about we agree to his terms and accidentially drop a daisy cutter on the bearded lard butt?

RobCon on March 30, 2008 at 3:42 PM

Look, all of us are speculating on vague, sketchy reports.

SteveMG on March 30, 2008 at 3:29 PM

Can’t argue with that too much, although some reports are fairly specific, but are they that reliable?.

MB4 on March 30, 2008 at 3:47 PM

Here’s a Iraqi source I’ve long come to respect. It’s Iraq The Model.

From today’s post:

Iran, on the other hand and as we predicted yesterday, chose not to endorse Sadr’s position and did nothing more than issue a call through Ahmed Jannati, chief of the Guardians Council, for negotiations between Sadr and the government to resolve the crisis.

On the field, as fighting spread to include Karbala province, Sadrists rejected Maliki’s call to lay down their weapons and said they’d do that only surrender their weapons to a government that “fights the occupation”. Putting such an unrealistic condition is synonymous to “we will never lay down our weapons”. This defiance is logical from their perspective that is based on force and in order to justify the use of force they need to find a pretext—and what’s better than claiming to be fighting for the cause of national liberation!?

techno_barbarian on March 30, 2008 at 3:48 PM

The reason we hold truth in such respect is because we have so little opportunity to get familiar with it.

There have been innumerable temporary Seekers after the Truth–have you ever heard of a permanent one?

We are always hearing of people who are around seeking after the Truth. I have never seen a permanent specimen. I think he has never lived. But I have seen several entirely sincere people who thought they were permanent Seekers after the Truth. They sought diligently, persistently, carefully, cautiously, profoundly, with perfect honesty and nicely adjusted judgment- until they believed that without doubt or question they had found the Truth.

That was the end of the search. The man spent the rest of his hunting up shingles wherewith to protect his Truth from the weather.
- Mark Twain

MB4 on March 30, 2008 at 3:50 PM

As I have stated before, t_b…

”If you don’t like the editorial commentary read it for the “SitReps” only.

If you can stand the TRUTH…?

J_Gocht on March 30, 2008 at 3:53 PM

If you don’t like the editorial commentary read it for the “SitReps” only.

Because the clearly radical editorial views of the operators doesn’t influence their selection of “sitreps”?

Sorry, I was born on a Monday but I wasn’t born last Monday.

SteveMG on March 30, 2008 at 3:58 PM

If you can stand the TRUTH…?

J_Gocht on March 30, 2008 at 3:53 PM

See MB4′s post directly above. And have a great day!

techno_barbarian on March 30, 2008 at 3:59 PM

According to Thatcher’s Home Secretary, this thing may be very personal to Al-Maliki. He indicates that a couple of the recent rockets into the green zone landed in the prime minister’s compound (see link).

http://www.washingtontimes.com/article/20080330/COMMENTARY/788217470/1012/commentary

burt on March 30, 2008 at 4:13 PM

As political animals we all have our druthers. We may subscribe to a particular pamphlet or page because we agree with its’ editorial slant, or not!

We may actually subscribe for exactly a contrarian point of view to allow for honest debate within our own mind’s eye.

That being said; we expect the actual reported news [Situation Reports] to be accurate and defensible from second and third sources.
My thought is that the actual news the “SitReps” on http://warnewstoday.blogspot.com/ can be second sourced if you wish to expend the time and mental energy.

Recently the daily reports from Iraq in MSM have been rather thin. That does not mean our American troopers, Iraqi troops and civilians haven’t been continually killed and horribly maimed and wounded on a daily basis.

President Bush’s policy is to; not allow the flag draped coffins of our fallen hero’s to be photographed at Dover Air Base on their return from Iraq. This to me is truly the final nail in their coffins.

Think about it!

J_Gocht on March 30, 2008 at 4:29 PM

President Bush’s policy is to; not allow the flag draped coffins of our fallen hero’s to be photographed at Dover Air Base on their return from Iraq. This to me is truly the final nail in their coffins.

Think about it!

J_Gocht on March 30, 2008 at 4:29 PM

This is not Bush’s policy, this is the policy of the Armed Forces, and has been the policy for quite a few years (ie prior to Bush).

As an X service member myself, the last thing we want is our dead brother’s being politicized, by ANYONE.

Romeo13 on March 30, 2008 at 4:37 PM

Observations: Domestically, the Democrats are fully vested in defeat, the more bad news and dead Americans the better! While this is nothing new, the lack of any statement by Obama or Hillary which voiced support and confidence in the Iraqi government and its military to prevail in this battle was extremely telling. (if they did voice support I couldn’t find it anywhere)

The speed at which the MSM went from ignoring Iraq to proclaiming that we were loosing was actually pretty impressive see above!
Amazing photos from AFP on either LGF or Jawa, a professionally staged photo shoot for the newest release of Brave Mahdi Fighters trading cards.
Sadr and Iran; the Iranians continue to build their sphere of influence with Shiite blood spilled in the battle against the Great Satan. The Mahdi are nothing more than Iraq’s Hezbollah. Maliki as a Shiite cannot afford to keep killing members of his sect without running the risk of being branded an instrument of the United States crusader agenda.

dmann on March 30, 2008 at 4:48 PM

This is not Bush’s policy, this is the policy of the Armed Forces, and has been the policy for quite a few years (ie prior to Bush).
As an X service member myself, the last thing we want is our dead brother’s being politicized, by ANYONE.
Romeo13 on March 30, 2008 at 4:37 PM

Romeo13, you’re saying that President Clinton didn’t allow the coffins of the Rangers from Somalia and “those killed” in the extended air war against Serbia to be photographed?

Tell me now and tell me true Romeo13…You would not want to be recognized for posterity as one who had fallen bravely for your country under our glorious flag?

As for being politicized…Had I fallen in Vietnam; I would have been proud to have had my dead cold corpse displayed for all to see beneath the flag for which I fought!

Politics can certainly make some olde soldiers delusional… Bravo13?

J_Gocht on March 30, 2008 at 5:09 PM

President Bush’s policy is to; not allow the flag draped coffins of our fallen hero’s to be photographed at Dover Air Base on their return from Iraq. This to me is truly the final nail in their coffins.

Think about it!

J_Gocht on March 30, 2008 at 4:29 PM

If you don’t see the coffins, it makes it more just like a video game rather than reality.

MB4 on March 30, 2008 at 5:12 PM

BTW: Romeo13…President Bush is the CIC. No matter what it’s his policy. “As an X service member myself” I can’t believe you weren’t aware of that?

This is not Bush’s policy, this is the policy of the Armed Forces, and has been the policy for quite a few years (ie prior to Bush).
As an X service member myself, the last thing we want is our dead brother’s being politicized, by ANYONE.
Romeo13 on March 30, 2008 at 4:37 PM

J_Gocht on March 30, 2008 at 5:19 PM

It’s all Muslim to me….

BL@KBIRD on March 30, 2008 at 5:24 PM

Comment pages: 1 2