8a246f2890c19056d745…

Clark1, I think you have it.

The Brits are not staying because “Sadr won” – they are staying to make sure that their shifting out doesn’t appear to be fleeing – they got stung bad enough in the Basra/Shatt al-Arab area already… Once they hand off to the IA and US, they can continue to shift from Iraq to Afghanistan.

Anyways, I’ll be around to see the end result…

They worked it out between themselves with a “little” U.S. help. Hopefully soon they work it out without any U.S. help.

A free and independent Iraq that fends for it’s self is the objective. This was a minor step in that direction. What they agreed on is not the point, they agreed is the point. That is progress for the Iraqi government and I for one am darn glad to see it.

Besides, the Iraqi government couldn’t wipe them all out without being compared to Saddam Hussien. This was a victory for the Iraqi government, and from my vantage point, their second, the first being the decision to make a stand in the Basra area.

But remember: Sunnis would never help Shi’as and vice versa.
SteveMG on April 1, 2008 at 7:43 PM

How’s it go…NOW?

Even though you are my enemy….
And my enemy is your enemy…
…and I hate my enemy more than I hate your…enemy.
Even thou your enemy is my enemy…!
My thought would be…

KICK ARSSE and TAKE NAMES!

HUH?

J_Gocht on April 1, 2008 at 9:16 PM

“No, I read the report when it came out. Kinda’ significant report, no?”

Yes.

Interesting, are you an historical author or paid for your thought or research?

“To be blunt, I’m not sure what your point is. I think you took a shot at McCain for thinking that the Iranian Shia’s (Shiites, say sect w/different spelling) would assist the Sunni al-Qaeda.”

You got me. I was shooting verbally,euphemistically at Saint Mc!

“My point is that while the evidence of that today is mixed that it shouldn’t surprise anyone that they would do so since they’ve done it in the past.”

I agree.

“Anyway, re Basra: It sure looks like a victory for Sadr and a defeat for Maliki. But the final chapter hasn’t been written.
SteveMG on April 1, 2008 at 8:12 PM”

Lessons learned… almost half a century ago in Vietnam.

I’m impressed! Either you’re one, very voracious reader… or you have one hell of a research team watching your back

!

No, I read the report when it came out. Kinda’ significant report, no?

To be blunt, I’m not sure what your point is. I think you took a shot at McCain for thinking that the Iranian Shia’s (Shiites, say sect w/different spelling) would assist the Sunni al-Qaeda.

My point is that while the evidence of that today is mixed that it shouldn’t surprise anyone that they would do so since they’ve done it in the past.

Anyway, re Basra: It sure looks like a victory for Sadr and a defeat for Maliki. But the final chapter hasn’t been written.

“http://govinfo.library.unt.edu/911/report/911Report_Ch7.htm
But remember: Sunnis would never help Shi’as and vice versa.
SteveMG on April 1, 2008 at 7:43 PM”

I’m impressed! Either you’re one, very voracious reader… or you have one hell of a research team watching your back!

My thought is, we may be at logger heads with respect to terms…Your Shi’as maybe my Shiites?

I continue to admire your initial thought!

“Hmm, it’s fair to observe that the British would not pause their drawdown from Basra had this been a defeat for Sadr….”

As we mentioned in chapter 2, while in Sudan, senior managers in al Qaeda maintained contacts with Iran and the Iranian-supported worldwide terrorist organization Hezbollah, which is based mainly in southern Lebanon and Beirut. Al Qaeda members received advice and training from Hezbollah.

Intelligence indicates the persistence of contacts between Iranian security officials and senior al Qaeda figures after Bin Ladin’s return to Afghanistan. Khallad has said that Iran made a concerted effort to strengthen relations with al Qaeda after the October 2000 attack on the USS Cole, but was rebuffed because Bin Ladin did not want to alienate his supporters in Saudi Arabia. Khallad and other detainees have described the willingness of Iranian officials to facilitate the travel of al Qaeda members through Iran, on their way to and from Afghanistan. For example, Iranian border inspectors would be told not to place telltale stamps in the passports of these travelers. Such arrangements were particularly beneficial to Saudi members of al Qaeda.120

http://govinfo.library.unt.edu/911/report/911Report_Ch7.htm

But remember: Sunnis would never help Shi’as and vice versa.

SteveMG are you and Saint Mc cousins

?

Right, because once you’re a Shi’a or Sunni you’d never help the other sect out in a fight or struggle.

Oy, this is kindergarten thinking.

Hmm, it’s fair to observe that the British would not pause their drawdown from Basra had this been a defeat for Sadr…

Good thinkin’, Steveo!

Sadr and his forces will not be defeated in one battle or in several days (or even weeks). We’ve had to spend so much time and attention against al-Qaeda that we neglected (not the right word but I can’t think of a better one) the Shi’a thuggery in the South…
SteveMG on April 1, 2008 at 4:51 PM

SteveMG are you and Saint Mc cousins?

It’s Shiite in the south. Sunni generally around Baghdad and al Qaeda [Sunni] being trained in Iran which is [Shiite]; according to Saint Mc.

Here’s a map that might help you both?
Will you continue to repeat it four times after being corrected by Holy Joe once, like Saint Mc?
http://www.lib.utexas.edu/maps/middle_east_and_asia/iraq_ethno_2003.jpg

As I’ve said before… give it a week and see who has boots on the ground in these cities.
We have very conflicting reports hitting the MSM… none of which seem to be talking to either the US or Iraqi Armys…
Romeo13 on April 1, 2008 at 2:58 PM

The forces at play in the Middle east are truly convoluted. I’m waiting for someone to come on here (and they will) and explain this in simple terms so that even I can understand them.
TooTall on April 1, 2008 at 6:09 PM

Darn, where are Yon, Totten and Roggio?
At least “Mike” could give us an objective… “boots on the ground “report!

He does get out of the “Green Zone” doesn’t he?

Oh silly me!

BANG!!!

Thank you.

Sadr and his forces will not be defeated in one battle or in several days (or even weeks). We’ve had to spend so much time and attention against al-Qaeda that we neglected (not the right word but I can’t think of a better one) the Shi’a thuggery in the South.

Going to be interesting to see how Iran tries to influence our elections.

for the “total defeat” spin, try Time (“How Moqtada al-Sadr Won in Basra”), which notes that the outcome does at least prove that Sadr still holds sway over most of the JAM

And who holds sway over Sadr? See above.

Defeat. Arrest the chubby guy with BO (that would be Sadr.

RobCon on April 1, 2008 at 2:53 PM

Can’t. He’s in Iran.

mjk on April 1, 2008 at 3:20 PM

You’re right, it is hudna, thank you! :-)

It’s all about the local sympathies. When the Sunnis turned against AQI, they were ratted out of every safehouse and bomb factory across Iraq. From what I read, JAM wasn’t popular with the Shi’ites after turning into a mafia protection and intimidation racket. If the central gov’t comes in and provides better security and less corruption, the locales won’t be any too happy to see a return of JAM.