19 Protestors Killed by Coalition Soldiers in Najaf

[lord of the mark]

"It is frankly odd that the CPA is pursuing this case at this time, and one suspects that it is an attempt to weaken Muqtada's organization before they return sovereignty to the Iraqis and move to elections (Muqtada's forces could well be a pivotal group in parliament)."

It is at least 10 months before any elections are to be held, and the Mehdi army doesnt seem to be very interested in elections.

[The Mad Viking]

Originally posted by lord of the mark
I of course, NEVER said that all Iraqi Shiites were Americas friends. Do i really need to go back and quote my own post.

No you didn't say they were America's friends. :

I'll quote it for you, I still find it amusing.

Among the Shiites a minority hate us, most mistrust
us, and a considerable minority like us.

So this protest was the minor minority of the Shia.

Among the Kurds most like us.

Sure. Like a jackal "likes" a lion.

The number who hate us was reasonably easy to predict.

Indeed. 100%.

The problem is sorting out the ones who hate you but will collaborate completely from the ones who hate you but only collaborate when it suits them.

Also tough is deciding which ones who hate you and refuse to collaborate will simply ignore you, and which ones who hate you and refuse to collaborate will kill you when they get the chance.

Where the admin got it wrong was in the number who mistrust us, rather than like us, principally among the Shia.

Where the admin got it wrong was that all of them hate you and mistrust you.

The explanation of course is that Moqtad al Sadr, who has been hostile to the Coalition since the occupation started, is going for broke. The Coalition arrested on of his aides for the murder of Grand Ayatollah Al Khoei. Khoei was killed at the beginning of the occupation.. Evidently he WAS seen as a friend of the coalition, and so was eliminated by violence. Apparently, with the transition to Iraqi sovereignty coming, the coalition decided to go after Al Sadr. Presumably with a close aide arrested, Al Sadr deduced he would be next on the list, and decided to strike while he was strong.

One hopes the Coalition was wise enough to realize that Al Sadr would strike when Yacoubi was arrested, and is prepared. If not, such unpreparedness would be criminally negligent.

What is not clear is whether Al Sadr is ready for a fight to the death, or intends to negotiate. Gr, Ayatollah Sistani has called for "calm and negotiations". Bremer certainly doesnt want to let Al Sadr get away again, but there may be pressure from SCIRI, Dawa, and Sistani not to arrest Al Sadr. Expect some complex politics ahead.

Well we can certainly agree on the last sentence. However, you cannot expect America (or the UN) to ever figure out the local politics. Let alone figure it out in the next few months...

[Dinner]

Originally posted by chegitz guevara
Spain hasn't been occupying Iraq for fifty years now and doing things like this on a regular basis, has it? I do think, however, that the Spanish troops there should be court-martialed.

Che: neither of us was there nor do we have a full account of what happened. Everyone should withhold judgement until all the facts are known.

However my gut tells me the Spanish soldiers did the right thing. We'll have to wait to know for sure.

[Az]

Che:

Spain hasn't been occupying Iraq for fifty years now and doing things like this on a regular basis, has it?

fifty years? I thought the palestinians wanted only the 67' territories...

A point about your "Apartheid" , Azazel The mayor of Melilla since 1999 to 2002 was Mustafa Aberchán, a muslim of moroccan origin.

Israel has many arab government officials as well, appointed, and elected. That never bothered anyone yelling "Apartheid".

A resume in inverse chronological order:

Ceuta: Today Spanish - before Portugesse - before independent state city (Taifa kingdom) - before part of the Al-andalus caliphate (muslim Spain and Portugal) - before dependent from Umeyyas in Damascus (like muslim iberian territories were) - before part of visigotic Hispania- before Roman - before Carthaginian - before phoenician - before we dont know.

Melilla: Today Spanish - before part of Granada Kingdom - before part of Al-andalus caliphate - before dependent from Damascus - before visigotic - before Roman - before carthaginian - begore greek - before phoenician - before we dont know.

Neither Ceuta nor Melilla had never nothing to do with the Fez Sultanate (if you want to take it how a possible seed for the present-day Moroccan state)

This is the reason because when Morocco became independent from Spain and France in 1957 Ceuta and Melilla were no returned. There were nothing to be "returned". The only reason for any possible demand today would be "geographical". Even that is a very poor reason. Ceuta is only at 14 km from peninsular Spain. There is no more relation between Morocco and Ceuta/Melilla than, for instance, with Sevilla, Madrid or Santiago de Compostela.

About the people living AROUND Ceuta and Melilla, in moroccan territory, well, it is the Rif region. I have been there many times (i have some friends there). They dont like to be part of Morocco. In fact they are the poorest region of Morocco, they are very bad trated by the Moroccan state, like second level citizens. They would like to be independent. Historically they never had relation with the Fez Sultanate, being independient. They are so poor that the only possibility of survival for them is the cultivation of hashish or to emigrate to Spain, many dying in the travel on the Gibralatar Straight (of course moroccan autorithies do nothing to avoid it, because they are part of the ilegal inmigration maffia and because It seems they want to bomb spanish coasts with cadavers)

In fact, recently moroccan monarchy invented some nonsense demands about Ceuta and Melilla to distract his people from his own desperate situation. However they have no been very successful, most moroccans dont give a damn about Ceuta and Melilla. They are too bussy trying to survive. But if somebody want to follow the game of an antidemocratic, corrupt and absolutist petty monarch who considere himself a semi-god and that treates "his people" like if they were s***, is his problem no mine.

So what? There never even was a palestinian state, so speaking of a connection of the places where the colonies are to the palestinian people is meaningless. Does that mean that any claim to the Israeli settlements is unjustified? and ironically, the fact that there is a local majority for opposing the control by Morocco, is also irrelevant. There are palestinians who want to be part of Jordan, that doesn't mean that anyone bothers with them, on the international arena.

The nature of the regime in Morocco is also irrelevant. Do you think that Palestinians don't deserve a state just because Arafat is a dictator?

[Tripledoc]

So every time the coalition guns down civilians, that will strengthen Israels claim to Palestnian land?

[lord of the mark]

Originally posted by The Mad Viking


No you didn't say they were America's friends. :

I'll quote it for you, I still find it amusing.

Among the Shiites a minority hate us, most mistrust
us, and a considerable minority like us.

So this protest was the minor minority of the Shia.

Among the Kurds most like us.

Sure. Like a jackal "likes" a lion.

[

WRT Shia: the followers of Sadr, according to Paul Wood of the BBC, make up at most about 15% of the total population, which would be about one quarter of the Shiite population. Thats a substantial minority, not a minor one, but a minority nonetheless. Id day about one quarter of the shia hate us, about half mistrust us, and about one quarter see a strong and long term matching of their interests with ours.

Wrt: the kurds. Your charecterization of a people who have been denied political rights for generations, who have been the victims of genocide, who want to build a secular, democratic society as "jackals" is speaks for itself.

[Defiant]

Originally posted by Tripledoc
So every time the coalition guns down civilians, that will strengthen Israels claim to Palestnian land?

http://www.usatoday.com/news/world/iraq/2004-04-05-rioting_x.htm

There is look at your civilians, now what do you call them?

[Tripledoc]

LotM.

Historically, NATO (the Lion) has had no qualms in training Turkish deathsquads (the Gray Wolves, literally), in hunting down the Kurdish "jackals."

[Tripledoc]

Originally posted by Defiant
There is look at your civilians, now what do you call them?

Well, I think it was Azazel who named them "civilians" at some point, so excuse me.

But how are these men any less "civilian", than the "private contractors"?

[Defiant]

Originally posted by Tripledoc


Well, I think it was Azazel who named them "civilians" at some point, so excuse me.

But how are these men any less "civilian", than the "private contractors"?

Private contractors, to my knowledge are not killing and mutilating bodies. Now if you are conceding that this is still a war then we have the right to fire at will on these "civilians".

[lord of the mark]

Originally posted by Tripledoc
LotM.

Historically, NATO (the Lion) has had no qualms in training Turkish deathsquads (the Gray Wolves, literally), in hunting down the Kurdish "jackals."

I dont identify the entire Kurdish people with the PKK. IF MV was referring to any particular Kurdish organization when he called the Kurds jackels, he should have named it. I dont think he knows enough about the Kurds in Iraq or elsewhere to have done so. Like far too many on both sides of the debate he is using a priori reasoning, rather than empirical facts.

[Tripledoc]

Originally posted by Defiant


Private contractors, to my knowledge are not killing and mutilating bodies. Now if you are conceding that this is still a war then we have the right to fire at will on these "civilians".

No, insurgent gurillas do the actual killing, civilians do the mutilation, and take the punishment.

[lord of the mark]

Originally posted by Tripledoc


No, insurgent gurillas do the actual killing, civilians do the mutilation, and take the punishment.

what civilians in fallujah have been punished thus far???

[Defiant]

Originally posted by Tripledoc


No, insurgent gurillas do the actual killing, civilians do the mutilation, and take the punishment.

I don't believe the insurgents did the killing, not what from I saw in the aftermath, if they are going to sit there and gloat, they sure can commit the attack. No insurgents here, it was the good ole'civilians.

[Tripledoc]

Originally posted by lord of the mark
what civilians in fallujah have been punished thus far???

As far as I understand the battle of Falluja is in full progress as I write this.