Start of Civil War? Attacks Across Iraq!

[Cruddy]

Originally posted by MichaeltheGreat

No wonder the UK has declined from being a major world power to being the lapdog of one.

Anyone else notice what is wrong with this statement?

Like, swap "the" for "a"?

And I'm not sorry it happened. Better a small power that cares for its people than THE world power that treats its poor as expendable.

On topic; last I heard (couple of hours ago) "US forces were battling to retake control of Kut and Najaf".

It's funny how they were never reported as lost in the first place.


[COLOR=blue]* Cruddy goes away to let his temper cool

[Eli]

It's funny how they were never reported as lost in the first place.

They did. See my post in this thread on the 08-04-2004 13:05 (GMT +2) :

Originally posted by Eli
BAGHDAD, April 8 (Reuters) - U.S.-led coalition forces do
not have control of the cities of Najaf and Kut, where Shi'ite
militiamen have seized control of key buildings in the centre of
the towns, the top U.S. general in Iraq said on Thursday.
Lieutenant-General Ricardo Sanchez said coalition troops in
the cities -- who include Ukrainian and Spanish soldiers -- were
in their bases on the edge of the towns.

[MOBIUS]

Originally posted by Chemical Ollie
Michael, you said yourself some days ago that "War is political and strategical, battle is tactical", and I agree. But don't you think that bombing a Mosque fits perfectly into that wisdom? Winning one battle by acting like *******s can make you lose the whole war, politically.

The mission must not be to "kill the enemy at any cost" but to "liberate Iraq", right?.

People like Arrian, MtG etc comment on my contemptous attitude and yet here is MtG performing an unashamed volte-face...

[DinoDoc]

Well you have to admit it does seem like you get hard everytime something bad happens.

[Cruddy]

Thanks Eli. But that little nuggest hasn't been reported on the BBC broadcasts I've heard.

It's a minor point... but again, thank you.

[MichaeltheGreat]

Originally posted by Chemical Ollie
Michael, you said yourself some days ago that "War is political and strategical, battle is tactical", and I agree. But don't you think that bombing a Mosque fits perfectly into that wisdom? Winning one battle by acting like *******s can make you lose the whole war, politically.

Two totally different situations. There are mosques and there are mosques. It's not like we systematically demolished the main one in Najaf to get Sadr. It's not like we systematically have non-Muslims enterning mosques by force to search them. It's not like we are destroying them on a regular basis to retaliate for them being used as bases for attack in the past.

Arab leaders, including Hussein, have historically shown little or no regard for the sanctity of mosques, and Sadr's followers assassinated an Ayatollah on the steps of one last year. The people and religious leaders sure as hell don't prevent either secular or jihadi fighters from profaning mosques by using them to store materiel or to fight from.

Despite a little venting in the street, and the efforts of arab propagandists, most Iraqis are not going to change their fundamental interests or positions one way or the other. The Saddamites in Fallujah have nothing to gain from the end of the Saddam regime, so they're going to be implacably opposed to us regardless, until we render them impotent to resist. Sadr's and Sistani's followers, the Kurds, and other Shiite and Sunni and secular groups all have their own interests and agendas, and in the long term, the occasional bomb in a mosque compound being actively used as a fighting and support position isn't going to rock the boat.

That's 180 degrees different from Tet, when the US had been making all these "hearts and minds" bull**** claims and talking about huge defeats inflicted on the VC and pacification, blah blah blah, then suddenly there are coordinated VC operations all up and down the country.

The mission must not be to "kill the enemy at any cost" but to "liberate Iraq", right?.

All you guys who seem to think the US is engaged in killing at any cost haven't seen US forces engage an enemy to our full capability.

[MichaeltheGreat]

Originally posted by Cruddy


Anyone else notice what is wrong with this statement?

I thought EST's troll at the end of his post, and MOBY's usual spin deserved a little "in-kind" treatment.

[MichaeltheGreat]

Originally posted by MOBIUS


People like Arrian, MtG etc comment on my contemptous attitude and yet here is MtG performing an unashamed volte-face...

Not at all - read my reply to Ollie. There are distinct issues between the two situations.

[Agathon]

Originally posted by Ogie Oglethorpe


You know you have too many of these analogies that just scream personal first hand experience.

Just because you're a sissy virgin.

[Ramo]

A flyer attributed to Sadr has called for an end to violence:

http://www.back-to-iraq.com/archives/000733.php

To Iman Mahdi, the officers of Hawza and the followers of Muqtada al-Sadr and all Muslims.

Previously, we had requested the exit of all American occupation forces from our country and the establishment of an Islamic country. But after the aggression on us by the American Zionist forces, we asked for the release of Sheikh Yacoubi and the restoration of the license four our newspaper. They (AF) confronted us with fire and an uncivilized reply. A lot of our Sunni and Shi’a sons and brothers have been martyred. We have been informed that a bad group of people interfered in your groups and are making conflicts between our groups. They tried to steal stuff from the government offices and banks of the country. They shut the doors of the universities and schools in order to badly affect the image of Islam and Muslims and the Al Mahdi Army.

We do not fear the American Army forces and the statements of Bremer and Kimmitt. After interventions from a number of religious leaders, Iraqi figures and heads of the tribes, we (the office of sayed Muqtada al-Sadr) have decided to stop the military confrontation and demonstrations; not to make trouble for the innocent people; not to invade anything which is prohibited by religion; and to catch the bad elements mentioned and get them to the Hawza offices.

We are still asking and requesting the release of all detained people and to reopen our newspaper (the al-Hawza newspaper). We will remain peacefully inside the mosque of Al Kufa after the prayer of Jumma on Friday (the 19th of Safar, year 1425 of the Islamic calendar). All other Believers and brothers in all Governorates should prepare themselves to do the same to prevent the enemies of Islam from interfering or entering our group.

Holy Najaf
Muqtada al-Sadr

17th of Safar year 1425 sealed with the seal of the office of the sayed, the martyr

Though, the Shia insurrection may no longer be under his control.

[MichaeltheGreat]

Originally posted by Ramo
A flyer attributed to Sadr has called for an end to violence:

http://www.back-to-iraq.com/archives/000733.php

Though, the Shia insurrection may no longer be under his control.

Start the ****, lose control of it, then play peacemaker.



At least this ******* has style and a sense of humor.

[GePap]

Well, no idea whether control is lost, but it makes some sense-act up, show that the current Iraqi leaders are weak and have no real base, make the western leaders of the occupation nervous, but try to avoid the full wrath of the occupation armies...

[Arrian]

That's a possibility, GePap. The other is that he didn't actually expect the crackdown, and didn't like it when it came.

Anyway, it may be the guy doesn't really want to be a martyr after all, but rather to raise his profile so that he's dealt in to the new power structure (whatever that ends up being) after the US turns the country over to the new government.

Here's hoping he doesn't make it.

-Arrian

[Arrian]

Originally posted by MichaeltheGreat


I thought EST's troll at the end of his post, and MOBY's usual spin deserved a little "in-kind" treatment.

Tsk, tsk. Better to point 'em out and leave it at that, then to respond and stoop down. But that's just my opinion.

-Arrian

[DinoDoc]

Originally posted by Arrian
Anyway, it may be the guy doesn't really want to be a martyr after all, but rather to raise his profile so that he's dealt in to the new power structure (whatever that ends up being) after the US turns the country over to the new government.

Considering the fact that he lacks the credentials according to Shiite law to assume political leadership, that is a definate possibility.