Quoted: It's not clear to me what the DEFINTION of "winning" is in Iraq any longer, other than vague feel-good bullshit.

It is very simple:

Winning will be crushing the insurgency, producing a strong and united Iraqi government that can stand up against any future insurgency that would be sponsored by Iran or other players, and creating a stable society in Iraq that will prosper.

The problem is that no matter how good a job our troops do, none of that can be accomplished without the Iraqi people going for the same thing. Some of them are fighting to the death to make it happen.

Some of them are fighting to stop it because they want power for themselves (Al Sadr, etc...)

Still others are caught in the middle. They are unsure about the US because idiots here keep blabbing about how we need to just quit and go home, and don't want to be left holding the bag AGAIN if the US leaves. Thus they are hedghing their bets by congregating with people like Al Sadr because he might be the devil, but it is better to be friends with the devil down the street than with the angel who can leave at any moment. The devil, after all, will still be there next year.

The bottom line is that this thing won't work unless the Iraqis WANT it to work, and are willing to FIGHT for it. If they can overcome their sectarianism and can stop listening to jackasses like Al Sadr who are making a play for power and can decide that they have had enough of the f*cking terrorists, then Iraq will be a great place.

If they don't, then it will be as bad as it was under Sadaam because the criminals will be back in government power.

Quoted: We are still there because we are fighting a common enemy - funded, trainied, and adhering to the same life philosophy of the organization that attacked us on 11 Sep 2001. Why these simple fact are so muddled to so many Americans is beyond me.

All that negative press coverage has an effect. The libbies figured that out in Vietnam, and they are working hard to have the same effect today.

Unfortunately too many of us are too easily influenced by the media.

Those people for the most part are ungrateful.

Again I say, not worth an American's life.

If its come to the point that our troops are being manipulated and controlled by a known enemy through Maliki, then we either install a new PM, or we leave...this is just getting ridiculous.

Quoted: If its come to the point that our troops are being manipulated and controlled by a known enemy through Maliki, then we either install a new PM...

Or we do our best behind the scenes to try to point out to people who don't want an Al Sadr future that *THEY* need to stand up and make the change themselves, and that if Sadr resorts to violence the combined forces of the US and the Iraqi government will crush Sadr and his armies.

The best option here is for the Iraqis to step up and get the job done themselves, which is what our folks over there are trying so desperately to make them realize. We will support them fully, but THEY have to take some steps.

Their future is in their hands...it just seems like a significant contingent doesn't realize that.

Where ARE the Bushie apologists, 3 pages and no one has stepped up yet...

Quoted: Quoted: ETA picture of said shithole and lament for the umpteenth million time why the fuck didnt we kill al'Sadr's ass in 03 as soon as we realized what kind of shitbird he truly is. Because he is a sh*tbird with some political clout, and the Iraqi government didn't really WANT him to be taken out. The lack of progress in Iraq isn't because guys like you didn't do your jobs. It is because there are a bunch of clowns in Iraq who are trying to feather their own nests in the hope that we will get frustrated and just go home. Hopefully our leadership will show better judgement than that.

I don't think that all is lost in Iraq, but we can't afford to have tactical decisions that can get our troops killed to be dictated by politicians in Baghdad, any more that we can afford to have them dictated by senators in Washington.

Quoted: Quoted: We are still there because we are fighting a common enemy - funded, trainied, and adhering to the same life philosophy of the organization that attacked us on 11 Sep 2001. Why these simple fact are so muddled to so many Americans is beyond me. All that negative press coverage has an effect. The libbies figured that out in Vietnam, and they are working hard to have the same effect today. Unfortunately too many of us are too easily influenced by the media.

I'm NOT influenced by the media.

I AM influenced by the fact that we were just ordered OUT of Sadr City.

Quoted: Quoted: If its come to the point that our troops are being manipulated and controlled by a known enemy through Maliki, then we either install a new PM... Or we do our best behind the scenes to try to point out to people who don't want an Al Sadr future that *THEY* need to stand up and make the change themselves, and that if Sadr resorts to violence the combined forces of the US and the Iraqi government will crush Sadr and his armies. The best option here is for the Iraqis to step up and get the job done themselves, which is what our folks over there are trying so desperately to make them realize. We will support them fully, but THEY have to take some steps. Their future is in their hands...it just seems like a significant contingent doesn't realize that.

They've had THREE YEARS.

Americans have DIED to give them just such an opportunity.

Instead they have joined militias like that created by Sadr.

Iraqis "no habla" Freedom. So let's stop wasting our time and lives trying to give it to them.

Quoted: Quoted: Quoted: If its come to the point that our troops are being manipulated and controlled by a known enemy through Maliki, then we either install a new PM... Or we do our best behind the scenes to try to point out to people who don't want an Al Sadr future that *THEY* need to stand up and make the change themselves, and that if Sadr resorts to violence the combined forces of the US and the Iraqi government will crush Sadr and his armies. The best option here is for the Iraqis to step up and get the job done themselves, which is what our folks over there are trying so desperately to make them realize. We will support them fully, but THEY have to take some steps. Their future is in their hands...it just seems like a significant contingent doesn't realize that. They've had THREE YEARS. Americans have DIED to give them just such an opportunity. Instead they have joined militias like that created by Sadr. Iraqis "no habla" Freedom. So let's stop wasting our time and lives trying to give it to them.

Amen. They are ignorant tribal freedom haters. They hate us, get used to it.

Quoted: They've had THREE YEARS.

Three years isn't a long time. We spent longer than that working in Europe, and even then it didn't end. How many bases did we build in Europe? How many troops did we deploy over there?

And yet how many people in Europe were there wanting to capitulate to the Soviets?

Americans have DIED to give them just such an opportunity. Instead they have joined militias like that created by Sadr.

There's the trouble. Not all of them have. There are factions in Iraq, that is true....but not everybody is hooked up with a faction. There are, believe it or not, people in Iraq who are making an honest effort. Do we just abandon those people and write off the middle east?

That isn't a very attractive option....

Quoted: Quoted: They've had THREE YEARS. Three years isn't a long time. We spent longer than that working in Europe, and even then it didn't end. How many bases did we build in Europe? How many troops did we deploy over there? And yet how many people in Europe were there wanting to capitulate to the Soviets?

Yes but how many of them were still SHOOTING AT US in 1946? How many times did we get ordered to leave Nuremburg or Munich?

Quoted: Americans have DIED to give them just such an opportunity. Instead they have joined militias like that created by Sadr. There's the trouble. Not all of them have. There are factions in Iraq, that is true....but not everybody is hooked up with a faction. There are, believe it or not, people in Iraq who are making an honest effort. Do we just abandon those people and write off the middle east?

Yes there are. There are people who are working to help, there are people who are working against us and there are people who are doing NOTHING but letting Americans "fix it" for them. The people who are trying to help are outnumbered by the people who aren't.

If the majority of the population (just 51%) wanted our efforts to succeed the insurgency would be over.

Nobody would be able to plant IEDs without getting ratted out.

Nobody would be able to conduct ambushes or attacks against Americans.

The problem is the same one you see in ghetto areas. Not all the residents are crminals, but they sure as hell ain't gonna tell you who is. And if they have to choose between "their criminals" and you, guess what?

The only time you will get ANY COOPERATION is when they "ghetto" wants to catch somebody specific (like the guy who mugged Rosa Parks). But if you are trying to find out who killed a cop or some outsider, you are on your own.

Iraqis are gonna be the same way, same tribal mentality.

Quoted: Iraqis are gonna be the same way, same tribal mentality.

Maybe, but I don't think it is time to come to that conclusion just yet.

Quoted: Quoted: Iraqis are gonna be the same way, same tribal mentality. Maybe, but I don't think it is time to come to that conclusion just yet.

The writing is on the wall.

It was a bad risk to begin with. The continued effort is not worth American lives.

I'm tired of trying to clean up the ghetto already.

It's a nice idea, but there is a reason certain people make ghettos out of where they live in the first place.

stony275 - Let me guess. 1st CAV. 1st BCT.  Were you at FOB Eagle?  

I only spent a few days there doing PSD work while my clients helped an Army CA team and I was amazed at what a shit hole that place was. Honestly, to call it a shit hole is an insult to other shit holes in the world.  It ranks somewhere in the rings of Hell in Dante's Inferno.

You are correct, 1CD, 1BCT in lovely FOB War Eagle. I am truly sorry that you had to spend any time at all there.

It sickens me everytime I think about Mookie (Sadr) and the level to which he has embedded himself into the Iraqi Govt. He is a 2 bit cleric, with only a name his father earned to go on. He has killed off the competition, used muscle and intimidation, disinformation and outright lies to get where he is.

The PM thinks that appeasing Muqtada will keep him allied, but he will get stabbed in the back as soon Mookie sees a change in the way the wind is blowing.

Quoted: You guys are all a bunch of defeatist, liberal communists!  I have it on good authority from a chain e-mail from a friend of my cousin's brother in law's nephew's ex-girlfriend's mom's half brother that the terrorists are only 2 missions away from total defeat. Just to play a little devil's advocate, wasn't Iraq a sovreign nation before we invaded?  Wasn't the whole justification for invading then based on our belief that Iraq posed a threat to the United States of America?  So do they pose a threat to us any longer?  If not, why are we still there?  Last I checked, it wasn't the responsibility of the USA to spread truth, justice, and the American way. How much does anyone want to bet that the war is going to be magically declared "won" sometime between the 06 elections and the 08 elections?

Seriously, did you even read Dav_A's or my posts?

This has nothing to do with WMD anymore - hasn't since right after the invasion.

The invasion was to excecute a regime change and reult out use of WMD nby Saddam, and sales to other potential enemies.  That' sdone an over with.

What nobody realized (and moreso because nobody predicted the AMERICAN PEOPLE would be so closed-minded and politically ignorant) is that Al Qaeda affiliates would see the new Iraq as a great opportunity to not only embarass the US but cease power and

So many folks in the US are so busy repeating the same ad nausum bullshit about an invasion over three years ago - they fail to realize that the fight and the enemy has changed.

Letting the SUNNI insurgeny win is letting Al Qaeda (remember them?) gain significant influence in the middle east, and allow them to prepare for further attacks on the US.  This is just NOT AN OPTION

There is no option to just UNDO HISTORY.  You guys sound like 3rd graders when you whine about Bush, WMD's or whatever else.  Damn.  I don't give a FUCK whether our poor decisions years ago let this scenraio occur or not.  I don't give a fuck if Saddam, may have suddenly started playing nice and not shooting at us had we given him a few more months and more UN investigations (doubtful) - reality is what it is NOW.

The fight is real.  The enemy is real,  The threat is real.

You say we should just leave, but when they ask us to leave even a small portion of one city, you bitch.

One of two things will happen in Sadr city.  Sadr will gain influence and continue his campaign against the elected government - and the Iraqis will have to fight it themselves (what people claom they want) or ask us to help - OR the source of most of Sadr's support will be shown to be the anti-US rhetoric and insurgent activities WILL die down in that sector.  

Please - no more BS that Sadr is intimitely tied into the govt. - there has been too much bloodshed betwen groups to believe that - there are too many factions at play for such simplistic bullshit and rhetoric.  Also, no more BS about supposedly wanting the Iraqis to fight their own fights - when the moment they essentially demand we let them do that - you bitch and say they need to let us fight this.

Listen to yourselves!

The biggest issue continues to be the Sunni insurgency - and that continues to be our focus.  If anything, this will allow us to divert troops aways from the internal Shia problems and focus in the bigger enemy at the moment.

Save the bullshit for DU.

Quoted: Quoted: You guys are all a bunch of defeatist, liberal communists!  I have it on good authority from a chain e-mail from a friend of my cousin's brother in law's nephew's ex-girlfriend's mom's half brother that the terrorists are only 2 missions away from total defeat. Just to play a little devil's advocate, wasn't Iraq a sovreign nation before we invaded?  Wasn't the whole justification for invading then based on our belief that Iraq posed a threat to the United States of America?  So do they pose a threat to us any longer?  If not, why are we still there?  Last I checked, it wasn't the responsibility of the USA to spread truth, justice, and the American way. How much does anyone want to bet that the war is going to be magically declared "won" sometime between the 06 elections and the 08 elections? Seriously, did you even read Dav_A's or my posts? This has nothing to do with WMD anymore - hasn't since right after the invasion. The invasion was to excecute a regime change and reult out use of WMD nby Saddam, and sales to other potential enemies.  That' sdone an over with. What nobody realized (and moreso because nobody predicted the AMERICAN PEOPLE would be so closed-minded and politically ignorant) is that Al Qaeda affiliates would see the new Iraq as a great opportunity to not only embarass the US but cease power and So many folks in the US are so busy repeating the same ad nausum bullshit about an invasion over three years ago - they fail to realize that the fight and the enemy has changed. Letting the SUNNI insurgeny win is letting Al Qaeda (remember them?) gain significant influence in the middle east, and allow them to prepare for further attacks on the US.  This is just NOT AN OPTION There is no option to just UNDO HISTORY.  You guys sound like 3rd graders when you whine about Bush, WMD's or whatever else.  Damn.  I don't give a FUCK whether our poor decisions years ago let this scenraio occur or not.  I don't give a fuck if Saddam, may have suddenly started playing nice and not shooting at us had we given him a few more months and more UN investigations (doubtful) - reality is what it is NOW. The fight is real.  The enemy is real,  The threat is real. You say we should just leave, but when they ask us to leave even a small portion of one city, you bitch. One of two things will happen in Sadr city.  Sadr will gain influence and continue his campaign against the elected government - and the Iraqis will have to fight it themselves (what people claom they want) or ask us to help - OR the source of most of Sadr's support will be shown to be the anti-US rhetoric and insurgent activities WILL die down in that sector.   Please - no more BS that Sadr is intimitely tied into the govt. - there has been too much bloodshed betwen groups to believe that - there are too many factions at play for such simplistic bullshit and rhetoric.  Also, no more BS about supposedly wanting the Iraqis to fight their own fights - when the moment they essentially demand we let them do that - you bitch and say they need to let us fight this. Listen to yourselves! The biggest issue continues to be the Sunni insurgency - and that continues to be our focus.  If anything, this will allow us to divert troops aways from the internal Shia problems and focus in the bigger enemy at the moment. Save the bullshit for DU.

Why don't you follow your own advice?  You're painting with a pretty big brush there, pilgrim.

What a hellhole that is.

HH

Quoted: stony275 - Let me guess. 1st CAV. 1st BCT.  Were you at FOB Eagle?   I only spent a few days there doing PSD work while my clients helped an Army CA team and I was amazed at what a shit hole that place was. Honestly, to call it a shit hole is an insult to other shit holes in the world.  It ranks somewhere in the rings of Hell in Dante's Inferno. You are correct, 1CD, 1BCT in lovely FOB War Eagle. I am truly sorry that you had to spend any time at all there. It sickens me everytime I think about Mookie (Sadr) and the level to which he has embedded himself into the Iraqi Govt. He is a 2 bit cleric, with only a name his father earned to go on. He has killed off the competition, used muscle and intimidation, disinformation and outright lies to get where he is. The PM thinks that appeasing Muqtada will keep him allied, but he will get stabbed in the back as soon Mookie sees a change in the way the wind is blowing.

You weren't in 2/5 Cav were you? If so, I know your former Bn Cdr. I knew him when we were both 1LT's.

Quoted: What nobody realized (and moreso because nobody predicted the AMERICAN PEOPLE would be so closed-minded and politically ignorant) is that Al Qaeda affiliates would see the new Iraq as a great opportunity to not only embarass the US but cease power and So many folks in the US are so busy repeating the same ad nausum bullshit about an invasion over three years ago - they fail to realize that the fight and the enemy has changed. Letting the SUNNI insurgeny win is letting Al Qaeda (remember them?) gain significant influence in the middle east, and allow them to prepare for further attacks on the US.  This is just NOT AN OPTION There is no option to just UNDO HISTORY.  You guys sound like 3rd graders when you whine about Bush, WMD's or whatever else.  Damn.  I don't give a FUCK whether our poor decisions years ago let this scenraio occur or not.  I don't give a fuck if Saddam, may have suddenly started playing nice and not shooting at us had we given him a few more months and more UN investigations (doubtful) - reality is what it is NOW. The fight is real.  The enemy is real,  The threat is real. You say we should just leave, but when they ask us to leave even a small portion of one city, you bitch. One of two things will happen in Sadr city.  Sadr will gain influence and continue his campaign against the elected government - and the Iraqis will have to fight it themselves (what people claom they want) or ask us to help - OR the source of most of Sadr's support will be shown to be the anti-US rhetoric and insurgent activities WILL die down in that sector.   Please - no more BS that Sadr is intimitely tied into the govt. - there has been too much bloodshed betwen groups to believe that - there are too many factions at play for such simplistic bullshit and rhetoric.  Also, no more BS about supposedly wanting the Iraqis to fight their own fights - when the moment they essentially demand we let them do that - you bitch and say they need to let us fight this. Listen to yourselves! The biggest issue continues to be the Sunni insurgency - and that continues to be our focus.  If anything, this will allow us to divert troops aways from the internal Shia problems and focus in the bigger enemy at the moment. Save the bullshit for DU.

The problem with that is US forces have just been ORDERED OUT of a INSURGENT controlled city. How are we gonna defeat any of them Sunni, Shiite, etc. under these restrictions?

Quoted: You weren't in 2/5 Cav were you? If so, I know your former Bn Cdr. I knew him when we were both 1LT's.

Which one, LTC James B, or LTC Gary V?  Either way, they're both great men.

I was Trial Counsel for 2/5 from 1999-2002.  I went to Kuwait with them in 2001 under LTC B, but got to know LTC V pretty well.  I ended up going to OIF 1 with a Civil Affairs unit and was stationed at Camp Marlboro/The Cigarette Factory in Sadr City.  2/5 replaced us there.  It's a small world.

Were you there in '03-04?    

And it's a toss-up whether Marlboro or War Eagle is worse.    

Quoted: So many folks in the US are so busy repeating the same ad nausum bullshit about an invasion over three years ago - they fail to realize that the fight and the enemy has changed.So many folks, heh.  How about dick cheney "insurgency is in its last throes", GWB "won't run from a bunch of thugs and dead enders", and "Bring it on".  If our administration refuses to understand this war, why should we give it a blank check? The fight is real.  The enemy is real,  The threat is real.This entire thread is about the current threat, current administrations failings, and current situation on the ground.  Are you reading? Please - no more BS that Sadr is intimitely tied into the govt. - there has been too much bloodshed betwen groups to believe that - there are too many factions at play for such simplistic bullshit and rhetoric.  You have GOT to be kidding: After U.S. forces raided Sadr City in August, the Shiite-dominated administration of Iraqi Prime Minister Nouri Maliki made it clear the district was virtually untouchable. "This won't happen again," he said. www.latimes.com/news/printedition/asection/la-fg-sadr24oct24,1,7110383.story?coll=la-news-a_section&ctrack=1&cset=true The fighting in Amara follows the arrest of Sheikh Mazen Al Saedi, the leader of Sadr's offices the Baghdad neighborhood of Karkh. U.S. forces detained Saedi after he was implicated in organizing death squads and car bomb cells. Sadr demanded his release and organized a protest in Baghdad. Prime Minister Maliki demanded the U.S. release Saedi, which they did. The military was infuriated by this appeasement of Sadr. billroggio.com/archives/2006/10/iraqi_army_sadrs_mah.php No more BS that Al Sadr is intimately tied to the government, heh?  LOL.  You've thorougly discredited yourself with that statement. Listen to yourselves! The biggest issue continues to be the Sunni insurgency - and that continues to be our focus.  If anything, this will allow us to divert troops aways from the internal Shia problems and focus in the bigger enemy at the moment. Save the bullshit for DU. ]

There are many components to the insurgency.  You're hopelessly out of touch if you think we can ignore the course of iraq right now... rocketing towards civil war, and stick to the same tactics, including mischaracterizing the enemy and the situation.

Quoted: Quoted: Iraqis are gonna be the same way, same tribal mentality. Maybe, but I don't think it is time to come to that conclusion just yet.

You're being too kind.

The entire Middle East, with the exception of Israel (and maybe Jordan), is nothing more than a thin veneer of civilization on top of what is essentially a religious tribal mentality that goes back millennia.

It's not about nations, not about people coming together for the betterment of themselves and their posterity, it's about religious dogma, about who did what to whose tribe, about retribution, about it always being "the other guy that started it".

Western ideas about culture, civilization and religion simply do not, and will not apply in the ME.  They don't see beyond the veil of religion and tribe.  They simply don't care about the future, about doing things NOW that will make things better later.  It's very much like a bunch of kids who have no concept beyond what they want RIGHT NOW!

There may be great INDIVIDUALS in Iraq but as a group, they're just a notch above "Lord of the Flies".  When push comes to shove the whole idea of "Democracy" will be beaten down by THOUSANDS of years of religious fanaticism and primitive tribal bonds.

Quoted: There are many components to the insurgency.  You're hopelessly out of touch if you think we can ignore the course of iraq right now... rocketing towards civil war, and stick to the same tactics, including mischaracterizing the enemy and the situation.

He has been there more recently than any of us...

Quoted: Quoted: What nobody realized (and moreso because nobody predicted the AMERICAN PEOPLE would be so closed-minded and politically ignorant) is that Al Qaeda affiliates would see the new Iraq as a great opportunity to not only embarass the US but cease power and So many folks in the US are so busy repeating the same ad nausum bullshit about an invasion over three years ago - they fail to realize that the fight and the enemy has changed. Letting the SUNNI insurgeny win is letting Al Qaeda (remember them?) gain significant influence in the middle east, and allow them to prepare for further attacks on the US.  This is just NOT AN OPTION There is no option to just UNDO HISTORY.  You guys sound like 3rd graders when you whine about Bush, WMD's or whatever else.  Damn.  I don't give a FUCK whether our poor decisions years ago let this scenraio occur or not.  I don't give a fuck if Saddam, may have suddenly started playing nice and not shooting at us had we given him a few more months and more UN investigations (doubtful) - reality is what it is NOW. The fight is real.  The enemy is real,  The threat is real. You say we should just leave, but when they ask us to leave even a small portion of one city, you bitch. One of two things will happen in Sadr city.  Sadr will gain influence and continue his campaign against the elected government - and the Iraqis will have to fight it themselves (what people claom they want) or ask us to help - OR the source of most of Sadr's support will be shown to be the anti-US rhetoric and insurgent activities WILL die down in that sector.   Please - no more BS that Sadr is intimitely tied into the govt. - there has been too much bloodshed betwen groups to believe that - there are too many factions at play for such simplistic bullshit and rhetoric.  Also, no more BS about supposedly wanting the Iraqis to fight their own fights - when the moment they essentially demand we let them do that - you bitch and say they need to let us fight this. Listen to yourselves! The biggest issue continues to be the Sunni insurgency - and that continues to be our focus.  If anything, this will allow us to divert troops aways from the internal Shia problems and focus in the bigger enemy at the moment. Save the bullshit for DU. The problem with that is US forces have just been ORDERED OUT of a INSURGENT controlled city. How are we gonna defeat any of them Sunni, Shiite, etc. under these restrictions?

It is actually a neighborhood within Baghdad - and predominately Shia.

The insurgency that is the main focus of our struggle is the Sunni-dominated one supported and led By Al Qaeda and many former key leaders of the old regime.

The Shia groups that have been attacking us are a different fight are, quite frankly, a sideshow.  If the Iraqi .gov thinks that our just leaving might solve the problem - then so be it - it's their call.

If the fighting stops - and Sadr city suddenly becomes less insane and becomes cooperative with the Iraq govt (the likelihood of which should be very high is you are to believe some of the keyboard experts here that Sadr is just an extension of said government) than why is that a bad thing?  We can take care of the Sunni insurgency and let the Iraqi govt. work out its own internal issues - why is it a good thing for us to be in the middle of it?

If the fighting continues - it will be Iraqis handling their own internal issues - Shia on Shia for th emost part.  Again, not the Sunni vs. Shia civil war scenario everyone loves to sing about, and again - whay is the Iraqis hadnling their own fighting a bad thing?

What exact scenario do those of you so upset about this foresee happening?  Sadr using Sadr city as a based of operations for sectarian attacks elsewhere in Baghdad?  Sadr using it as a base of operations for attacks agains US forces elsewhere?  Inquiring minds want to know.

Gotta cave in to everyone.  HELLO MR. PRIME MINISTER--IF IT WASN'T FOR US YOU WOULDN'T EVEN BE PM.

Quoted: If the fighting continues - it will be Iraqis handling their own internal issues - Shia on Shia for th emost part.  Again, not the Sunni vs. Shia civil war scenario everyone loves to sing about, and again - whay is the Iraqis hadnling their own fighting a bad thing? What exact scenario do those of you so upset about this foresee happening?  Sadr using Sadr city as a based of operations for sectarian attacks elsewhere in Baghdad?  Sadr using it as a base of operations for attacks agains US forces elsewhere?  Inquiring minds want to know.

The 'internal issue' you speak of is nothing less than iraq descending into civil war.  You claim that we need pay no attention to various sectarian militias as long as they're shia affiliated, and that we only need worry about sunnis and al qaeda.

Your assertion that the sunnis are primarly concerned exclusively with killing Americans isn't borne out by events on the ground.  Al qaeda is a relative bit player in the violence on the current scale.  Since February, with the bombing of the shiite shrine in samarra, this has widened into a sectarian war, with death squads and killings rampant on both sides.  This attack may have been fomented primarily by al qaeda, but the results today have wider consequences.

If there is no 'shia on sunni' conflict, and we're all wailing into the wind, how then do you explain hundreds of multiple murder incidents where the victims all have one thing in common... their religious affiliation?  Just an internal matter, I guess.

You ask why we should be disturbed that muqtada al sadr be allowed to maintain an armed resistance to the government and US forces, kill US troops, and continue to help break apart and radicalize iraq, with the governments tacit permission, if not outright aid.  Sadr has also pledged support for IRAN in case we ever attack it.  So this is what we fought for?  To bring iranian and iraqi shiites closer together as long as the sunnis don't win.  

Our standard for 'victory' also seems to keep lowering.

If we want to 'win' this war in any way that brings decent, unified government and helps justify our sacrifices, muqtada sadr needs to die or disarm.  Guess which is more likely, if the will can be found.





BAGHDAD, Jan. 23 -- An Iraqi Muslim cleric who leads a major Shiite militia pledged to come to the defense of neighboring Iran if it were attacked, aides to the cleric, Moqtada Sadr, said Monday.

The commitment, made Sunday in Tehran during a visit by Sadr, came in response to a senior Iranian official's query about what the cleric would do in the event of an attack on Iran. It marked the first open indication that Iraq's Shiite neighbor is preparing for a military response if attacked in a showdown with the West over its nuclear program.

The pledge was also one of the strongest signs yet that Iraq could become a battleground in any Western conflict with Iran, raising the specter of Iraqi Shiite militias -- or perhaps even the U.S.-trained Shiite-dominated military -- taking on American troops here in sympathy with Iran.

www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2006/06/28/AR2006062802028.html

Quoted: I spent a year in Sadr City, March 04 through March 05, and it was a bitch. 2.5 million people in 5 square miles, and more than a few of them hate our guts. All the fighting and working we did to to eradicate the enemy and build infrastructure for the people and it for all intents and puposes get handed back to Muqtada right after we leave.... img.photobucket.com/albums/v421/hrd2thecore/wild023.jpg ETA picture of said shithole and lament for the umpteenth million time why the fuck didnt we kill al'Sadr's ass in 03 as soon as we realized what kind of shitbird he truly is.

Amen brother, I was there from Dec 04 to Jan 05 and couldn't agree more!

Quoted: Quoted: Quoted: What nobody realized (and moreso because nobody predicted the AMERICAN PEOPLE would be so closed-minded and politically ignorant) is that Al Qaeda affiliates would see the new Iraq as a great opportunity to not only embarass the US but cease power and So many folks in the US are so busy repeating the same ad nausum bullshit about an invasion over three years ago - they fail to realize that the fight and the enemy has changed. Letting the SUNNI insurgeny win is letting Al Qaeda (remember them?) gain significant influence in the middle east, and allow them to prepare for further attacks on the US.  This is just NOT AN OPTION There is no option to just UNDO HISTORY.  You guys sound like 3rd graders when you whine about Bush, WMD's or whatever else.  Damn.  I don't give a FUCK whether our poor decisions years ago let this scenraio occur or not.  I don't give a fuck if Saddam, may have suddenly started playing nice and not shooting at us had we given him a few more months and more UN investigations (doubtful) - reality is what it is NOW. The fight is real.  The enemy is real,  The threat is real. You say we should just leave, but when they ask us to leave even a small portion of one city, you bitch. One of two things will happen in Sadr city.  Sadr will gain influence and continue his campaign against the elected government - and the Iraqis will have to fight it themselves (what people claom they want) or ask us to help - OR the source of most of Sadr's support will be shown to be the anti-US rhetoric and insurgent activities WILL die down in that sector.   Please - no more BS that Sadr is intimitely tied into the govt. - there has been too much bloodshed betwen groups to believe that - there are too many factions at play for such simplistic bullshit and rhetoric.  Also, no more BS about supposedly wanting the Iraqis to fight their own fights - when the moment they essentially demand we let them do that - you bitch and say they need to let us fight this. Listen to yourselves! The biggest issue continues to be the Sunni insurgency - and that continues to be our focus.  If anything, this will allow us to divert troops aways from the internal Shia problems and focus in the bigger enemy at the moment. Save the bullshit for DU. The problem with that is US forces have just been ORDERED OUT of a INSURGENT controlled city. How are we gonna defeat any of them Sunni, Shiite, etc. under these restrictions? It is actually a neighborhood within Baghdad - and predominately Shia. The insurgency that is the main focus of our struggle is the Sunni-dominated one supported and led By Al Qaeda and many former key leaders of the old regime. The Shia groups that have been attacking us are a different fight are, quite frankly, a sideshow.  If the Iraqi .gov thinks that our just leaving might solve the problem - then so be it - it's their call. If the fighting stops - and Sadr city suddenly becomes less insane and becomes cooperative with the Iraq govt (the likelihood of which should be very high is you are to believe some of the keyboard experts here that Sadr is just an extension of said government) than why is that a bad thing?  We can take care of the Sunni insurgency and let the Iraqi govt. work out its own internal issues - why is it a good thing for us to be in the middle of it? If the fighting continues - it will be Iraqis handling their own internal issues - Shia on Shia for th emost part.  Again, not the Sunni vs. Shia civil war scenario everyone loves to sing about, and again - whay is the Iraqis hadnling their own fighting a bad thing? What exact scenario do those of you so upset about this foresee happening?  Sadr using Sadr city as a based of operations for sectarian attacks elsewhere in Baghdad?  Sadr using it as a base of operations for attacks agains US forces elsewhere?  Inquiring minds want to know.

Seems to me the problem isn't just Sunnis, or Shia, it is insurgents. All of them.

I don't think it is a good idea to leave a contained area like Sadr City, we roadblocked it for a reason.

Also I don't think the government is interested in our bringing "democracy" to the region as much as they are interested in consolidating their power base and eliminating their enemies (or more correctly directing US forces to eliminate their enemies).

I personally don't see this one turning out well.

Our belief that we could establish a democracy that would represent and protect ALL Iraqi people seems like a hopeless pipe dream like "We are the world..."

The alternatives are a partitioned state which is almost sure to fail and become a arab Balkan tinderbox.

Or we can back one group such as the Sunnis or Shia and allow them to dominate and mostly extreminate their traditional enemies. This will of course create a powerful Iraqi tribe who will eventually turn on us and bite us on the ass when it most suits them. And the remnants of their former enemy will blame the US (and not the Iraqis who actually did it) for their destruction and will form groups along the line of the PLO who will attack us at every opportunity.

Or we can pick a military leader and back him as a powerful dictator who in the tradition of Marshall Tito (and ironically enough Hussein) will so brutally impose his will that the population will have bigger problems than hating Kurds or Sunnis.

Or we can accept what we should have realized years ago, that the reason democracy doesn't exist in that region is because the populations don't have what it takes to make it happen. Their culture and religion are almost completely incompatable with ideas such as "freedom" and "democracy."

I only wish it didn't cost US lives to learn that the hard way.

Quoted: Look at it this way: The Iraqi government is convinced that there are 2 'types' of insurgent right now: 1) Those that are fighting for 'Iraqi independance' and 3) Those that are foreign-sponsored terrorists True or not, that's what they believe... The strategy that Mr PM is persuing, is to try and separate (1) from (2) and get (1) to lay down arms and join the government. So he is trying to show that US forces work for him - and take orders from him, thinking that maybe if it becomes clear that the US isn't in control of Iraq and he is, some folks will leave the insurgency, and all that will be left is the foreign-controlled groups... Now, weather or not he is right - that's another story... But that's what he's trying to do...

This is the most sensible post in this thread...

my .02

One other point:

M Al Sadr is currently 'protected'... Like it or not, he has too much popular support to just eliminate him...

If we kill him now, or had killed him 'then', it would have created problems for us... Problems worse than the ones he causes...

However, if we let him make an ass of himself, and push the limits too far, the Iraqi government will eventually decide he has to go, and make the call themselves...

That is the ONLY way we can deal with him, without causing a severe backlash...

Quoted: Quoted: If the fighting continues - it will be Iraqis handling their own internal issues - Shia on Shia for th emost part.  Again, not the Sunni vs. Shia civil war scenario everyone loves to sing about, and again - whay is the Iraqis hadnling their own fighting a bad thing? What exact scenario do those of you so upset about this foresee happening?  Sadr using Sadr city as a based of operations for sectarian attacks elsewhere in Baghdad?  Sadr using it as a base of operations for attacks agains US forces elsewhere?  Inquiring minds want to know. The 'internal issue' you speak of is nothing less than iraq descending into civil war.  You claim that we need pay no attention to various sectarian militias as long as they're shia affiliated, and that we only need worry about sunnis and al qaeda. Your assertion that the sunnis are primarly concerned exclusively with killing Americans isn't borne out by events on the ground.  Al qaeda is a relative bit player in the violence on the current scale.  Since February, with the bombing of the shiite shrine in samarra, this has widened into a sectarian war, with death squads and killings rampant on both sides.  This attack may have been fomented primarily by al qaeda, but the results today have wider consequences. If there is no 'shia on sunni' conflict, and we're all wailing into the wind, how then do you explain hundreds of multiple murder incidents where the victims all have one thing in common... their religious affiliation?  Just an internal matter, I guess. You ask why we should be disturbed that muqtada al sadr be allowed to maintain an armed resistance to the government and US forces, kill US troops, and continue to help break apart and radicalize iraq, with the governments tacit permission, if not outright aid.  Sadr has also pledged support for IRAN in case we ever attack it.  So this is what we fought for?  To bring iranian and iraqi shiites closer together as long as the sunnis don't win.   Our standard for 'victory' also seems to keep lowering. If we want to 'win' this war in any way that brings decent, unified government and helps justify our sacrifices, muqtada sadr needs to die or disarm.  Guess which is more likely, if the will can be found. BAGHDAD, Jan. 23 -- An Iraqi Muslim cleric who leads a major Shiite militia pledged to come to the defense of neighboring Iran if it were attacked, aides to the cleric, Moqtada Sadr, said Monday. The commitment, made Sunday in Tehran during a visit by Sadr, came in response to a senior Iranian official's query about what the cleric would do in the event of an attack on Iran. It marked the first open indication that Iraq's Shiite neighbor is preparing for a military response if attacked in a showdown with the West over its nuclear program. The pledge was also one of the strongest signs yet that Iraq could become a battleground in any Western conflict with Iran, raising the specter of Iraqi Shiite militias -- or perhaps even the U.S.-trained Shiite-dominated military -- taking on American troops here in sympathy with Iran. www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2006/06/28/AR2006062802028.html

When did I say there is no Sunni on Shia conflict?  I specifically siad that was the PRIMARY conflict.  Shit - are you reading my posts for info, or reading them looking for something to bitch about?

This whole thread is about our being asked to step away from the Shia on SHIA conflict.  A conflict which really does no need to be our focus right now.  Sadr city is a SHIA neigborhood.  The govt, is primarily Shia.

How can anyone argue on one hand that Sadr is intricately lnked to the government, then on the other hand also be an insurgent leader?  Is he running an insurgency against himself?  If his only target is Americans (not true) then why be upset if we leave the area where he is target seem to want us to leave the whole country!

Sadr hates Americans, and is vying for power and influence.  Yes, he has some connections - but he wouldn't be attacking Iraqi military and police if he had the power some of you are acting like he has.

Dave_A seems to be the only person here who comprehends the bigger strategic picture.  the Govt. keepin guS forces out  of internal Shia disputes may very well remove folks like Sadr of their biggest recruitment tool.  If not, it is the Iraqi governments fight, not ours.