« Nevermind | Main | Imperialist Logo »

Iraq

I haven't spent this much time updating Command Post since the first few weeks of the war. Yes, it's been a violent, deadly couple of days in Iraq. But let's look at this a few different ways. * Strategically, this could work to U.S. advantage. That's not say that I'm discounting the fact that many people have died since the weekend. What I mean is this; the crazed cleric did not have enough foresight to start this uprising after June 30th. Instead, he is waging an all out war against the occupying forces. Not a smart move on his part. * What we are seeing is a convergence of terrorist organizations. Like pigs to a trough, they are swarming into Iraq to take part in this "resistance," in the hopes of both destroying the United States (or at least killing a few dozen of its soldiers) and gaining some power in Iraq and the surrounding areas. We're seeing not only Shi'ites and Sunnis, but members of al-Qaeda, Hezbollah and other assorted terrorist groups represented in Iraq. In addition, the mad mullahs of Iran are sending their hired guns over by the busload. All these terrorists in one place, and a whole bunch of coalition forces there to greet them. It's certainly easier to kill a bunch of loons while they are in a flock, rather than flying around alone. * Meanwhile, other terrorists around the world are becoming more brazen as they assume that the U.S., Britian, etc., are just too busy fighting off Iraqi insurgents to be bothered with them. There have been terror arrests almost every day for the past week. Do you realize how many deadly incidents have been avoided? See, the U.S. and its friends can walk and chew gum at the same time. We can keep vigilant in the war on terror while fighting off the uprising in Iraq. Does anyone honestly think that al Sadr is going to get his way? Hell, I doubt he'll make it out alive. I have to laugh at those who are saying: see, they didn't want us to free them. They want us to just go home. Try taking the blinders off. The people fighting the forces now are not the regular citizens of Iraq, the ones who yearn for freedom and real schooling and life without fear. If you think they speak for all Iraqis then you have just insulted a million peaceful people. This is a fearful time in Iraq. Perhaps even more fearful than when the war first started because, unlike the U.S forces that first went into Baghdad, the cleric and his followers and all the other tag along terrorists will not try to differentiate between friends and ememies. They will kill anyone, including their own. Once these battles are done with and al Sadr is either in custody or in pieces, things will calm down. In fact, the fighting taking place now will make the handover in June even smoother. There will be many, many of Saddam's leftover handymen who will not be around to see it. The wind will have left the sails of the insurgents. We can hope this is the way it works out. Peace be with the people of Iraq. Soon.

TrackBack

Listed below are links to weblogs that reference Iraq:

» 85 Days from The Bellman
What a horrible couple of days. I just heard a report that up to a dozen marines have been killed in fighting in Ramadi. If so, that would [Read More]

» Fallujah Fallout from Dean's World
Strategypage notes that Fallujah is symptomatic of the last gasp of the Islamo-fascists in Iraq, and their increasing desperation as everyday Iraqis take more and... [Read More]

» WE didn't fall - the sonofa "News"man pushed us... from Who Tends the Fires
The Word for the Day is: Scrofulous... We have a WINNER!!! LC Steve, KotE guessed Air Force One with Harrison Ford giving the Presidential speech from our Pop Quiz yesterday. Your Official Radio Free No-Prize is in the mail, Steve.... [Read More]

Comments

Agreed. I've heard some comparisons to Tet, which is absurd. Tet consisted of multiple nose-bloodying, but relatively ineffective strikes to give the impression of chaos and lack of control.

This is engaging a concentrated enemy and duking it out, which we are quite able to handle. al Sadr has miscalculated quite a bit on this one.

Well, its about time you warbloggers had something to say about this. Been a little quiet once things started not going according to plan over there, huh?

And when are you going identify the "real" Iraqis, Michelle? The attackers in the Sunni Triange? Oh, they're not real Iraqis. The people who keep blowing up government buidlings, they're not "real" Iraqis-- they must be al Qaeda. Thosse people in Falluja? Not real Iraqis either, they're just low down crazy dogs. The Shiites currently in revolt against the U.S.? Well now, seems they're not real Iraqis either. Hm. Where are the real Iraqis?

Face it. 12 Marines just died in Ramadi. You folks who supported this war have really fucked things up. Thanks

Yes,Michele,peace to the good ones.The info I heard is that this whole" resistance" is funded and organized by the Iranians.They know that they are next on the list,and they want Iraq to fail.It really sucks being them.

Does anyone honestly think that al Sadr is going to get his way? Hell, I doubt he'll make it out alive.

Excellent point.

Moqtada al-Sadr is reportedly in the Imman Ali shrine, surrounded by thousands of armed supporters who have taken over religious, government and police buildings in the holy city.

Imam Ali is the founding martyr of Shia Islam. Exactly what to you think "his way" is? The only way this is a strategic advantage, is if that "strategy" looks something like Iran in 1979.

I pray for peace in Iraq. And I pray for people who are able to achieve it with honesty and open eyes, rather than declaring every wave of deaths another flypaper success.

Let me get this straight:

Saddam killed Sadr's family.

We got Saddam.

Sadr wants to get us.

Ingrateful bastard!

I hope the Marines have a sense of irony. Michele, would tyou support one of your children to go fight there?

This is good news? I am left wondering what could possibly count as bad news. At least the Kurds aren't fighting us.

How is anyone supposed to know who/what to believe? I guess I don't know who real Iraqis are either but I have been following a couple of the high profile Iraqi bloggers since the war began. Doesn't seem like they enjoy our "occupation" much at all but I do doubt they'd want us to just pack up and leave them in a lurch.

This seems to suggest that at least millions of Iraqis want us out/dead/hurt/whatever. I am not sure at all what to believe. Can't say since I am not there but it's scary, scary shit nonetheless.

That nutpig Muqtada al-Sadr has been mudering his Shiite cleric buddies it would appear.
He is not a typical Iraqi, he is a gangster, he's staking his claim.
Yet another murderer using Islam as an excuse to what he damn well likes.

Forgot the bloody link
http://www.boston.com/dailynews/097/world/U_S_officials_outline_charges_:.shtml

Sorry too dumb to anything but cut and paste.

Lawrence, you have heard that the problem might be, um, Islamist-fascism? The problem we're trying to address? Which won't be solved by creating a vacuum for another Islamist-pusbag-failed nation state? That's accomplished by removing the dictators and teaching people how to give and take under the rule of law.

Yes, Saddam had his boot on al Sadr's throat. He ruled by murder. We suggest rule of law. Do you find that quaint? Unachievable? History suggests otherwise.

And where exactly have you been when this dialogue has been taking place, that you would ask a bullshit question like "what if it was your kid"? What does that mean exactly? That we don't give a damn cause it's somebody else's kid? Fuck you.

Pat Kincaid, I can't even work up enough energy to deal with your remarks. They're too infantile.

Major major major screw up by al Sadr and the dancing fools in Fallujah. Things that would not be done beforehand are now in motion. In the background I hear Samuel L Jackson from "Pulp Fiction"...

As for real Iraqis, I choose to read the weblogs available. And they are pretty united in their support of what we are doing. But then, what do they know?

Way to read between the lines. I never said this was good news. Good news would be the war in Iraq ending, the Iraqi people getting a full democracy and every last terrorist dead.

Today is not success. I was just looking at ways to turn this around.

Well, its about time you warbloggers had something to say about this. Been a little quiet once things started not going according to plan over there, huh?

Darn that Michele, not dropping everything to comment on current events fast enough to suit the almighty Pat Kincaid.

Where are the real Iraqis?

The ones who are helping rebuild their nation instead of running around killing people, perhaps? Oh wait, that concept is too difficult for you to ponder and kind of gets in the way of the "oh look, this group of Iraqis is killing people so that means ALL Iraqis want to do that" theory. Run along now, and don't slip in the blood you're dancing in.

Three quarters of the Iraqis have never even seen an American. I am sure that they would MUCH prefer that we left...but only after giving them a chance to have a stable government. Clannish and tribal, arabs are not the best bet for democracy anyway, but stick another sunni or shiia Iranian theocracy in Iraq and our problems would be worse.

These latest assholes fight for an Iranian backed power-grabber who is living on the reputation of his family...and murdering anyone blocking his ambition. He is not much more than a warlord...and soon to be dead, exiled, or imprisoned.

The fight in Fallujah was seen coming by anyone with a brain...the sunni triangle needed to be scraped clean of Baathists in order for Iraq to progress.

You are not seeing the beginning of a popular Iraqi uprising. You are seeing the end of Baathist power and the death of the last chance that theocracy has to capture Iraq by force of arms.

In 1945 there were 80 million Germans alive…yet the war was over. We just killed all those who were willing to fight.

Today is not success. I was just looking at ways to turn this around.

Ah, but didn't you know? Everything has to be perfect or it's all a miserable failure. Isn't that just convenient for those on the other side?

Minor supply problems during Operation Iraqi Freedom last year meant our troops were cut off and doooooooomed. Or at least it was useful for some to keep claiming that (while stating that they supported the troops, of course) in the hope that the campaign would fail and we'd lose.

This year, it seems that some groups rising up in rebellion have given the LLL that hope of defeat (while supporting the troops, of course) again.

Hope you're right.

Like this new lay-out, btw. (Do I take down your old logo and replace with a do-it-yourself-sign? What would that be?)

I blieve this is the guy who's been preaching all along that the US went to Iraq, not for Saddam, not for oil, not for Israel...

No, the US went to Iraq to perform black magic and destroy the soul the Mahdi (the Messiah) before he can be resurected!

Fucking nutcase! He looks like a nutcase to other nutcases!

Mr. brain dead thuggly cult leader. Jim Jones with Kalishnikovs.

And he's got thousands of idiots ready to die for the nonsense pablum he drools.

This is the sort of crap that makes dynasties among the Arabs. Pathetic, isn't it?

why do you insist on calling it the War On Terror? Arrrgh!
You can't wage war against an emotion dammit! The ISM makes all the difference, as I'd expect from a person who knows how language works!! 8)

bsti, due respect, why can't you wage a war against an idea? Slavery. Piracy? The Royal Navy and the US Marines waged effective warfare against both.

"Waging war" is action. Terror and those who practice it are the target/recipient/enemy.

<<The ones who are helping rebuild their nation instead of running around killing people, perhaps?

I distinctly remember reading reports that the majority of Iraqis are out of work and the reconstruction is a racket, hiring mostly other countries laborers or subcontracting out to the iraqis for much cheaper than the original contract was given for.

As for reading weblogs of Iraqis, well, it all depends on the weblogs you read I guess. Honestly we all need to realize that just because you tend to read one type of weblog, and the links you find on those logs, that doesn't mean the opposing view doesn't exist.

I tend to read a moderate Iraqi weblog, riverbendblog. She tends to be cynical of the US, not militantly demanding we leave but cognizant of a reconstruction racket. She also gets annoyed when peaceful protests are broken up with guns by the US and allied troops. But yeah, she's pretty moderate.

http://riverbendblog.blogspot.com

That much is clear by now: the "even handed" "hey, itīs your country" approach doesnīt work. Sadr should have been assassinated months ago (without the US taking credit for it). We should have countered Iranian influence earlier and better. Are w edoing it now? I cannot see that. Why arenīt we threatening Iran at all?

Are we serious about this or not?

Facism supporters like Riverbend are hardly my idea of moderation.

Joshua's right. Even the other Iraqui Bloggers have little use for Riverbend. Keep in mind two important concepts: a) most truth resides between the two extremes, and b) it's very unlikely any one person knows ALL the facts. Criticising the Bush administration for being absolutely right about the scope and difficulty of victory in Iraq is really intellectually dishonest. He said it would be hard. He said it would be bloody. And we all wondered as it seemed so easy - could it really be that easy? Of course not. But we've become used to instant gratification. No sacrifices. And the freedom to do or say anything we want. Guess what? That isn't reality. The Fallujah incident is more proof that there is a price to be paid.

It's refreshing to see the flypaper theory resurface again. I missed it.

Has anyone said that we should have marched into Pyongyang instead of Baghdad.

Forget liberating people. Let's protect them from nuclear meltdown first, shall we?

Oh, and <a href="http://riverbendblog.blogspot.com/"here's your real Iraqui, Ms. Kincaid. Hope the link works.

It isn't clear that Sadr has miscalculated.

1. Sistani wants a simple majority democracy and rule by the Shiite majority. Checking the tyranny of the majority requires a complicated constitution, which takes longer and is harder to negotiate. The sooner we leave, the likelier the final constitution will privilege the majority. If Sadr's uprising scares us off, or (more likely) weakens our long-term resolve, it aids one Shiite agenda.

2. Or, Sadr could be playing domestic/Arabic politics, building his bona fides as a resister for later days. In which case he'd be indifferent to larger Iraqi concerns.

3. Sadr may not be an independent actor. Could someone (Sistani, Iran) be using him to serve their particular agenda?

The US should go after Sadr and the Mahdis, but without losing sight of the main game: building a viable government that constrains the majority while legitimized by widespread approval.

Jim, just like in the good old U.S., Iraq has it's political sides. Riverbend is to Iraq what Atrios is to America.

Healing Iraq and blogs that like that are pretty moderate.

My biggest fear is that come November the American electorate will lose its resolve and we'll cut and run. If the news media reported World War 2 the way they're reporting Iraq, we would've given up on D-Day.