You have commented 339 times on Rantburg.

Your Name
Your e-mail (optional)
Website (optional)
My Original Nic        Pic-a-Nic        Sorry. Comments have been closed on this article.
Bold Italic Underline Strike Bullet Blockquote Small Big Link Squish Foto Photo
Iraq
Iraq PM Tells Shiite Militias to Give Up
2007-01-11
Iraq's prime minister has told Shiite militiamen to surrender their arms or face an all-out assault by U.S.-backed Iraqi forces, senior Iraqi officials said Wednesday, as American and Iraqi troops prepared major military operations aimed at ending sectarian warfare in Baghdad.

The move came as President Bush said he will send an additional of 21,500 American combat troops to Iraq, according to excerpts of a speech the president was set to deliver later Wednesday. Prime Minister Nouri al-Maliki, head of Iraq's Shiite-led government, previously had blocked several U.S. attempts to crack down on fighters controlled by his most powerful political ally, Muqtada al-Sadr, a radical Shiite cleric. ``Prime Minister al-Maliki has told everyone that there will be no escape from attack,'' a senior Shiite legislator and close al-Maliki adviser said. ``The government has told the Sadrists: 'If we want to build a state we have no other choice but to attack armed groups.'''

Al-Maliki on Saturday announced that his government would implement a new security plan for Baghdad, which consists of neighborhood-by-neighborhood sweeps by Iraqi forces backed by U.S. troops. In the past, the Iraqi government has tried to prevent American military operations against the Mahdi Army, while giving U.S. forces a free hand against Sunni militants. The Bush administration has pushed al-Maliki, who took office in May, to curb his militia allies or allow U.S. troops to do the job.

Although al-Maliki withdrew political protection from the Mahdi Army, there was no guarantee the Shiite fighters would be easily routed from the large and growing area of Baghdad under their control. The militia has more fighters, weapons and sophistication today than it did in 2004, when it battled U.S. forces to a standstill in two strongholds, the Shiite holy city of Najaf and Sadr City, Baghdad's sprawling Shiite slum.
That's what's known as "Pay me now, pay me later."
Posted by:Fred

#11  Yes. Iraq is supposedly a sovereign nation again and we are supposedly there with their consent. Without it, the political pressure in this country to get out will be too great. Consent will be given as long as we go after Sunnis. Go after Shiites who do run the government and they will demand we leave immediately.
Posted by: ed   2007-01-11 20:02  

#10  Wether Maliki agrees or not we should bag US a Sadr. What is Maliki going to do Kick US out.
Posted by: C-Low   2007-01-11 19:31  

#9  Damner, Greg, notwen Fred, altho Ima sum he might agree.
Posted by: Shipman   2007-01-11 18:50  

#8  It's the gUardian Fred.
Posted by: Shipman   2007-01-11 18:48  

#7  The militia has more fighters, weapons and sophistication today than it did in 2004, when it battled U.S. forces to a standstill in two strongholds, the Shiite holy city of Najaf and Sadr City, Baghdad's sprawling Shiite slum.

Huh, what!?

How come I never heard anything about this? The Sadrites battled the US Army and Marines to a standstill? Did anybody tell them?

It was my understanding that the planned assaults in these areas were called off at the request of Maliki.

Let's use those Lancers we have in theater to do what they were designed to - level Najaf and Sadr City, rubble the level, then make the rubble bounce a few times. Then salt the earth, look around, and say "Who wants to f&^k with us next?"

Posted by: FOTSGreg   2007-01-11 16:15  

#6  "The kid gloves are off!"
Posted by: mojo   2007-01-11 15:15  

#5  We fought to a standstill because we were soooo worried about civilian casualties and bad PR from imbedded reporters. I don't think it will play out like that this time. Probably more like Falluja.
Posted by: bigjim-ky   2007-01-11 14:45  

#4  I'm guessing Maliki will not be able to save Tater this time. Too much politcal pressure. Anyone want fresh baked Tater-Tots with their popcorn? Get 'em while they're still warm!
Posted by: SteveS   2007-01-11 10:11  

#3  There have been many MSM articles about what Maliki said, none of them with direct quotes. At the moment I don't believe any of these recent articles. Maliki is likely to repeat his past performance and get in the way of effective US actions against Shiite militias.
MacNails nailed it.
Posted by: Anguper Hupomosing9418   2007-01-11 10:00  

#2  How I hate the Guardian , good news , badly reported , and distorted , with extra dribble on top for icing ..

Does this mean we have a free policy to reign in Sadrs militia in Ansar , Basra , and central Baghdad ? Disarming doesnt cut it for me ,seeing as they are been supplied with weapons at a faster rate than we take them off ..

A statement along the lines of all non-iraqi civs to leave the country ASAP , would be a good start , quickly followed by outlawing any militia , with a shoot on site policy for any non servicemen armed with anything heavier than a 9mm pistol . We could all have a laugh aswell if a guns-for-cash hand-in policy was activated .

Secondly we need to approach Iran with a no holds barred action approach . I for one like the signs that we are gearing up to a pre-emp on Iran .. a non -invasion , but strikes to totally wipe out their pathetic religio-state infrastructure .. put them back in the stone age where islam lives . Bad infrastructure will put back their nuke program substantially , and will inevitably lead to decay of their investments in the pursuit of nucleur tec , which in turn will lead to civil unrest from the non extremists /political groups , see how Iran's nutjob leaders likes other people stoking the fires of hate in their country

2007 is going to be a very rough but rewarding year I feel .



Posted by: MacNails   2007-01-11 06:30  

#1  Cause the Great Satan is beginning to caught on?
Posted by: gromgoru   2007-01-11 05:19  

00:00