Larger Shiite Revolt Looming In Iraq?

[Chewbacca]

This could turn ugly quick. It seems to be a damn if you do, damned if you don't situation for the coalition. Arresting or killing him will just spark even more flames of violent retribution. Fortunately this guy's popularity seems to be marginal and his people are fighting with other Shiite factions. If the Shiite's had a unified front agianst the occupation, it would be a much, much grimmer situation indeed. Perhaps the best approach is to allow some of the other Shiite factions, the ones who are less violently opposed to the Coalition, take care of him. That would allow the puppet governing council and the coalition off the hook for the recourse of taking action.

Thoughts? Opinions? Ect.?


Link
****************************

Supporters of Shi'ite Cleric Continue Second Day of Protests


For the second day, Iraqi demonstrators, many of them disciples of a Shi'ite cleric, have clashed with US troops in Baghdad and other Iraqi cities. At least eight American troops and more than 50 Iraqis have been reported killed in the on-going rioting. Violence broke out again between US troops and followers of Shi'ite cleric Moqtada al-Sadr during demonstrations in Baghdad Monday. Two days of clashes in the Iraqi capital and other cities follow US decisions to close a Shi'ite newspaper and arrest of a senior aide to Moqtada al-Sadr.
A call by the cleric for his militia - known as the al-Mahdi army - to 'terrorize the enemy' has prompted thousands of his disciples to take to the streets, and for the U.S. military to take action in response.

U.S. Military spokesman General Mark Kimmitt said, "The action of the al-Mahdi army over the past 48 hours is clearly inconsistent with a safe and secure environment. Individuals who create violence, who incite violence, who executive violence against persons inside Iraq will be hunted down and captured or killed."

Top U.S. administrator for Iraq, Paul Bremer, labeled Moqtada al-Sadr an outlaw.

U.S. military authorities announced an Iraqi judge has issued a warrant for Moqtada al-Sadr's arrest in connection with last April's murder of cleric Abdel Majid al-Khoei. General Kimmitt would not speculate on when the arrest warrant might be executed.

"He is free to surrender," Mr. Kimmitt added. "He is free to walk into any police station. He is free to have that warrant served upon him. He will be treated with dignity. He will be treated with respect."

Meanwhile, U.S. Marines began to seal off the town of Fallujah, west of the Iraqi capital, in what the U.S. military is warning will be an overwhelming response to last week's murder of four American security contractors.

Despite the Shi'ite unrest, President Bush attempted to reassure the Iraqi people the United States will not allow the increasing violence to deter coalition plans for rebuilding Iraq - or delay sovereignty being handed back to the Iraqi people on June, 30 2004. He said, "That is an important message for them to hear. If they think that we are not sincere about staying the course, many people will not continue to take the risk toward freedom and democracy."

But some officials in Washington are beginning to question whether the security situation in Iraq will allow for a June 30 handover. Among them are Republican Senator Richard Lugar, the chairman of the Senate Foreign Relations Committee who spoke on ABC news.

"Clearly, pragmatically, you have the militias that have not been disarmed, and if, in fact, the worse situation comes the militia begin to fight each other," Mr. Lugar said.

Despite the Bush administration's assertion that Iraq is just one front in the war on terror, Democratic Senator Edward Kennedy - one of the administration's most outspoken critics on Iraq - is drawing election-year comparisons between the situation and a war the United States fought a generation ago.

He said, "Iraq is George Bush's Vietnam and this country needs a new president."

More than 600 American troops have been killed in Iraq. During the past year, attacks have been led largely by minority Sunnis. But the violence during the past two days has been carried out largely by majority Shi'ites, a group that, until recently, had been seen as being more supportive of the U.S. occupation, since it was Shi'ites who were suppressed by decades by Saddam Hussein

[Skunk]

Originally posted by Chewbacca: This could turn ugly quick. It seems to be a damn if you do, damned if you don't situation for the coalition. Arresting or killing him will just spark even more flames of violent retribution. Fortunately this guy's popularity seems to be marginal and his people are fighting with other Shiite factions. If the Shiite's had a unified front agianst the occupation, it would be a much, much grimmer situation indeed. Perhaps the best approach is to allow some of the other Shiite factions, the ones who are less violently opposed to the Coalition, take care of him. That would allow the puppet governing council and the coalition off the hook for the recourse of taking action. Thoughts? Opinions? Ect.?

He has a following of approximately 1,000,000 supporters (10-15%) of the Shi'ite population and around 3,000 hardcore militiamen to back him up. In broader terms, although rightly described as marginal, those figures still represent a powerful group and voice.

Much depends on how the coalition deal with him.

Sadr wants the US to turn its forces on to his supporters. That will give him the aura of the 'hero resistance fighter', while the inevitable civilian casualties will help to make Shi'ites forget anything good that the coalition might have done for them - and look to him as a figurehead.

Bush/Blair seem to be playing right into his hands.
Trumping up phoney murder charges (a la Saddam Hussein style) was just fantastic postive propaganda for Sadr. Middle-easterners just love a martyr and the parallel to Saddam's time will convince many moderates that the promised democracy was a lie.

Likewise, the over-aggressive measures against his supporters in residential areas will make sure that, if they weren't against the coaliton before, the residents sure as hell are now.

When will Bush and Blair figure out that the military is not always the best option? Cutting a few deals with rival moderate shi'ite groups could have solved the 'problem' of this man. And since they don't appear to care whether they act outside the law on this issue anyway, they should have confined their 'force' to a simple assassination.

[Sir Taliesin]

How do you know the charges are phoney?

[Timber Loftis]

And, weren't those charges trumped up a while back? Erm... I mean allegedly trumped up? [img]graemlins/heee.gif[/img]

He has a following of approximately 1,000,000 supporters (10-15%) of the Shi'ite population and around 3,000 hardcore militiamen to back him up. In broader terms, although rightly described as marginal, those figures still represent a powerful group and voice.

Well, if this thread is accurate, and only the larger Shiites revolt, these numbers will dwindle quickly. [img]graemlins/heee.gif[/img]

Ooops, two smarmy smilies in one post. Whatever came over me?

[Timber Loftis]

From Today's NY Times:

Taken from
April 6, 2004 Article
8 Americans Dead in Iraq Clashes Since Weekend, U.S. Says
By CHRISTINE HAUSER
and KIRK SEMPLE
________________________________________________
*snip*

In Najaf, an aide to Mr. Sadr said at a news conference that the uprising by the cleric's supporters would continue until occupying troops were withdrawn from populated areas and prisoners were released, Reuters reported.

The aide, Qays al-Khazali, also read a statement from Mr. Sadr denouncing President Bush as "the great evil."

"This insurrection shows that the Iraqi people are not satisfied with the occupation and they will not accept oppression," the statement said.

He called on all countries to withdraw their soldiers from Iraq.

Mr. Sadr, who is being sought by American and Iraqi authorities, had been holed up in a mosque in the city of Kufa and had vowed to stay in the mosque until his demands were met. But he said in the statement that he had decided to leave that sanctuary because he feared it would be raided by foreign troops.

Mr. Sadr was reported to have traveled to Najaf, 100 miles south of Baghdad, earlier today.

On Monday, American administrators declared Mr. Sadr an "outlaw" and disclosed that an Iraqi judge had issued a warrant for his arrest in connection with the murder of a rival cleric last April.

Mr. Bremer, in an interview on CNN today, pledged to arrest Mr. Sadr.

"He believes that in the new Iraq, like in the old Iraq, power should be with the guy who's got the guns, and that's an unacceptable vision for Iraq," he said. "He represents a fundamental challenge to the rule of law in Iraq, and it will not stand."

American and Iraqi forces that have amassed on the outskirts of Falluja have begun conducting raids in the city in what Donald H. Rumsfeld, the United States defense secretary, called "a methodical effort" to find and capture the people responsible for killing the four American military contractors last week in Falluja. Speaking at a televised news conference in Norfolk, Va., Mr. Rumsfeld said today that coalition forces had gone after "high-value targets" and captured or killed several people since the weekend.

Explosions and gunfire were heard in the city throughout the night and into this morning, though The Associated Press reported that the majority of the American-led force remained on the outskirts of the city. Marines pushed into an industrial zone in the eastern part of the city, clashing with guerrillas, the agency said.

Elsewhere in Iraq, fighting flared between coalition troops and guerrillas. Italian troops clashed with Mr. Sadr's Mehdi Army militia in Nasiriya, Reuters reported. Four Italian vehicles were set ablaze during the predawn fighting and 12 Italian soldiers were wounded. Prime Minister Silvio Berlusconi said in a statement that he was committed to keeping Italian troops in Iraq.

*snip*

[Skunk]

From NY Times, as quoted by TL: Mr. Bremer, in an interview on CNN today, pledged to arrest Mr. Sadr. "He believes that in the new Iraq, like in the old Iraq, power should be with the guy who's got the guns, and that's an unacceptable vision for Iraq," he said.

Coming from the guy with the MOST guns and whose rule is based upon the presence of those guns, that's actually quite humourous.

[Chewbacca]

Originally posted by Sir Taliesin: How do you know the charges are phoney?

I dunno if the charges are exactly phoney, just trumped up, or valid. I did read that the CPA sat on the charges since last October, which does suggest funny business.

[Skunk]

Originally posted by Chewbacca: quote: Originally posted by Sir Taliesin: How do you know the charges are phoney?

I dunno if the charges are exactly phoney, just trumped up, or valid. I did read that the CPA sat on the charges since last October, which does suggest funny business. [/QUOTE]And now he is 'suddenly' also wanted for 'murdering a pregnant women' and 'stealing from a mosque'! The administration is really laying it on with a trowel now...

http://english.aljazeera.net/NR/exer...3A8F5DFEBB.htm

[Sir Taliesin]

I figure last October they were just trying to keep the peace and not have a civil war break out, but since Sadr decided to call for violence, the CPA now has nothing more to lose. I don't know about the other charges, but that's typically how the American justice system works. They pile on the charges, figureing something will stick.

As for reading an Aljazeera piece... nah not looking for more propaganda. I'd rather read the NY Times. It's the Arab worlds answer to DEBKA.

BTW, Skunk you never answered the question. How do you know the original charge was phoney?

[ 04-07-2004, 10:50 AM: Message edited by: Sir Taliesin ]

[Skunk]

Originally posted by Sir Taliesin: I figure last October they were just trying to keep the peace and not have a civil war break out, but since Sadr decided to call for violence, the CPA now has nothing more to lose. I don't know about the other charges, but that's typically how the American justice system works. They pile on the charges, figureing something will stick. As for reading an Aljazeera piece... nah not looking for more propaganda. I'd rather read the NY Times. It's the Arab worlds answer to DEBKA. BTW, Skunk you never answered the question. How do you know the original charge was phoney?

Because Sadr was no where near the site of the killing and the perpetrators were never caught. There is no evidence to suggest that Sadr had anything to do with it otherwise they would have arrested him months ago. And the timing of the announcement is more than suspicious.

BTW, if you had bothered to read the Al'Jazeera article, you would have noted how wonderfully unbiased it was and how it reported the official US line without adding any comments to the contrary.

Of course, if truthful unbiased reporting is not your thing, the NY Times is always there for a bit of salious made up news. I hear that their reporters have become rather too well known for it