Sadr Surrendering?

Loading

Is there any doubt why this happened?

Shiite cleric Muqtada al-Sadr said Sunday that he was pulling his fighters off the streets nationwide and called on the government to stop raids against his followers and free them from prison.

The Iraqi government quickly welcomed al-Sadr’s apparent move to resolve a widening conflict with his movement, sparked Tuesday by operations against his backers in the oil-rich southern city of Basra.

Al-Sadr’s nine-point statement was issued by his headquarters in the holy city of Najaf and broadcast through loudspeakers on Shiite mosques. It said the first point was: “taking gunmen off the streets in Basra and elsewhere.”

He also demanded that the Iraqi government stop “haphazard raids” and release security detainees who haven’t been charged, two issues cited by his movement as reasons for fighting the government.

Followers handed out sweets in Baghdad’s main Mahdi Army militia stronghold of Sadr City.

Government spokesman Ali al-Dabbagh called the statement “positive and responsible.” But he also warned in a telephone interview broadcast on Iraqi state TV. that security forces would continue to target those who don’t follow the order.

Why you ask? Because they were getting their asses kicked from one end of the city to the other:

With the fifth day of fighting in Baghdad, Basrah and the South completed, the Mahdi Army has suffered major losses over the past 36 hours. The Mahdi Army has not faired well over the past five days of fighting, losing an estimated two percent of its combat power, using the best case estimate for the size of the militia.

A look at the open source press reports from the US and Iraqi military and the established newspapers indicates 145 Mahdi Army fighters were killed, 81 were wounded, 98 were captured, and 30 surrendered during the past 36 hours.

Since the fighting began on Tuesday 358 Mahdi Army fighters were killed, 531 were wounded, 343 were captured, and 30 surrendered. The US and Iraqi security forces have killed 125 Mahdi Army fighters in Baghdad alone, while Iraqi security forces have killed 140 Mahdi fighters in Basra.

While the size of the Mahdi Army is a constant source of debate, media accounts often put the Mahdi Army at anywhere from 40,000 to 60,000 fighters. With an estimated 1,000 Mahdi fighters killed, captured, wounded and surrendered, the Mahdi Army has taken an attrition rate of 1.5 to 2.5 percent over the past five days.

It didn’t look too good for them on the political front either:

diwaniyah-protest-03292008.jpgAbout 200 demonstrators held a rally to support the military operations in Basra
and Maliki’s government, in Diwaniya on Saturday.

The major political parties in the ruling Coalition remain united in supporting the offensive against the Mahdi Army and the Iranian-backed Special Groups cells. President Jalal Talabani and Massoud Barazani, the president of the Kurdish Regional Government reiterated their support for the operation on Friday, while Prime Minister Nouri al Maliki ratcheted up the rhetoric against the Shia terror groups.

Maliki called the Shia terrorists “worse than al Qaeda” and vowed to remain in Basrah until the operation is completed. “Our determination is strong … those who break the law are punished, and those who draw their weapons in the face of the state are punished,” Maliki said on Iraqi state television.

And the disinformation campaign waged by Sadr, which the MSM fell for hook, line and sinker was highlighted once again:

The Sadrist movement claimed numerous Iraqi policemen and soldiers are defecting. “Groups of Iraqi troops came to us to lay down their arms,” said Sheikh Salam al Afraiji, the leader of the Sadrist movement in eastern Baghdad.

But the spokesman of Baghdad Operations Command denied Iraqi security forces are defecting en masse. “The registered number that we have [defecting to the Sadrists] is that 15 soldiers were able to escape,” said Major General Qassim Atta in a briefing today in Baghdad. Atta stressed that there are over 50,000 Iraqi security forces operating in Baghdad, and some level of defections should be expected. Atta also said Maliki has “ordered [the military] to prosecute those soldiers according to the Military Punishments Law.”

Either way you look at it, the man was getting beat and wants a time out. Problem is, the Iraqi government seems to be allowing it instead of pushing ahead and taking out the whole of the gang. But I have no doubt in the long run Sadr is done. Maliki still remains in Basra, Sadr’s troops are in retreat, and the sovereignty of Iraq appears to be strengthening, slowly but surely.

Whatever will the MSM do? Ed Morrissey already noted how they spun this fight:

Anyone who follows the news closely in Iraq knew this day would come. The British left a power vacuum behind in the south that the Baghdad government could not fill at the time, and Sadr and the Supreme Islamic Iraqi Council’s Badr Brigades filled it instead. They have fought each other and some smaller Shi’ite groups for control of the streets ever since 2005, as Steven Vincent tried to warn people just before they murdered him in Basra. The Iraqi government had no choice but to challenge the militias for control of Basra and the surrounding areas, but they waited until the Iraqi Army had enough strength to succeed.

Did our media give anyone this context? No. They reported it as some kind of spontaneous eruption of rebellion without noting at all that a nation can hardly be considered sovereign while its own security forces cannot enter a large swath of its own territory. And in the usual defeatist tone, they reported that our mission in Iraq had failed without waiting to see what the outcome of the battle would be.

I doubt anyone is shocked that our MSM would perform this way. Iraq has been off the frontpage for months now because there was nothing bad to report. They must of gone into a orgasmic shudder when this Sadr fight came up, not understanding that Sadr was no longer a match for the American trained Iraqi army.

0 0 votes
Article Rating
Subscribe
Notify of
13 Comments
Inline Feedbacks
View all comments

So Sadr, instead of being crushed, gets to dictate the terms on which fighting will stop, refuse to disarm, and call off his fighters only if Maliki will stop trying to crush him in advance of the elections.

And all this because the Iraqi “army,” even backed up by the American army, was not able to crush the much smaller Mahdi army.

So, to review: Sadr dictated the terms of cease-fire (again), Maliki failed to crush his political opponent, and the U.S. has destroyed the slim hopes of political reconciliation by allying itself with Maliki’s failed attempt to crush his political opponents.

Add this to the horrific levels of violence, and no wonder you’re happy about

al-Sadr’s actions mean nothing unless/until his militia either disarms itself or is disarmed. Anything else is just playing poker, right? He bluffs, he feints…

Ok, let me understand this: Maliki starts a Sadr Army purge in definitive terms announcing  "a decisive and final battle" for Basra, puts in his best troops in, adds northern battalions, enlists Americans and Brits to join in the mission …then, when he’s winning, he turns on his own prior commitments, to rid Basra of militias, and in consequence, steps away from his first –highly needed victory– steals his generals first win, and tells Western support, "thanks, but now I’ve changed my mind, decided to let Sadr stay armed and may even let those captured go free; not only all that, he’s letting those that "are worse than AQ" remain.

Does this sound like Sadr’s Army "were getting their asses kicked from one end of the city to the other"? Or, does it look as tho’ there may be another explanation?

Maliki even leaves Bush’s rhetoric out there blowing in the breeze when he said it was the "defining moment" in Iraq.

What’s appears to be prima facie is Maliki was doing poorly and time wasn’t on his side to finish the job. Now the public is hurting with little food and water.

You say:" Problem is, the Iraqi government seems to be allowing it instead of pushing ahead and taking out the whole of the gang."

What will you say if Maliki does more than just  give them a "time out" …and lets them keep their arms?

So your disappointed they did not wipe them out?

Isn’t Sadr still hiding in Iran?

It was a time out for both sides to save face. In the end, Al-Sadr’s army would have been crushed, yet Iraq’s government would have looked weak taking weeks or months to crush those forces even when Iraq’s forces in the area outnumbered Sadr’s forces at least 2-1 and Sadr’s forces were outgunned too. It could have been their version of the Alamo with the government forces playing the role of the Mexicans.

This does hurt Al-Sadr more. His spies were outed, his heavy weapons, which he probably can’t resupply were used, surveillance has probably outted at least some of his weapon depots and safe houses. Those night raids are going to hurt Al-Sadr.

Mike’s America: I believe Sadr has been back from Iran.. and no welcome for return… since May of last year.

This Basra battle is, I believe, conducted by rogue (or publicly unsanctioned) elements of Sadr’s Madhi force. Last I knew, he had extended the cease fire for six add’l months, per Roggio’s embedded Iraq report. The same report via a WaPo report.

So it may be that Sadr is merely calling off the disobedient dogs by yanking on the chain (in the wake of a failed mission, of course).

Sadr himself gets off scott free. He maintains good standing, saying “I agreed to a cease fire”, and gets points for controlling his internal rebels in the aftermath.

As far as “dictating terms” (also known as that coveted “negotiation” path in usual DNC speak), “disarming”, or Maliki letting “Sadr stay armed and may even let those captured go free; not only all that, he’s letting those that “are worse than AQ” remain.”… the point remains the same. The Iraqis demonstrated their intents for a functioning, self sufficient nation by stepping up to the plate to regain control over Iraq mobsters in Basra.

If any of you think Iraq will find “unity” and peace with power hungry Sadr’ists, you have the same chance at finding US govt “unity” and with our own drug cartels.

The question you should *really* be asking yourselves is, can a freely elected Iraq govt’s nat’l military force control the mobs and gangs that seek personal power and control within it’s borders? Is this not what the naysayers want? Let Iraq defend themselves?

Claim failure all you want, for too many of you are vested in failure for a political agenda. Despite every reality, every cogent argument, you will go the extra mile to weave failure out of any each and every single event and battlefield until November.

But your opinion, or mine, matters whit. Because the Iraqis’ future lies in how much faith *they* place in their elected govt. Hopefully they will have ample opportunities in the future to win that faith, and not have their progress nipped in the bud by poll-driven leadership that is elected to office by promises of failure.

Maliki has not been able to either defeat or disarm Sadr. The 2% casualties have  I am sure already been replaced. let’s remember that Sadr is the most popular leader of millions of Shia. Sadr city is home to  at least 2 million. Sadr captured many more arms than he lost including armored vehicles.

The “most popular leader” of Shia title belongs to al Sistani, John Ryan. Sadr may be the “most popular” of jihad Shia. And their numbers are a very small percentage of Iraq’s total Shi’ite population.

Sounds like Sistani has spoken, and the left’s greatest hope for American defeat in Iraq, Sadr, is quitting yet again.

If the Americans and Iraqi government wants Sadr to surrender, they better ask the Iranians very nicely.

Question to Moderator: Am I correct in assuming that my posts are not visible until they are “Moderated”?