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.

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.

Does this sound like Sadr’s Army “were getting their asses kicked from one end of the city to the other”?

Yes, it does sound like that. Heavy casualties in battles usually does mean your getting your ass kicked.

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

Ahh….the what ifs. If he does do that then it will be a mistake but up to this point he has not.

Baghdad - Iraqi Prime Minister Nuri al-Maliki praised a move by radical Shiite cleric, Moqtada al-Sadr, to withdraw his fighters from the streets of Basra and other provinces but the government said an offensive to restore security in some areas would continue. Al-Maliki said in a statement the move was a “step in the right direction” that would hopefully help with stabilizing security and creating a suitable climate for reconstruction.

More:

Six days after the Iraqi government launched Operation Knights’ Charge in Basrah against the Mahdi Army and other Iranian-backed Shia terror groups, Muqtada al Sadr, the Leader of the Mahdi Army, has called for his fighters to lay down their weapons and cooperate with Iraqi security forces. Sadr’s call for an end to the fighting comes as his Mahdi Army has taken serious losses since the operation began.

“Sadr has sent a message to his loyalists urging them to end all armed activities,” the Al Iraqiya television channel reported. Sadr “disowned anyone attacking the state institutions or parties’ offices and headquarters.”

“Based on responsibility towards Iraq and to stem Iraqi bloodshed and to preserve the country’s unity and integrity as a prelude to its independence, I call on the people to be up to their responsibility and awareness in order to maintain Iraq’s stability,” according to a statement issued by Sadr and sent to Voices of Iraq. Sadr has called for the government to free members of the Mahdi Army and the Sadrist Movement captured during recent operations.

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?

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