The battle of Basra
The battle of Basra is becoming more intense. Basically, the Maliki government is using the Badr Corps militia against the Al Sadr Mahdi army. Two Shia militias fighting it out. The Badr corps is probably the least anti American militia in Iraq.
In my opinion, from watching the news for the last five years, I believe that the Mahdi army has gradually increased power and influence over the war years. This seems like a rather desperate attempt to stop that. I do not think that the Badr corps can dislodge or destroy the Mahdi army. So this will mean increased chaos, and it certainly shows that the surge ordered by President Bush has not really provided any kind of enduring security for Iraq.
Oh and by the way, Muqtada al Sadr, leader of the Mahdi army, absolutely hates the US. Maybe it is because we tried to kill him a few times. We missed. In my opinion, he is the one most likely to end up ruling whatever entity will be Iraq once America withdraws.
Well John McCain, what is your campaign story line now?
Posted: March 27th, 2008 under Iraq, McCain.
Comments: 24
Comments
Comment from Max
Time: March 27, 2008, 12:46 pm
Just a little update on the Basra fighting. A blown Iraqi pipeline has cause oil to hit $107 a barrel.
OK Democrats, this is a fact, and a demonstrated result that the war is not at all going well. George Bush keeps saying the surge is a success. John McCain says we should stay in Iraq for 100 years. Yet despite what these men say, it gets worse.
The only solution as I see it is to pull the plug, leave, and prepare for a society with less oil. In any case, available oil will decrease no matter what we do, we had better get ready.
And as far as the Republican party, who deceived us and got us into this mess of a war, throw the bums out!
Comment from Pat
Time: March 30, 2008, 9:43 am
Max
The following article explains what is going on in Basra in a way that the media seems unable to do:
Comment from Pat
Time: March 30, 2008, 9:52 am
BTW, There are rumors coming out of Russia that bush is going to attack Iran on April 6th.
Comment from Pat
Time: March 30, 2008, 10:04 am
The rumors are all over the internet. This is one site:
Comment from Pat
Time: March 30, 2008, 2:13 pm
Ignore my last two comments. Someone sent me a year old article.
Comment from Max
Time: March 30, 2008, 7:21 pm
We had some very serious scares in both 2007 and 2006, around March and April. I think Seymour Hersh can be credited at least once for blowing the whistle and saving us from a disastrous war. I hope we can survive until the Bushies are gone.
Comment from Max
Time: March 30, 2008, 7:41 pm
Meanwhile, back in Basra, the Sadrists are winning, even counter attacking. The government attack has broken down. Failure could mean the end of the Maliki government, a major embarrassment for Bush and McCain.
When have we seen this before? We are supporting a failed state with an army that will not fight. Oh yes, South Vietnam. How we never learn. But SV was never THIS bad!
Comment from Max
Time: March 31, 2008, 11:35 am
Fighting has possibly died down However, what I see as key here is that the demands of PM Maliki, that the Mahdi army disarm, are being ignored. Instead, Al-Sadr is making counter demands that all Mahdi army prisoners be released. Politically, Maliki may have to go along, he is that weak.
Maliki, unlike Al-Sadr, does not have a true force he can command. What is called the National Army, is really basically the Badr Corps, another militia. (the Mahdi army concentrated on infiltrating the police)
In places like Basra, where fighting has decreased, the Mahdi army has simply faded away, classic guerrilla tactics. Baghdad is still violent however.
Increasingly, this is looking like a defeat for the fiction of a national government headed by PM Maliki.
Comment from JerryA
Time: April 2, 2008, 5:14 am
I sure as hell hope not Black Dog. Me thinks that Bob is suffering from a combination of Iraqnaphobia and election fatigue. Who would ever think that either Iraq or Bushco could be boring. I thinks that apathetic would be more appropriate. Apathy being a true American tradition.
Comment from Josh Hammond
Time: April 2, 2008, 7:08 am
Sorry folks. There is incoming fire and we are all running for cover. Its either the Clintons, CIA, FBI or a technology glich in the main system that we can’t fix yet. No agenda here. Promise. We’re working on it or I should say they are working on it.
Thanks for your patience and support.
Comment from Pat
Time: April 2, 2008, 8:13 am
Good, BoB’s not dead. So, let’s keep this going while we’re waiting for the glitch fix.
I saw this item at a blog called Sharon Cobb, and thought it was funny:
“All day yesterday, Hillary Clinton compared herself to Rocky at her stump speeches throughout Pennsylvania.
She played the theme from ‘Rocky’ as she entered arenas and said ‘Rocky and I aren’t quitters.’
True. They’re not quitters.
But after the distance, Rocky still lost to a black man, and so will Hillary.”
Comment from Josh Hammond
Time: April 2, 2008, 11:39 am
Say Pat, Hillary could be the Harold Rocky Stassen of the Party. Both had multiple sequels. I believe I have this right: Stalone wrote the script with him as the star and no Hollywood studio would fund it. Some were interested in the story line, but not with him in the lead role. Eventually he raised his own money. The movie was shot, so to speak, for $1 million in less than a month, about what Clinton has left for her knockout.
Comment from Amos N. Handy
Time: April 2, 2008, 2:26 pm
This Bush-Cheney ass kisser should not be teaching law ….
Now, finally, the Yoo memo has been declassified and released. And even though we knew so much about it, it is diffcult to read it and not be shocked by Yoo’s argument and how matter-of-factly he makes it. There are many breathtaking passages, but there is a short section, as described in the Washington Post, that stands out:
Interrogators who harmed a prisoner would be protected by a “national and international version of the right to self-defense,” Yoo wrote. He also articulated a definition of illegal conduct in interrogations — that it must “shock the conscience” — that the Bush administration advocated for years.
“Whether conduct is conscience-shocking turns in part on whether it is without any justification,” Yoo wrote, explaining, for example, that it would have to be inspired by malice or sadism before it could be prosecuted.
By this incredibly dangerous and misguided reasoning, any interrogator who tortured or cruelly mistreated a prisoner could not be held responsible so long as he wasn’t inspired by malice or sadism — as long as, in other words, he was just following orders. As long as he administered it dispassionately almost any kind of physical or mental torture would be condoned, by Yoo’s reasoning. Moreover, virtually anything an interrogator did to a prisoner could be justified so long as the President deemed it necessary as matter of national self-defense. Again, from the Post:
“If a government defendant were to harm an enemy combatant during an interrogation in a manner that might arguably violate a criminal prohibition, he would be doing so in order to prevent further attacks on the United States by the al Qaeda terrorist network,” Yoo wrote. “In that case, we believe that he could argue that the executive branch’s constitutional authority to protect the nation from attack justified his actions.”The ends justify the means. Yoo, now a law professor at Berkeley, defends the memo, saying it was standard-issue “boilerplate” aimed at protecting Presidential power. What a relief.
(Here are links to the full memo: Part 1, Part 2, Part 3 and Part 4).
NOTE: In a new piece in Vanity Fair, Phillippe Sands lays the blame for abuses on the lawyers, and their bosses.
Comment from Amos N. Handy
Time: April 2, 2008, 2:30 pm
the links ….
http://www.time-blog.com/swampland/2008/04/the_yoo_memo.html
Comment from Max
Time: April 2, 2008, 3:04 pm
We have become what we seek to destroy.
Comment from Max
Time: April 3, 2008, 7:53 am
Until the posting problems are over, I will put this here.
Here is my analysis of the Basra fighting.
For a long time, the SCIRI (Supreme Council Islamic Revolution Iraq) with
it’s military wing the Badr Corps, and Muqtada al Sadr’s Mahdi Army have
been tussling for control of the Iraqi territory south of Baghdad. The
Mahdi Army already controls most of Baghdad, control of the south would make
it the pre-eminent Shia organization Iraq. And since the Shia outnumber the
Sunni’s, well you can figure who will be the big guy in Iraq.
Muqtada al-Sadr’s Mahdi Army has gradually increased it’s control of towns
in the south. Also, he has fought at least two pitched battles with US
forces, and emerged with more influence each time.
I think the main reason that the government of Prime Minister Maliki
started this fight was to try to stop this gradual erosion of Badr corps
power in the south. There is another idea floating around the net, that
reducing the Mahdi Army’s power was seen as necessary to secure US supply
line as a prelude to a US attack on Iran. I think this is an American, not
an Iraqi idea. The Badr Corps under al-Hakim have refrained from attacks on
US supply routes, and generally supported the Maliki government. However, I
do not think their non interference of US supply routes would be guaranteed
in a US attack on Iran. That is wishful thinking on the part of Bush
administration strategists, and we have to remember that the Bush
administration has been wrong about EVERYTHING in Iraq.
So. The Iraqi National Army, which really is basically the Badr Corps, a
militia, (The Sadrists control the national police) attacked Mahdi Army
forces in Basra and other southern cities. The attack collapsed within
days. Iraqi National Army forces basically refused to fight or deserted
over to the Mahdi Army. This is truly an important event. It is an out and
out win for Muqtada al-Sadr, and he really hates America. Perhaps that is
because we tried to kill him several times.
And this may prove to conclusive when we consider the American military
presence in Iraq. The supply lines south from Baghdad have always been our
Achilles heel. Basically they are guarded by Iraqi Sheiks, paid for this
purpose. In a sense, we can say they are paid not to shoot. Also, until
now, the Badr Corps has been pre-eminent in the south. They have had a
policy of not directly opposing the US. I think this has shifted.
Al-Hakim’s Badr Corps has come out as a big loser in the Basra battle, as
has the Maliki government.
What does this mean for America forces? It means that Muqtada is now the
strongest player both in Baghdad and the south. He has several options. He
out and out close the supply roads. He can allow a gradual increase in
guerrilla strikes. He can organize mass civilian demonstrations to close
the roads. Al-Hakim has adopted a policy of waiting for America to
withdraw. Al-Sadr has always been demanding an immediate US withdrawal
since the first days of the US invasion. Now he has the power to force the
retreat. If the supply lines are cut, an orderly US withdrawal becomes
impossible, we will have to fight our way out. And not everyone will make
it. The Private Contractors will panic. They will not do their jobs, the
armed security guards may kidnap the military and civilian American leaders
they are guarding, as bargaining chips for seat out. The US can only supply
some one third of US forces by air. There are not enough vehicles for all
units in Iraq, they all share. And if Iran allows surface to air missiles
in, which they have so far declined to do, air supply and evacuation are
impossible.
And yes, about Iran. Until now, Muqtada al-Sadr was basically hostile to
Iran. The Badr Corps, which spent the Saddam years in exile in Iran, was
the Iranian backed force in Iraq. Now al-Sadr seems to have improved
relations with Iran.
For a US withdrawal to succeed, we will need the help of Iran. And here is
where I would like to say a few things to Barack Obama and Hillary Clinton.
Stop fighting each other. One of you will be President, one will not. It
is high time to start joint efforts to fight John McCain. Senator McCain’s
entire position is that America must remain in Iraq until victory. That is
impossible, this Basra debacle proves that. The only question now is how an
American withdrawal can be managed. It is time to think of what is best for
America. That is the mission of the Democratic Party of the United States
of America.
Comment from Pat
Time: April 3, 2008, 8:01 am
General Mukasey gave a speech before congress arguing that the president should have warrantless eavesdropping powers, and during the course of the speech, he actually admitted that the administration knew about 9/11 BEFORE it happened.
Mukasey said that officials; “shouldn’t need a warrant when someone with a phone in Iraq picks up a phone and calls somebody in the United States because that’s the call we may really want to know about. And before 9/11, that’s the call we didn’t know about. We knew that there has been a call from someplace that has been known to be a safe house in Afghanistan, and we knew that it came to the United States. We didn’t know precisely where it went.”
That’s bullshit! Under FISA, if they knew a call was coming from a known safe house in Afghanistan, they could haveeavesdropped without a warrant, and then applied for a warrant within 72 hours, and that’s what they undoubtedly did. They knew we were going to be attacked, and they allowed it to happen.
Comment from Pat
Time: April 3, 2008, 8:30 am
“Senator McCain’s entire position is that America must remain in Iraq until victory.”
I was watching a show on PBS the other night about a group of soldiers in Iraq who had been given cameras and told to film anything they wanted. One of the things they said was that this tour of duty for them was different than their previous tours. This time they were basically providing security for supply vehicles, and they were not supposed to engage the enemy unless they had to. Based on that show, which was filmed almost entirely by the soldiers, it seems to me that this is no longer a war, it is an occupation. How do you win an occupation?
It seems to me that administration insists on calling whatever is going on in Iraq a war, because if the American people knew what it really was they would be screaming for us to leave.
Comment from Max
Time: April 3, 2008, 9:15 am
Either we are just hanging on so that George Bush can fob the whole mess on to the next President, and save his legacy, or somebody still believes that America still has a chance to control the Iraqi oil. We do not have a chance to control the oil.
Comment from bdr
Time: April 3, 2008, 9:19 am
Jerry and Josh,
I’m hearing from a few friends and noticing on some other wordpress blogs growing angry dissatisfaction with wordpress and its performance and wordpress’ response to blogger concerns. For what it’s worth, if you’re thinking of migrating, I’m almost completely happy with typepad.
And, since Max kindly posted new content, here’s more for the five of you who click over:
The evil banality of Michael Gerson, plus links
http://bdr.typepad.com/blckdgrd/2008/04/080402.html
The evil banality of Richard Cohen and profound misreadings of a profound book of war and pacifism, plus links
http://bdr.typepad.com/blckdgrd/2008/04/epitaph.html
On pure cowardice and political cynicism, plus links
http://bdr.typepad.com/blckdgrd/2008/03/080331.html
On seeing Chris Matthews in SF airport, plus links
http://bdr.typepad.com/blckdgrd/2008/03/airportery-or-k.html#comments
On discgolfing with a Hillary fan, plus links
Comment from Max
Time: April 3, 2008, 1:47 pm
Lt. Gen. William Odom testifies before the Senate Foreign Relations committee. The General and I agree. It is much better to withdraw when we can do so in a relatively orderly fashion. Now Muqtada al-Sadr posses the power to force America to withdraw. There is nothing the power or the United States can do to prevent it. And such an event will be humiliating chaos.
Comment from Max
Time: April 6, 2008, 7:27 am
I am still not able to post. I will put this here. Watch the news on Wednesday, Iraq time, Muqtada will try something.
Muqtada al Sadr is planning a mass demonstration against the occupation on April 9. The location is Najaf, which is astride a major North South highway in Iraq, and also essential for the transit of US supply.
Remember what I have been saying about the US supply lines. And from the Iraqi Resistance point of view, this is a very good option for closing our supply lines. masses of angry unarmed civilians blocking the roads. With TV cameras. What can we do? No matter what our troops do, it will be the wrong thing.
Comment from Max
Time: April 6, 2008, 7:41 am
Some 1,000 troops deserted in Basra, including dozens of officers and senior commanders. Maliki is bribing some southern tribes with job offers to join his forces.
Iraq is looking shakier by the day.
http://www.nytimes.com/2008/04/04/world/middleeast/04iraq.html?_r=1&pagewanted=all&oref=slogin
Write a comment