Comments on: Al-Sadr Orders Militia To Disarm
Iraqi Shiite Cleric Will Keep Elite Force Until U.S. Troop Withdrawal Timetable Enacted
Add a Comment See all 64 Comments
- Sadr is trying to refashion himself as an anti-American politician after the setbacks the government has dealt his militia this year. He said he was going to disarm most of his militia weeks ago. The newest twist that he''ll end his militia entirely if the U.S. leaves is electionerring for the coming provincial elections. The problem is, Sadr can say he''ll disarm if the U.S. leaves, but Maliki can say he is the one that got the to withdraw in the first place, thus outdoing Sadr. For more see: http://musingsoniraq.blogspot.com/2008/08/maliki-hits-campaign-trail.html
- Reply to this comment
- alohaone1:
Posted by alohaone1 at 05:29 PM : Aug 08, 2008
--------------------
12.You are incredibly ignorant when it comes to the subject of the Iraq war.
In closing, read more about the war, analyze what you read, see, and hear about it.
Maybe, read a history book about the Mid-East. Stop listening to rightwing spinners, their purpose is to make you ignorant regarding the Iraq war! And, it''s working!!
Part2 - Reply to this comment
- alohaone1:
Posted by alohaone1 at 05:29 PM : Aug 08, 2008
-------------------
1.I''m glad I amuse you.
2.Yes, he can and has been bought with U.S.money! How long, who knows?
3.Fighting is down,there are many reasons,the surge isn''t the primary one.
4.Security? It''s war torn! Iraq''s in pieces! There''s no security.
5.YES,we give them money to get their cooperation and guns. If you followed the war, you''d know this. It''s been S.O.P. for decades! You don''t know much
about Arab-U.S. history. I''m sorry you''re offended by this, but that''s how it is!
6.Iranians won''t give Iraq money or weapons WITHOUT ''strings attached''.
7.HUH? You think Iran or Iraq is not short of money? Wrong. They showed recent profit but it''s not enough to rebuild their infrastructure and help the public, etc..
8.You say they don''t want our money! They want money from WHOEVER will give it to them!
I suggest you tell your insane money theory to someone from the Bush administration who will promptly laugh in your face!
9.They aren''t beaten---yet.
10.I wouldn''t have Petraeus on my general staff. He lost nearly a quarter million weapons. He''s either an idiot or a gun-runner who''s armed the Middle-East!
11.They haven''t given up. They''re Arabs.
Part1 - Reply to this comment
- To win to this war, all we need to do is stop listening to these weak minded liberals..without that support, Muqtada al-Sadr si helpless..just like how nancy pelosi and Barack Obama and the DNC lost interest in Iraq...Muqtada al-Sadr knows it..and he knows its time to change strategy...
Posted by libsluv2spit at 09:59 PM : Aug 08, 2008
Considering that the "weak minded liberals" have been ignored in the first 5 years of the Iraq war, how can you possibly blame them for "not winning"? - Reply to this comment
- Excellent news! Our troops are needed in Georgia...
- Reply to this comment
- This is also a huge blow to Iran, which has been using the Mahdi Army as a vehicle to increase its influence in the country.
- Reply to this comment
- Well the good news just keeps coming in. Positive developments in Iraq seem like almost a daily occurence now days.
- Reply to this comment
- Wow, there''s lots of kool aid drinkers on tonite. Salivating on how your gestapo did that Mayor and his wife?
boosh''s success in Iraq rests entirely on Al Sadr. If he tells his militia to stop, they stop and vice, versa.
boosh and co. opened the door for civil war, and those folks are tired of killing themselves because of what boosh started.
Now, get back to your kool aid reich wingers.... - Reply to this comment
- The U.S. should of killed sadr many years ago. Nothing more then a dumb dune ****.Democrats will eventually destroy this country.
- Reply to this comment
- To win to this war, all we need to do is stop listening to these weak minded liberals..without that support, Muqtada al-Sadr si helpless..just like how nancy pelosi and Barack Obama and the DNC lost interest in Iraq...Muqtada al-Sadr knows it..and he knows its time to change strategy...
- Reply to this comment
- Pelosi is/was not the "Decider" - just maybe you should be looking at the source(s) of intel that fueled remarks from her and "others". There were 935 that are well documented...
Posted by IOWEIGN at 06:19 PM : Aug 08, 2008
+ report abuse
**********
935 lies..and yet YOU MORONS CANNOT IMPEACH???????
your right..I rather have bush than someone who share your weak minded..all whinney..conspiracy theory having liberal mindset.. - Reply to this comment
- IOWEIGN
They don''t want to be bothered by the facts about the sources of the intel any more than the administration wanted to be bothered by the facts about the defunct WMD programs. They ordered the intel they wanted and they got it. There was a real division of labor in the intelligence community. The real intelligence operatives were questioning the administration''s assertions as fast as the intelligence forgers could create the new "made-to-order" evidence for the administration. - Reply to this comment
- Al-Sad''r is caving. Trying to save face but caving in as he hides in Iran, afraid to return, and be indicted by the Maliki government.
- Reply to this comment
- The beauty of the written record is that we can always go back to it and compare our corrupt politicians both then and now... Here is the cornerstone of Democrats in Congress, Pelosi, back in ''''02: "Pelosi categorically declared on NBC%u2019s Meet the Press that %u201CSaddam Hussein certainly has chemical and biological weapons. There%u2019s no question about that"
Here is the full article in a very "Progressive" news source: http://www.commondreams.org/views05/0122
-08.htm
Posted by endofempire at 05:49 PM : Aug 08, 2008
Pelosi is/was not the "Decider" - just maybe you should be looking at the source(s) of intel that fueled remarks from her and "others". There were 935 that are well documented... - Reply to this comment
- The beauty of the written record is that we can always go back to it and compare our corrupt politicians both then and now... Here is the cornerstone of Democrats in Congress, Pelosi, back in ''02: "Pelosi categorically declared on NBC%u2019s Meet the Press that %u201CSaddam Hussein certainly has chemical and biological weapons. There%u2019s no question about that"
Here is the full article in a very "Progressive" news source: http://www.commondreams.org/views05/0122-08.htm - Reply to this comment
- Liberals have clearly lost their War on America - and now it''s all over for them, except for the shouting, but that too will fade soon enough.
It''s back to the fringe margins of society for you, liberals. - Reply to this comment
- I can''''t believe that some stupid GOP Republicans still think the surge is responsible for all this! If you think so you need to look at the timeline of the events, and the fact that unlike McSame and his 100 year war talk..the ONLY talk that has decreased the violence is the same talk that Senator Obama said needed to take place.. POLICTICAL TOGETHER WITH THE US AGREEING TO LEAVE THEIR COUNTRY!! Trust me if Dumb Bunny Bush would or McSame would have said NO WE AIN''''T LEAV''''EN FOR 100 YEARS you would have had more blood shed than you have ever seen before. And in any case, WE NEVER SHOULD HAVE INVADED THEIR COUNTRY..THERE WAS ANY MWD STUPID!!
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Posted by labrat9999 at 05:19 PM : Aug 08, 2008
I BET you even think that Obama somehow deserve credits for the success of the Surge even though he was ignorantly against it ! Yep , Obama wanted to cut and run and the muslim fanatics were so afraid that if the US follow Obama''s plan , they would be left with the whole country to themselves to run and do what ever they want and the thought of that is so scary that they gave up arms , and that is why Obama should be credited , after all, his cut and run strategy DID scare them ( at least the Libs probably think so ! ) - Reply to this comment
- It is all so easy to criticize after the fact, when the truth is that we all wanted our pound of flesh after 9-11 and any brown looking person wearing a turban was a good target. When it was popular to do so, the gold standard of the Democratic party, Al Gore, Mr. Green himself, pushed for the creation of a coalition and pushed for war.
- Reply to this comment
- NOW, we know WHERE at least a part of that $8 billion dollars that Bremer and Bush "lost", is going!
Specifically, to buy al-Sadr''''s cooperation--
--------------------------
Posted by stn_sage at 05:24 PM : Aug 08, 2008
YOU CRACKED ME UP BIG TIME! Do you think this guy can be BOUGHT with our money ??? You must be one of the ignorant LIBS who continue to deny the success of the Surge and to think that the security now in Iraq is not the work of the Surge and of our brave troops but rather a natural process happened on its own when muslim fanatics suddenly feel tired of violence and give up OR it was the results of us giving money to them to give up arms ...My friends , you do not understand Muslim Fanatics, period!. Bin Laden has 300 mil. in the bank when he plan to bomb America , Al-Sadr can get more money from Iran than ever from us and yet , Iranian money does not come with strings attached to Human Rights and Freedom and DEmocracy , so it is the more better. These guys are not short of money and are not in need of sources of money . For us to leave Iraq in Chaos and in their control , they benefit much more from oil and from support from Iran and other Terrorists'''' financiers , They do not need and do not want money from us , so , it is quite ignorant of you to even think that these guys are bought out ! They are beaten badly by our genius general and our brave troops and see that there is no other way out for them but to give up and so they DID , simple as that ! - Reply to this comment
- Al Gore in 2003: "Nevertheless, Iraq does pose a serious threat to the stability of the Persian Gulf and we should organize an international coalition to eliminate his access to weapons of mass destruction. Iraq%u2019s search for weapons of mass destruction has proven impossible to completely deter and we should assume that it will continue for as long as Saddam is in power. Moreover, no international law can prevent the United States from taking actions to protect its vital interests, when it is manifestly clear that there is a choice to be made between law and survival"
- Reply to this comment
