Top Leaderboard, Site wide
November 24, 2014
Truthdig: Drilling Beneath the Headlines
Sign up for Truthdig's Email NewsletterLike Truthdig on FacebookFollow Truthdig on TwitterSubscribe to Truthdig's RSS Feed

Get Truthdig's headlines in your inbox!


Malarkey on the Potomac
Europe’s Nuclear Giants Are Close to Collapse




Joan of Arc


Truthdig Bazaar
The New Old World

The New Old World

By Perry Anderson
$26.37

more items

 
Ear to the Ground

Sadr Warns of ‘Open War’

Email this item Email    Print this item Print    Share this item... Share

Posted on Apr 19, 2008
Sadr City protest
AP photo/ Karim Kadim

Sadr’s supporters rally in Sadr City on March 29, demanding Prime Minister Nouri al-Maliki’s resignation for cracking down on the Muslim cleric and his allies.

Muslim cleric Moqtada al-Sadr issued a strong warning to the Iraqi government Saturday, claiming that he and his supporters will “declare a war until liberation” if a crackdown against his Mahdi Army continues.


Al-Jazeera English:

Al-Sadr also accused the Iraqi government of being too close to the US military.

“The occupation has made us target of its planes, tanks, air strikes and snipers. Without our support this government would not have been formed,” he said.

“But with its alliance with the occupier [the Iraqi government] is not independent and sovereign as we would like it to be.”

Iraqi security forces moved against Shia militia groups in Basra on March 25, on the order of Nuri al-Maliki, Iraq’s prime minister, himself a Shia.

Read more

More Below the Ad

Advertisement

Square, Site wide

New and Improved Comments

If you have trouble leaving a comment, review this help page. Still having problems? Let us know. If you find yourself moderated, take a moment to review our comment policy.

By cyrena, April 20, 2008 at 4:42 pm Link to this comment

Well, ‘tis true about the goal being chaos and a sea of failed states. It’s also true about the real players…CIA, and Mossad at least. I don’t know that much about MI6, but the CIA has been behind every take over of the past 5 decades.

Report this

By bozhidar bob balkas, April 20, 2008 at 4:33 pm Link to this comment
(Unregistered commenter)

2) yes. as i have predicted at StopWar.ca meeting in ‘03, US will build permament bases in syrian desert or establish fourth there.

4)the war was not about oil; it flowed in quantities desired. It may have been about profits from iraqi oil.
6) yes. it has a puppet gov’t; probably provisional. Iraq may be dismebered into four states; one of them for US and the other three with puppet gov’ts.

8)Armed resistance will fail. partisan resistance succeeded because mighy empires also fought germans. Palestinian resistance has utterly failed because it was all alone resisting mighty US/IOF.
Iraqi resistance will fail for the same reasons.

My analyses, which i have posited many times shows or even proves, that US was mainly after the real estate; as a second stepping-stone to all of asia and destruction of all socialisms. 

And US is suported in this by nearly all oligarchies/plutocracies. Nationalism is dead or dying. there is no more america nor americanism. thank u.

Report this

By cyrena, April 20, 2008 at 3:20 pm Link to this comment

I know the war-mongering imperialist oil thieves on this site aren’t gonna like this. But, too bad. Sometimes the truth hurts, but it will still set EVERYBODY free.

Tomgram: 12 Reasons to Get Out of Iraq
Unraveling Iraq

12 Answers to Questions No One Is Bothering to Ask about Iraq

By Tom Engelhardt

Can there be any question that, since the invasion of 2003, Iraq has been unraveling? And here’s the curious thing: Despite a lack of decent information and analysis on crucial aspects of the Iraqi catastrophe, despite the way much of the Iraq story fell off newspaper front pages and out of the TV news in the last year, despite so many reports on the “success” of the President’s surge strategy, Americans sense this perfectly well. In the latest Washington Post/ABC News poll, 56% of Americans “say the United States should withdraw its military forces to avoid further casualties” and this has, as the Post notes, been a majority position since January 2007, the month that the surge was first announced. Imagine what might happen if the American public knew more about the actual state of affairs in Iraq—and of thinking in Washington. So, here, in an attempt to unravel the situation in ever-unraveling Iraq are twelve answers to questions which should be asked far more often in this country:

http://www.tomdispatch.com/post/print/174921/Tomgram%3A%20%2012%20Reasons%20to%20Get%20Out%20of%20Iraq

1.  Yes, the war has morphed into the U.S. military’s worst Iraq nightmare

2.  No, there was never an exit strategy from Iraq because the Bush administration never intended to leave—and still doesn’t.

3.  Yes, the United States is still occupying Iraq (just not particularly effectively):

4.  Yes, the war was about oil

5.  No, our new embassy in Baghdad is not an “embassy

6.  No, the Iraqi government is not a government

7.  No, the surge is not over

8.  No, the Iraqi army will never “stand up”

9.  No, the U.S. military does not stand between Iraq and fragmentation

10.  No, the U.S. military does not stand between Iraq and civil war

11.  No, al-Qaeda will not control Iraq if we leave (and neither will Iran)

12.  Yes, some Americans were right about Iraq from the beginning (and not the pundits either)

OK, those are just the titles/first lines of each answer. Each is lengthy, but well worth the read. So, check the link there at the top.

Report this

By cyrena, April 20, 2008 at 3:16 pm Link to this comment

Well, I’m not in Northern California, but this can still be arranged. She’s history…

Report this

By Marshall, April 20, 2008 at 1:15 pm Link to this comment

“Wow. You put it much more succinctly than I did, but with a bit more of a radical slant.”

Yeah, well the radical is nothing if not colorful.

Report this

By rodney, April 20, 2008 at 12:46 pm Link to this comment
(Unregistered commenter)

But they said the surge is working. Just another Bush lie that is now a Mccain lie. They were hoping that they could appease the radicals until the election so Bush could leave office on a good note and Mccain could keep the war going for four more years.or they could blame the Democrats for losing a already lost war. But Al-Sadr has his own plans. He will eventually be the new leader of Iraq. unless the US is willing to stay and babysit Iraq in a continuing bloody battle for decades to come.So while the lying deceiver I mean decider sits on his Texas ranch believing his own lies,America and the Middle East will continue to sink into the abyss.

Report this

By Jon, April 20, 2008 at 11:40 am Link to this comment
(Unregistered commenter)

Why is this guy complaining about the U.S. presence in Iraq anyway.  We paved the way for him and his crazy militia when we toppled Saddam!  If it wasn’t for the U.S Sadr wouldn’t even have a resounding voice in Iraq!  He should be thanking us for giving him a platform.

Report this

By cyrena, April 20, 2008 at 8:13 am Link to this comment

Niloroth..

Did you miss this clear and obvious point made by Ostrogoth in the VERY appropriately titled post, blowback has a name – al Sadr?

Obviously, you and Marshall the imperialist have missed it, which is exactly WHY the US will never ‘win’ in Iraq..not the OIL, not the Middle Eastern hegemony, or anything else.

Ostrogoth writes”

•  “Although most Iraqis don’t support al-Sadr’s religious fanaticism and misogyny, he’s the only Iraqi leader willing to fight the US and its proxy, Israel.”

He writes that after he made this other very clear point, that has been the case since the beginning of the disaster created by the Dick Bush thugs in DC..

•  “..Americans have driven moderate Muslims into the arms of extremists like al-Sadr. Muslims in Iraq and all over the world identify with the struggle of Palestinians and are unwilling to simply ignore Israeli atrocities.”

As much as this truth may pain you, that is EXACTLY what it is..it’s the TRUTH. Iraqis can’t help but identify with the struggle of Palestinians, one that has been on going for 60 years. To imagine that they will do NOTHING, as they see the US enslaving them in open air prisons as has been done to the Palestinians in Gaza, the West Bank, and all over their homeland, is just plain STUPID! NO group of human beings is willing to standby and watch themselves be exterminated if they have ANY OPTIONS. Why is that so flippin’ difficult for people to understand? And when the options are taken away, do you not understand that EVEN THEN, they will find them or die trying?

The hypocrisy in damning Sadr for his extremism is the cruelest farce of all, because it is the AMERICANS who have unleashed it!! You complain about a theocratic parliamentary in Iraq, WHICH NEVER EXISTED BEFORE, and wouldn’t even exist to the extent that it does now, if the SECULAR Prime Minister that the IRAQIS selected themselves, Jaafari,  had not been run out by the US, and replaced with the US puppet regime that is al- Maliki, then you wouldn’t HAVE this issue with al-Sadr, and the fact that even moderate Muslims have embraced him, because he is the only one fighting to resist the occupation of their sovereign nation.

This is standard procedure for the US, over the past 5 decades at least. The US overturned the democratically elected and secular leader of Iran, Mossadeq in the ‘50’s and replaced him with the US choice, the Shah. The Iranians eventually ran him out, and now they have what they have now..a Theocracy.

Same thing in Iraq. Saddam wasn’t ‘democratically’ elected, because dictators aren’t. He was a secularist however and prior to the US invasion and occupation of that nation, this type of religious extremism didn’t exist. Saddam wouldn’t have it. But, as with Iran, and as with so many other countries that the US has intentionally destabilized whenever the people of those countries want to control THEIR OWN NATURAL RESOURCES, the efforts usually blow right back in their faces.
The arrogance is limitless. The US goes to another country to enforce hegemony and steal their resources, and then starts whimpering and crying when the people or their leaders won’t just roll over and hand it to them, or show any type of resistance to being literally exterminated.

Meantime, the only ‘victory’ that anybody can see in Iraq or the Middle East period, is for the US to get the hell out!

Needless to say, that’s exactly what the imperialists refuse to do, and so more and more people continue to suffer and die.

It’s not like they don’t have an example to know what’s coming for them, just by looking to what Israel has done to the Palestinians for 60 years.

You honestly think they’re NOT going to resist that?

Why are Americans so stupid? This isn’t rocket science.

Report this
PatrickHenry's avatar

By PatrickHenry, April 20, 2008 at 7:28 am Link to this comment

The U.S. had its turn, now it’s their turn.

Good old girl, Nancy Pelosi, is crafting a 178 billion no strings attached funding bill for Iraq.  Will someone in peace loving Northern California please vote her out…....pretty please.

Report this
PatrickHenry's avatar

By PatrickHenry, April 20, 2008 at 7:25 am Link to this comment

Kind of like the one who stole the U.S. office of president.

Report this

By bozhidar bob balkas, April 20, 2008 at 7:13 am Link to this comment
(Unregistered commenter)

US may not retreat from iraq; US has easy ‘solutions’ for iraqi situations.
The optimal way out or exit from the quagmire or the house of horrors, would be establishment of a fourth state in syrian desert.
The new state or de facto 53d state of US would be large enough to hold the army as well as civilians.
It could be even walled; territory around it mined, etcetc.
Bush, of course, is not shouting from rooftops what US wants in iraq or for iraqis. But, then, who does?
We, perforce, can only infer. Iraq, in my opinion, will not rise again for centuries, if ever.
Just like palestine, so is iraq finished. thanx

Report this

By TDoff, April 20, 2008 at 5:47 am Link to this comment

It’s about time for the US to do some serious planning.

What are we going to do with the troops as they retreat from Iraq?

Attacking Iran would be another fiasco. If Iraq can whip the crap out of US, Iran would turn US to dust.

Maybe the government will finally come to it’s senses, and realize that we are in truly serious economic difficulty, and concentrate on that problem.

So the logical thing from the Bush and Pentagon point of view, would be to assign the troops to attack, invade and conquer Monaco. That’s where the money is, and it would be difficult to conceive of US losing that war.

But you never know…

Report this

By TDoff, April 20, 2008 at 5:32 am Link to this comment

Things are getting serious now. Between al-Sadr and the latest Pentagon report, it looks as though the US is perilously close to losing the war in Iraq.

But not to worry. AIPAC, the White House press corps, Rove’s propaganda machine, are all hard at work preparing a speech for Bush that will set things right.

He’s going to declare that there is no war in Iraq, there never was a war in Iraq, and the US was not involved in it.

Report this

By TDoff, April 20, 2008 at 5:24 am Link to this comment

Exactly. It’s what we’ve had running the US for the past 7 1/2 years, and we should give the Iraqis a taste of our own medicine. Look how well it’s turned out for US.

Report this

By TDoff, April 20, 2008 at 5:20 am Link to this comment

Wow. You put it much more succinctly than I did, but with a bit more of a radical slant.

Report this

By Ostrogoth, April 20, 2008 at 4:26 am Link to this comment

With their knee-jerk support for the worst excesses of Zionist apartheid, Americans have driven moderate Muslims into the arms of extremists like al-Sadr. Muslims in Iraq and all over the world identify with the struggle of Palestinians and are unwilling to simply ignore Israeli atrocities. Although most Iraqis don’t support al-Sadr’s religious fanaticism and misogyny, he’s the only Iraqi leader willing to fight the US and its proxy, Israel. Oh wait, sometimes it’s not clear who is whose proxy. Who is really setting US foreign policy in the ME, and for the benefit of whom?

Brainwashed Americans have to figure out the answer to that question before there can be any peace in the ME. Too bad that millions of innocents, many of them Americans, may have to die before that happens.

Report this

By Marshall, April 20, 2008 at 4:15 am Link to this comment

Yes yes - we know; you’d like nothing better than to see the U.S. imperialist pigs humiliated and driven from their oil-driven hegemonic global occupations by the true freedom fighters for truth and justice who represent the beleaguered petrol-adjacent masses of the world.  Then Israel will be blown up, Bush hanged from a petard, and everyone everywhere will live happily ever after under Obama the magnificent.

Report this

By blog dog, April 20, 2008 at 12:52 am Link to this comment
(Unregistered commenter)

any prominent player to emerge is either in direct service to or manipulated by the real players - CIA, MI6, Mossad - any genuinely indigenous movement will be subverted by pseudo-gang atrocities designed to demonize them - the goal is total chaos - a sea of failed states - any coalesced self-determinant state is a threat to the global finance oligarchs whose agents (CIA, MI6, Mossad) will assault them with every dirty trick in the book - Moqtada al-Sadr is not at all what he appears…

2 things to never forget:

1. “Deception is a state of mind and the mind of the state.” - James Jesus Angelton - Director of CIA Counter Intelligence (1954-74)

2. “The Central Intelligence Agency owns everyone of any significance in the major media.” - William Colby - Director of the CIA (1973-76)

Report this

By niloroth, April 19, 2008 at 9:38 pm Link to this comment

Yes, because obviously a theocratic paramilitary force that is apocalyptic by name, and seriously violent and misogynistic, is exactly who is needed to run Iraq.

Report this

By TDoff, April 19, 2008 at 9:15 pm Link to this comment

Geez, finally, a large armed segment of the Iraqi population is prepared to declare an ‘Open war of liberation’ against the puppet Iraqi government installed by the US to ‘Bring freedom and democracy’ to Iraq.
If al-Sadr has a firm idea of what ‘Victory’ will be (and I’m sure he does), he’ll probably achieve it, and this whole bloody, inane, US nightmare will be over in Iraq, as the ‘government’ is replaced and the invading US army rejected.
The repercussions of the NeoConZionistBush fiasco there will resound for decades, if not centuries, and not to the benefit of the US.

Report this
RAE's avatar

By RAE, April 19, 2008 at 8:47 pm Link to this comment

It seems to me that folks in that part of the world have been warring since the beginning of recorded history. It’s in their blood and I sincerely doubt that until there’s only one group left standing will peace ever be upon them.

And even then… after millennia of hostilities towards almost everyone, I doubt they’ll be able to, as Jack said… “you can’t handle the truth” - they won’t be able to stand the silence and tranquility. They’ll just start on their neighbors.

I feel so sorry for those who through no fault of their own are caught up in this stupid tragedy. It sure is wonderful to live far removed from a culture and society that simply, in my view, has NO FUTURE.

Report this
 
Monsters of Our Own Creation? Get tickets for this Truthdig discussion of America's role in the Middle East.
Right 1, Site wide - BlogAds Premium
 
Right Skyscraper, Site Wide
Right 2, Site wide - Blogads
 
Join the Liberal Blog Advertising Network
 
 
 

A Progressive Journal of News and Opinion   Publisher, Zuade Kaufman   Editor, Robert Scheer
© 2014 Truthdig, LLC. All rights reserved.

Like Truthdig on Facebook