[quote]JeffR wrote:
muqtada al-sadr FLEES IRAQ!!!
He’s in iran!!!
Huge news. Sounds like Maliki is keeping his word.
Sorry,dems/Anti-Americans.
With him being given refuge there, along with weapons from iran being found daily, this is heating up.
JeffR[/quote]
You’re just praying that the U.S. military invades Iran, aren’t you?
It won’t be so cool when the draft is instituted just to build a force big enough for said invasion and your number is called.
Dustin
Any of the “right-wing” pundits mentioned in this article could have easily been replaced with jeffr and Zappy.
http://www.zmag.org/content/showarticle.cfm?SectionID=22&ItemID=12121
Dustin
[quote]Dustin wrote:
JeffR wrote:
muqtada al-sadr FLEES IRAQ!!!
He’s in iran!!!
Huge news. Sounds like Maliki is keeping his word.
Sorry,dems/Anti-Americans.
With him being given refuge there, along with weapons from iran being found daily, this is heating up.
JeffR
You’re just praying that the U.S. military invades Iran, aren’t you?
It won’t be so cool when the draft is instituted just to build a force big enough for said invasion and your number is called.
Dustin
[/quote]
dustin,
No, I’m hoping iran comes to it’s senses.
I am ANGRY that they are funding the insurgency, running their mouth, and now harboring.
I’ve said 50 times I’m frightened by the iran situation.
You can rest assured. I know you couldn’t pass the physical.
JeffR
[quote]JeffR wrote:
Dustin wrote:
JeffR wrote:
muqtada al-sadr FLEES IRAQ!!!
He’s in iran!!!
Huge news. Sounds like Maliki is keeping his word.
Sorry,dems/Anti-Americans.
With him being given refuge there, along with weapons from iran being found daily, this is heating up.
JeffR
You’re just praying that the U.S. military invades Iran, aren’t you?
It won’t be so cool when the draft is instituted just to build a force big enough for said invasion and your number is called.
Dustin
dustin,
No, I’m hoping iran comes to it’s senses.
I am ANGRY that they are funding the insurgency, running their mouth, and now harboring.
I’ve said 50 times I’m frightened by the iran situation.
You can rest assured. I know you couldn’t pass the physical.
JeffR
[/quote]
Nah, the physical was easy.
Although I’m not sure you could use senility as an excuse to avoid being drafted.
Just kidding…sorta.
Dustin
Mookie fled to Iran. I’m sure congress is very happy about this latest development in the effort to stabilize Iraq.
U.S. Commander Insists Iraqi Cleric Muqtada Al-Sadr Fled to Iran
Wednesday, February 14, 2007
The chief U.S. military spokesman in Iraq insisted Wednesday that Muqtada al-Sadr has left the country and is believed to be in Iran, despite denials from the radical Shiite cleric’s supporters.
The statement by Maj. Gen. William Caldwell came after a U.S. official said al-Sadr left the country some weeks ago and is believed to be in Tehran, where he has family. The official, who also spoke on condition of anonymity to discuss U.S. monitoring activities, said fractures in al-Sadr’s political and militia operations may be part of the reason for his departure. The move is not believed to be permanent, the official said.
Lawmakers and officials linked to al-Sadr quickly denied that he had left the country, with one saying the cleric had met with government officials late Tuesday in the Shiite holy city of Najaf.
Caldwell declined to comment on the reasons al-Sadr had left the country or give more details.
“We will acknowledge that he is not in the country and all indications are in fact that he is in Iran,” Caldwell told reporters in Baghdad.
An Iraqi government official, however, said al-Sadr was in Najaf as recently as Tuesday night, when he received delegates from several government departments. The official, who is familiar with one of those meetings, spoke on condition of anonymity because he has no authority to disclose information on his department’s activities.
Lawmaker Nassar al-Rubaie, the head of Sadrist bloc in parliament, also insisted al-Sadr had not left the country.
“The news is not accurate because Muqtada al-Sadr is still in Iraq and he did not visit any country,” al-Rubaie told The Associated Press.
Visit FOXNews.com’s Iraq Center for more in-depth coverage.
The U.S. official, who also spoke on condition of anonymity to discuss U.S. monitoring activities, said al-Sadr had left his Baghdad stronghold some weeks ago and fractures in al-Sadr’s political and militia operations may be part of the reason for his departure. The move is not believed to be permanent, the official said.
The reference to Baghdad was unclear since al-Sadr’s headquarters are in Najaf, 100 miles south of Baghdad, although his Mahdi Army militia has its stronghold in the Shiite district of Sadr City in Baghdad.
Al-Sadr is a key political backer of Prime Minister Nouri al-Maliki, but the Iraqi leader has promised not to let that interfere with efforts to crack down on militia violence along with Sunni insurgents as part of the current crackdown.
Two key members of al-Sadr’s political and military organization were gunned down last week, the latest of as many as seven key figures in the al-Sadr organization killed or captured in the past two months.
A close aide who meets regularly with al-Sadr said the cleric was not in Tehran, said the report probably stemmed from a campaign by al-Sadr’s people to put out false information about his movements amid fears he will be detained by U.S.-led forces. The cleric also is sleeping in different places each night, the aide said.
An official in al-Sadr’s main office in Najaf also said the cleric had decided not to appear publicly during the current month of Muharam, one of four holy months in the Islamic calendar.
“The leader Muqtada al-Sadr is inside Iraq now,” he said.
Both officials also declined to be identified because they weren’t authorized to disclose the information.
The black turbaned cleric rarely appears in public or announces his movements and his Mahdi Army militia has mostly been keeping a low profile ahead of the security sweep.
Al-Sadr was reportedly going to make a speech on Monday in Najaf to mark the anniversary of the bombing of an important Shiite shrine north of Baghdad, but he did not do so. The anniversary fell on Monday, according to the Islamic lunar calendar.
A spokesman for the Sadrist bloc said the assertion that al-Sadr had fled was part of a “psychological war” by U.S.-led forces to try to prod the cleric into the open.
“The leadership of Muqtada al-Sadr is a brave one and will not leave the field,” Saleh al-Ukaili said.
Al-Sadr’s militia is blamed for much of the sectarian violence and is widely seen as the main threat to Iraq’s unity and high on the list of targets for the Baghdad security operation.
A ragtag but highly motivated militia that fought U.S. forces twice in 2004, the Mahdi Army is blamed for much of the sectarian strife shaking Iraq since a Shiite shrine was bombed by Sunni militants a year ago. U.S. officials have for months pressed Shiite Prime Minister Nouri al-Maliki to move against the militia, but he has so far done little to comply, largely because he does not want to lose al-Sadr’s support.
Al-Sadr, who is in his mid-30s, rose from obscurity after the ouster of Saddam Hussein to lead a movement of young, underprivileged Iraqis united by opposition to U.S. military presence as well as hunger for Shiite domination.
from James Dunnigan at Strategypage.
The Battle for Baghdad Begins
February 15, 2007:
How are the bad guys doing in Iraq?
The Iraqi media is full of information on what the various Sunni, Shia and Kurdish factions are up to. Lots of the reporting is speculation, but a lot of it is not. If you’ve been following the action long enough, you can pick out the accurate stories.
And the talk on the street and in the shops is also pretty dependable. That said, most people believe al Qaeda in Iraq is finished. After boasting last Fall that they would establish a safe zone in western Iraq, and failing to do anything close to that, the Islamic terrorists lost whatever credibility they had left.
Most of the terrorist bombings these days are the work of Iraqi Sunni Arab organizations, who still believe that if you make the Iraqi Shia Arabs mad enough, they will get so nasty that neighboring Sunni Arab nations will feel compelled to invade.
This plan has split the Sunni Arab nationalists, mainly because the invasion shows no sign of happening, and the brighter terrorists point out that the Saudi army is unlikely to win against the Americans. In a trend that began two years ago, Sunni Arab factions are continuing to battle each other. U.S. troops stand aside when they encounter “Red-on-Red” fighting, then deal with the winner.
Meanwhile, the Iraqi Shia Arab militias, especially the Sadr forces (the Mahdi Army), have lost whatever unity and discipline they once had. Factionalism has taken over as several of Sadr’s lieutenants compete for popularity and territory by driving Sunni Arabs out of Baghdad neighborhoods.
Most of Iraq’s Sunni Arabs have been chased from their homes since 2003, and that process has accelerated in the last year. The Iraqi Sunni Arabs are quite wealthy compared to Iraqi Shia, and the Shia gangs have been fighting each other over the loot, and the power. Gang war, literally, because many of the militiamen moonlight as gangsters (or vice versa).
While the number of terror bombings has been declining in the past year, the crime rate has not, and most people in central Iraq are looking forward to the “Battle for Baghdad.” Brigades of troops are arriving from the Kurdish north and Shia south, and more American troops can be seen on the streets.
There are more raids in Baghdad. But all the average Iraqi wants is safer streets, fewer kidnappings and a little peace and quiet. Realizing that that kind of paradise is not likely to be found in the Middle East, Baghdad has been suffering a major brain drain in the past year, with the most educated fleeing for foreign countries. Europe and North America are preferred destinations, but any place with a lower crime rate will do.
Many exiles carry a sense of shame with them. What they flee is not the violence of “foreign occupiers,” but of lawless Iraqis and foreign terrorists. Iraqis are running away from Arab criminals and fanatics. And none of those fanatics offer anything better, even if they win. The secular ones promise another Saddam, while the religious one offer a dictatorship run by clerics. It’s still popular to blame the Americans for everything, while still hustling to get a job with the Americans or, best of all, a visa to enter the United States. Those who cannot, or do not, want to leave, are trying to figure out how to make the place work. This is generating a lot of debate in the Iraqi press, which has not been free to publish freely for over four decades. The one thing most factions agree on is the need for peace, and that attitude should make the Battle for Baghdad, which has already begun, very interesting.
Bad news for the dems/anti-americans:
www.strategypage.com/qnd/iraq/articles/20070228.aspx.
Bad news for us all in that some of the bad guys appear to be smart enough to “wait out” the political infighting in Washington.
If the dems can’t cut the funding or the mission, the bad guys will continue to get the fist.
Here’s hoping the Republicans hone their message and take complete control of the agenda.
JeffR
[quote]JustTheFacts wrote:
[i]“Huck Finn, do you mean to tell me you don’t know what a crusade is?”
“No,” says I, "I don’t.
“A crusade is a war to recover the Holy Land from the paynim.”
“Which Holy Land?”
“Why, THE Holy Land – there ain’t but one.”
“What do we want of it?”
“Why, can’t you understand? It’s in the hands of the paynim, and it’s our duty to take it away from them.”
“How did we come to let them git hold of it?”
“We didn’t come to let them git hold of it. They always had it.”
“Why, Tom, then it must belong to them, don’t it?”
“Why of course it does. Who said it didn’t?”
I studied over it, but couldn’t seem to git at the right of it, no way. I says: “It’s too many for me, Tom Sawyer. If I had a farm and it was mine, and another person wanted it, would it be right for him to --”
“Oh, shucks! you don’t know enough to come in when it rains, Huck Finn. It ain’t a farm, it’s entirely different. You see, it’s like this. They own the land, just the mere land, and that’s all they DO own; but it was our folks, our Jews and Christians, that made it holy, and so they haven’t any business to be there defiling it. It’s a shame, and we ought not to stand it a minute. We ought to march against them and take it away from them.”
“Why, it does seem to me it’s the most mixed-up thing I ever see! Now, if I had a farm and another person --”
“Don’t I tell you it hasn’t got anything to do with farming? Farming is business, just common low-down business: that’s all it is, it’s all you can say for it; but this is higher, this is religious, and totally different.”
“Religious to go and take the land away from people that owns it?”
“Certainly; it’s always been considered so.” [/i]
[/quote]
Great post ! ! !
From http://www.villainouscompany.com/vcblog/archives/2007/03/hope_breaks_out_2.html
"MATTHEWS: Now I want to ask you the big question. How is the surge going in Baghdad?
WILLIAMS: Well, Ill tell you. Its in its early stages and with - if you mention the so-called surge, you have to talk about it in tandem with this new policy of these small outposts, these - what they are really is glorified police stations.
We saw it today in Ramadi. There is patently no way a few weeks ago we could have stood outside an armored vehicle and had a conversation as we did today in Ramadi.
They have changed policy there. The war has changed.
Is it better? That`ll be for other people to judge. But it is already being felt here, that is, the increase in troops. The first ones are already here.
Theres a huge field behind us they are clearing for the 3rd Infantry, for their next tour of duty here. And so, well have to wait and see. It`s on a continuum.
But, again, the combination, with this change in policy - getting out, decentralizing, going into the neighborhoods, grabbing a toehold, telling the enemy we`re here, start talking to the locals - that is having an obvious and palpable effect."
It’s going to be hard to call Brian Williams sympathetic towards this administration.
JeffR
U.S. casualties down 60% since the start of the new offensive.
www.kuna.net.kw/Home/print.aspx?Language=en&DSNO=961365
JeffR
http://news.yahoo.com/s/nm/20070517/sc_nm/veterans_sarin_dc
In other news, saddam wouldn’t use wmd against Americans. He wasn’t a threat and didn’t want or plan to reconstitute his weaponery. It’s inconceivable that he would arm terrorist groups with nerve gas. Remember, no coordination with terrorists because he and they didn’t have the exact same religious beliefs.
Signed,
Idiots.
[quote]JeffR wrote:
http://news.yahoo.com/s/nm/20070517/sc_nm/veterans_sarin_dc
In other news, saddam wouldn’t use wmd against Americans. He wasn’t a threat and didn’t want or plan to reconstitute his weaponery. It’s inconceivable that he would arm terrorist groups with nerve gas. Remember, no coordination with terrorists because he and they didn’t have the exact same religious beliefs.
Signed,
Idiots.
[/quote]
In other news, mustard gas from WW2 and napalm and agent orange from vietnam have long lasting negative effects as well.
So your article points out something from the first gulf war, yes, totally relevant, awesome.
[quote]JeffR wrote:
Dustin wrote:
JeffR wrote:
muqtada al-sadr FLEES IRAQ!!!
He’s in iran!!!
Huge news. Sounds like Maliki is keeping his word.
Sorry,dems/Anti-Americans.
With him being given refuge there, along with weapons from iran being found daily, this is heating up.
JeffR
You’re just praying that the U.S. military invades Iran, aren’t you?
It won’t be so cool when the draft is instituted just to build a force big enough for said invasion and your number is called.
Dustin
dustin,
No, I’m hoping iran comes to it’s senses.
I am ANGRY that they are funding the insurgency, running their mouth, and now harboring.
I’ve said 50 times I’m frightened by the iran situation.
You can rest assured. I know you couldn’t pass the physical.
JeffR
[/quote]
Agreed.
Now if we could get Hillary, Al Sharpton and Jesse Jackson to join Al Sadr, we’d be on the up and up. I think Iran is just taking advantage of the situation and exploiting it to their advantage. They stand to gain nothing from a peaceful Iraq, so why not keep the insurgency going.
[quote]JeffR wrote:
http://news.yahoo.com/s/nm/20070517/sc_nm/veterans_sarin_dc
In other news, saddam wouldn’t use wmd against Americans. He wasn’t a threat and didn’t want or plan to reconstitute his weaponery. It’s inconceivable that he would arm terrorist groups with nerve gas. Remember, no coordination with terrorists because he and they didn’t have the exact same religious beliefs.
Signed,
Idiots.[/quote]
That’s all you have? “Low-level” exposure in 1991?
Where are the stockpiles of WMDs he was hiding in 2003?
Damn, those are really well hidden.
In other news, evil Japanese attacked Pearl Harbor some time ago. Please boycott Honda, Toyota, Sony and Panasonic.
Signed,
Retards.
[quote]JeffR wrote:
U.S. casualties down 60% since the start of the new offensive.
www.kuna.net.kw/Home/print.aspx?Language=en&DSNO=961365
JeffR[/quote]
60%? Really?
[quote]JeffR wrote:
U.S. casualties down 60% since the start of the new offensive.
www.kuna.net.kw/Home/print.aspx?Language=en&DSNO=961365
JeffR[/quote]
Civilian death squad casualties through the roof!
[quote]pat36 wrote:
I think Iran is just taking advantage of the situation and exploiting it to their advantage.[/quote]
Of course they are. They’d be complete morons to pass up such a great occasion to learn everything they can about your army and its techniques and tactics. Same goes for Syria.
Iran was included in your “Axis of Evil,” don’t you think they’ll try to be as ready as they can be should you ever decide to invade them too? The worst Iraq turns out to be for you, the less you’ll be inclined to try another invasion. And if they have to fend off an invasion, they’ll know the best way to organize the popular resistance for it.
Has there ever been a war, anywhere, where neighboring countries didn’t try to gain some advantage from it?
Why do chickenhawks always assume all their actions and operations happen in a vacuum and that they can safely abstract away all other considerations?
[quote]pookie wrote:
JeffR wrote:
http://news.yahoo.com/s/nm/20070517/sc_nm/veterans_sarin_dc
In other news, saddam wouldn’t use wmd against Americans. He wasn’t a threat and didn’t want or plan to reconstitute his weaponery. It’s inconceivable that he would arm terrorist groups with nerve gas. Remember, no coordination with terrorists because he and they didn’t have the exact same religious beliefs.
Signed,
Idiots.
That’s all you have? “Low-level” exposure in 1991?
Where are the stockpiles of WMDs he was hiding in 2003?
Damn, those are really well hidden.
In other news, evil Japanese attacked Pearl Harbor some time ago. Please boycott Honda, Toyota, Sony and Panasonic.
Signed,
Retards.
[/quote]
You are doing it again. You know full well that I have one HELL OF A LOT more.
This is just another example refuting directly the nonsense that saddam wouldn’t have used wmd against America.
You live in a province that has a number of people who truly believe that saddam was contained, a paper tiger, and wasn’t in leaque with terrorists. Further, your pals believe that he couldn’t and wouldn’t take the risks associated with attacking the U.S. with nerve gas.
“He wouldn’t be that stupid” and other such nonsense.
Walk outside, grab a quebecois and test my theory.
What saddam using sarin against Americans shows quite clearly that he was willing and able to attack the Americans using these nefarious methods.
Therfore, intent, history, patterns of behavior, equals unacceptable danger.
JeffR
[quote]JeffR wrote:
You are doing it again. You know full well that I have one HELL OF A LOT more.[/quote]
A hell of a lot more of the same old crap. Last time, you cited articles that counted empty canisters and rusted out warheads as threats. Maybe if you cut yourself on them and catch tetanus…
You had to bring American troops in his back yard for him to do it. And all he managed was “low-level exposure.” He didn’t have ICBMs, nor any other high-tech mean of sending it to America, and if you’re thinking about shipping containers, you’d do better to beef up security at your ports.
If Iran can sneak weapons to Hezbollah under Mossad’s nose, getting anything inside your wide-open transparent borders is a piece of cake. Easy as muffin, you could say.
You want more security? Start there.
What has where I live got to do with it? Are your shortsighted views mandated by your city or state? Where you from? North Dumbkota?
Even if he was (which he wasn’t when we was your most bestest best buddy in the region, in the 80s) that’s what “contained” means. Whatever threat he presented, was not effectively implementable. All he could do was make dumb chickenshits afraid.
Just a minute…
He says you’re and idiot.
Well containment does not work as well when you go and march your army inside the container, now does it?
And even then, all you got was “low-level exposure” that required 17 years for its effect to be recognized. Terrifying, no?
Right. Go vandalize a Honda.
[quote]JeffR wrote:
What saddam using sarin against Americans shows quite clearly that he was willing and able to attack the Americans using these nefarious methods.
JeffR
[/quote]
aaahhhhhh, then why didn’t he? (the 2nd time we paid him a major visit that is).